Topics

Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car


Bob Chaparro
 

Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car

An undated (probably WW II) photo from an unknown source:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fd/85/cf/fd85cfe7acc1cdd07a519bfd9ea4864b.jpg

The location probably is Barstow, CA.

I can't see any tie-downs in the photo but there certainly is adequate blocking for the jeeps.

Also notice the Santa Fe Caswell drop-bottom gondolas in the background.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Douglas Harding
 

Bob if you look close you can see a cable or hook wrapped around the front bumper on first two jeeps. I suspect the cable was the tie-down, along with the block of wood under the bumper.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 1:10 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car

 

Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car

An undated (probably WW II) photo from an unknown source:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fd/85/cf/fd85cfe7acc1cdd07a519bfd9ea4864b.jpg

The location probably is Barstow, CA.

I can't see any tie-downs in the photo but there certainly is adequate blocking for the jeeps.

Also notice the Santa Fe Caswell drop-bottom gondolas in the background.

Bob Chaparro

Hemet, CA


Andy Brusgard <ajb1102@...>
 

Flatcar appears to have a little added width to deck to accommodate two side by side jeeps 5'3" = 10'6".


Douglas Harding
 

Looks to be a standard AAR 53’ 6” flatcar, which had a extreme deck width of 10’ 6”. Note how the deck boards overhang the stake pockets, with cut outs for the pockets.

The CGW had two lots of these flats, totaling 200 cars.

Chicago Great Western

3800-3899            100         1940       Pullman

                3900-3999            100         1944       Pullman

 

It looks like the car number is 3930. If it is that would put the photo date as 1944, when the car was brand new. The deck boards look fairly untouched.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Andy Brusgard
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 5:18 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car

 

Flatcar appears to have a little added width to deck to accommodate two side by side jeeps 5'3" = 10'6".


akerboomk
 

Are those army trailers, “on end”, behind the first ATSF gon. on the left?

They look too big to be the “jeep” trailers, so I’m guessing ones towed behind the larger trucks?

 


--
Ken Akerboom


Douglas Harding
 

They do appear to be trailers stood on end.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of akerboomk
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 8:34 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car

 

Are those army trailers, “on end”, behind the first ATSF gon. on the left?

They look too big to be the “jeep” trailers, so I’m guessing ones towed behind the larger trucks?

 


--
Ken Akerboom


Bruce Smith
 

These appear to be US Army 1/4 ton trailers. As such they would absolutely be likely to be towed by a Jeep or larger trucks.However, it is certainly possible that they could be 1/2 ton or even 1 ton trailers, which, as Ken notes, would be hauled behind larger trucks.
 
Regards,
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL

On Jul 17, 2020, at 9:13 AM, Douglas Harding <iowacentralrr@...> wrote:

They do appear to be trailers stood on end.
 
Doug Harding
 
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of akerboomk
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 8:34 AM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car
 
Are those army trailers, “on end”, behind the first ATSF gon. on the left?
They look too big to be the “jeep” trailers, so I’m guessing ones towed behind the larger trucks?
 

-- 
Ken Akerboom 



Richard Wilkens
 

Those are 1/4 ton jeep trailers, on one of them you can see the stepped top. The 1 ton trailers have a large stamped steel landing wheel which would be visible. I have a 1945 Ben-Hur one ton trailer. During this time the Army didn't have 1/2 ton trailers.

Rich Wilkens


Bob Chaparro
 

I received this comment:
"Generally military vehicles were not tied down, to facilitate emergency removal from the rail cars."
Can anyone verify or dispute this?
Thanks.
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA


Douglas Harding
 

May be true today, but the various photos I have of military loads show tiedowns. Attached are a couple of examples.

 

Doug Harding

www.iowacentralrr.org

 

From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bob Chaparro via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 5:00 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car

 

I received this comment:
"Generally military vehicles were not tied down, to facilitate emergency removal from the rail cars."
Can anyone verify or dispute this?
Thanks.
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA


Tony Thompson
 

Doug Harding wrote:

May be true today, but the various photos I have of military loads show tiedowns. Attached are a couple of examples.

