Date
21 - 31 of 31
Northern Pacific Boxcar Upgrades 1925
|
Do the Valuation Reports happen to include Canadian railways? (or even just the US operating subsidiaries?)
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Rob
On Oct 2, 2022, at 12:34 PM, Ray Breyer via groups.io <rtbsvrr69@...> wrote: The Val Reports are only as useful as the person tabulating the valuation. Some roads have virtually no information at all, while others have lots. For example, the NYC family of roads lists each freight car series, and how many have been rebuilt, and with what new appliances. And keep in mind that the valuations were mostly done in 1917. There was a lot of rebuilding happening between 1921 and 1929 that the reports won't have captured. Still, they're one useful tool in the box. Ray Breyer Elgin, IL
On Saturday, October 1, 2022 at 11:01:02 PM CDT, akerboomk <ken-akerboom@...> wrote:
While the ORER may be mute for replacement steel center sills (at least for the B&M it is, maybe different for other RRs if they renumbered cars with SCCs into separate series) the ICC valuation data does list (individually for the B&M) which cars had wood, steel, or "composite" underframes. -- Ken Akerboom
|
|
|
|
lrkdbn
Those Rock Island photos are just about exactly the same as what the NYC did. I wish I could find photos of the NYC cars that are that good!
Larry King
|
|
|
|
I think the approach would vary with the design of the boxcar underframe. The CPR 52xxx series car i showed yesterday had other longitudinal stringers (again, guessing at terminology), which to my eye would be sufficient to bear the weight of the floor of an empty stationary car. But even if the lack of the centre sill was going to leave a significant unsupported weight, it would be easy enough for the shops to place temporary long beams under the car during the process (similar to when houses are moved).
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Rob
On Oct 2, 2022, at 8:09 AM, Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> wrote: I'm no mechanical engineer, but don't you have to remove the wood sill first ? And when you do that, what supports the floor ? I guess if there are truss rods, maybe they are strong enough ? But what are they attached to ? On 10/1/2022 8:58 PM, Ray Breyer via groups.io wrote:
-- Tim O'Connor Sterling, Massachusetts
|
|
|
|
Dennis Storzek
The pix are neat, but don't really show what we are talking about. The classic wood freightcar underframe is completely flat on the underside of the sills, to which are bolted the body bolsters, needle beams, and draft sills. The original wood sills remain. Jack up the car, take off those things mounted to the bottom of the wood sills, and the new steel fabrication (which is also flat on top) can be rolled into place, the body lowered and bolted to the steel. The original truss rods can even be reused, threading them over the new bolsters and under the new needle beams. Not a big job at all.
Dennis Storzek
|
|
|
|
lrkdbn
Here's the Railway Age Gazette vol.88 article about the NYC Lines repair steel underframe ca.1912. There were other variations also- some had a different bolster construction, some only had the top cover plate,some had I beam crossties, some had channels,there were differences in rivet spacing. I imagine some came from outside vendors like ACF but have no hard data on this.
Larry King
|
|
|
|
Ray Breyer
The ICC Valuations only cover common carrier steam railroads within the borders of the United States. Remember that the original intent of the valuations was to assess the actual value of each property, in case the Federal Government decided to nationalize the railroads, and had to pay stockholders for their siezed property. Ray Breyer Elgin, IL
|
|
|
|
Tony Thompson
Ray Breyer wrote:
I don’t think this is correct. The intent of the valuation was to find out the actual capital value of each railroad, so that a “fair return” on investment could be instituted by the ICC. This was amid ongoing squabbles about whether freight rates were “fair” or not. Those, of course, didn’t get ended until Staggers.
|
|
|
|
Ray Breyer
You're thinking of the Transportation Act of 1920. The ICC Val predates that, and was an offshoot of antitrust legislation from the turn of the century. There was a huge discussion as to whether railroads were "public highways", and there were a few major pushes to nationalize them for the "greater good" (remember how hated the robber barons were at that time). By 1920 all that had gone by the wayside, and I believe the reports were used to generate data for the 1920 law. I have the 1920 act on hand, but need to look up the 1913 Valuation Act to see what justification is given for the valuations. I'll have to dredge up congressional transcripts too. Ray Breyer Elgin, IL
On Monday, October 3, 2022 at 12:09:54 PM CDT, Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:
Ray Breyer wrote:
I don’t think this is correct. The intent of the valuation was to find out the actual capital value of each railroad, so that a “fair return” on investment could be instituted by the ICC. This was amid ongoing squabbles about whether freight rates were “fair” or not. Those, of course, didn’t get ended until Staggers.
|
|
|
|
gary laakso
Utility rate making utilized the return on investment made by the utility. Railroad rate making required a value for the railroad’s investment and the 1913 Act was supposed to provide that to the ICC.
Gary Laakso Northwest of Mike Brock
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ray Breyer via groups.io
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2022 10:23 AM To: main@realstmfc.groups.io; main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Northern Pacific Boxcar Upgrades 1925
You're thinking of the Transportation Act of 1920. The ICC Val predates that, and was an offshoot of antitrust legislation from the turn of the century. There was a huge discussion as to whether railroads were "public highways", and there were a few major pushes to nationalize them for the "greater good" (remember how hated the robber barons were at that time).
By 1920 all that had gone by the wayside, and I believe the reports were used to generate data for the 1920 law.
I have the 1920 act on hand, but need to look up the 1913 Valuation Act to see what justification is given for the valuations. I'll have to dredge up congressional transcripts too.
Ray Breyer
On Monday, October 3, 2022 at 12:09:54 PM CDT, Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote:
Ray Breyer wrote:
I don’t think this is correct. The intent of the valuation was to find out the actual capital value of each railroad, so that a “fair return” on investment could be instituted by the ICC. This was amid ongoing squabbles about whether freight rates were “fair” or not. Those, of course, didn’t get ended until Staggers.
|
|
|
|
lrkdbn
Here's another repair steel underframe-this one from the D&H which was known for their equipment engineering expertise
Larry King
|
|
|
|
Alex Schneider
Larry, could you scan the following page too? The article about hot boxes is interesting.
Thanks
Alex Schneider
Alex Schneider
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of lrkdbn via groups.io <lrkdbn@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2022 8:31:32 PM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Northern Pacific Boxcar Upgrades 1925 Here's another repair steel underframe-this one from the D&H which was known for their equipment engineering expertise
Larry King
|
|
|