     I agree. The 1940s and 50s photos I have, definitely show tie-downs on all kinds of  military loads, though chocks seemed to be the main restraint.

Tony Thompson




Bruce Smith
 

In the inimitable words of Sherman Potter, that's "Horse Hockey". I can cite hundreds of pieces of evidence that military loads in the use were tied down. That occurs in multiple ways, with multiple means and is demonstrated in the US Army's own technical manuals. I will confine my further remarks to WWII, where I have the most expertise.

When units moved with their own equipment, which was generally confined to the pre-war and immediate period of 18 months after the start of the war, equipment was blocked with solid pieces of wood and tied down with twisted wire at multiple points, typically fore and aft, on both sides. Blocks were also positioned to prevent front and back, side to side, and even vertical movement with some vehicles

As the depot system became established, mid 1943, troops rarely traveled with their equipment, with the exception of specialized units such as some engineering units being moved between domestic construction assignments. Blocking started to consist of built up blocks as the stock of solid timber were requisitioned for other, more important war-time uses. Tie downs often consisted of threaded rod, with turn-buckles for tensioning and retaining plates with nuts at the bottom of flat car stake pockets. In some cases, where cars were captured for service, I have seen steel plates with eyes on top bolted to flat car decks as the tie down location. I have no evidence that it was eliminated and certainly none that it was done so to facilitate emergency removal. 

As a final note, chains and chain binders, were very uncommon tie downs in WWII, unlike today. I theorize that might be due to the free roaming nature of flat cars and the difficulty in getting that gear back to the factory or depot that shipped the vehicle.

Regards,
Bruce
Bruce Smith
Auburn, AL


From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> on behalf of Bob Chaparro via groups.io <chiefbobbb@...>
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 4:59 PM
To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Photo: Jeeps On Chicago Great Western Flat Car
 
I received this comment:
"Generally military vehicles were not tied down, to facilitate emergency removal from the rail cars."
Can anyone verify or dispute this?
Thanks.
Bob Chaparro
Hemet, CA


Allen Cain
 

As a point of pure speculation, the lack of use of chains for tie downs during the war MAY have been due to the shortage of all metals during the war.

We were obsessed with exporting metals during the war to Germany and Japan!

Allen Cain


Dennis Storzek
 

I agree with Bruce Smith; chain was very uncommon for load tie down during the steam era, the AAR loading diagrams most often specify cable, or just solid wire twisted into cable. The reason is, I think, that unlike today, where the chains on chain tie-down flats are part of the car, and missing chains will be noted by the car inspectors and charged back to the last shipper, during the steam era those chains would have been owned by the shipper. Chain is a valuable commodity in its own right, the load binders even more so. Good luck ever getting them back. Even if the same company was both shipper and receiver, there was a good chance at least some would be liberated en-route. Short lengths of wire, on the other hand, were pretty much worthless, and still did the job.

Dennis Storzek


Tony Thompson
 

Dennis Storzek wrote:

I agree with Bruce Smith; chain was very uncommon for load tie down during the steam era, the AAR loading diagrams most often specify cable, or just solid wire twisted into cable. The reason is, I think, that unlike today, where the chains on chain tie-down flats are part of the car, and missing chains will be noted by the car inspectors and charged back to the last shipper, during the steam era those chains would have been owned by the shipper. Chain is a valuable commodity in its own right, the load binders even more so. Good luck ever getting them back. Even if the same company was both shipper and receiver, there was a good chance at least some would be liberated en-route. Short lengths of wire, on the other hand, were pretty much worthless, and still did the job.

    This description of consignee behavior reminds me of what the retired PFE Car Department guy told me. Shippers who found floor racks in reefers to be "in the way" (usually shippers of non-produce) would simply remove them and throw away. Then when they were billed for them, there would be endless disputes. Plus of course PFE had to install new racks, since removed ones, even if retrievable, were usually seriously damaged.

Tony Thompson