Tank Car United States Army USAX 16503
|
Richard Wilkens
U.S. Army Tank Car USAX 16503 at Taylor Yard in Los Angeles on May 24, 1958. Wonder what nasty stuff was in those tanks?
Richard Wilkens
|
|
|
|
mel perry
helium :-) mel perry
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020, 5:37 PM Richard Wilkens <railsnw123@...> wrote: U.S. Army Tank Car USAX 16503 at Taylor Yard in Los Angeles on May 24, 1958. Wonder what nasty stuff was in those tanks?
|
|
|
|
Tony Thompson
Richard Wilkens wrote: U.S. Army Tank Car USAX 16503 at Taylor Yard in Los Angeles on May 24, 1958. Wonder what nasty stuff was in those tanks? Cars like that, with those removable tanks, were normally chlorine cars, but other compressed gasses could certainly be shipped that way. The tanks, known as "one-ton tanks," presumably by weight of tank plus cargo, could be separately distributed to buyers. Tony Thompson
|
|
|
|
Ian Cranstone
Cars of this type usually were in chlorine service, each canister held 1 ton. Ian Cranstone
On 2020-06-08 20:37, Richard Wilkens wrote:
|
|
|
|
John Barry
As Ian and Tony have stated, most likely Chlorine which was required to be placarded as a poison gas. Your photo captures said placard so you can infer that the car was loaded when you shot it. John Barry ATSF North Bay Lines Golden Gates & Fast Freights Lovettsville, VA 707-490-9696 PO Box 44736 Washington, DC 20026-4736
On Monday, June 8, 2020, 09:02:29 PM EDT, Ian Cranstone <lamontc@...> wrote:
Cars of this type usually were in chlorine service, each canister held 1 ton. Ian Cranstone On 2020-06-08 20:37, Richard Wilkens wrote:
|
|
|
|
Mont Switzer
John,
Unless the HM regulations were different back then the placards have to remain on the car whether loaded or empty to cover the residue. However, there may have been a slightly different placard for the residue back then.
Mont Switzer
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] on behalf of John Barry [northbaylines@...]
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 10:11 PM To: main@realstmfc.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Tank Car United States Army USAX 16503 As Ian and Tony have stated, most likely Chlorine which was required to be placarded as a poison gas. Your photo captures said placard so you can infer that the car was loaded when you shot it.
John Barry
ATSF North Bay Lines
Golden Gates & Fast Freights
Lovettsville, VA
707-490-9696
PO Box 44736
Washington, DC 20026-4736
On Monday, June 8, 2020, 09:02:29 PM EDT, Ian Cranstone <lamontc@...> wrote:
Cars of this type usually were in chlorine service, each canister held 1 ton. Ian Cranstone
On 2020-06-08 20:37, Richard Wilkens wrote:
|
|
|
|
Mont Switzer
Handling chlorine cylinders (called "tons") is nasty business. One reason for so many of these miniature pressure vessels is should there be a leak (chlorine gas) you are only dealing with 2000 lbs of product.
Once unloaded from the car, the "tons" are easy to distribute to multiple locations where the product is used. A lot of them go into water treatment.
Mont Switzer
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] on behalf of Mont Switzer [MSwitzer@...]
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 8:49 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Tank Car United States Army USAX 16503 John,
Unless the HM regulations were different back then the placards have to remain on the car whether loaded or empty to cover the residue. However, there may have been a slightly different placard for the residue back then.
Mont Switzer From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io [main@RealSTMFC.groups.io] on behalf of John Barry [northbaylines@...]
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 10:11 PM To: main@realstmfc.groups.io Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Tank Car United States Army USAX 16503 As Ian and Tony have stated, most likely Chlorine which was required to be placarded as a poison gas. Your photo captures said placard so you can infer that the car was loaded when you shot it.
John Barry
ATSF North Bay Lines
Golden Gates & Fast Freights
Lovettsville, VA
707-490-9696
PO Box 44736
Washington, DC 20026-4736
On Monday, June 8, 2020, 09:02:29 PM EDT, Ian Cranstone <lamontc@...> wrote:
Cars of this type usually were in chlorine service, each canister held 1 ton. Ian Cranstone
On 2020-06-08 20:37, Richard Wilkens wrote:
|
|
|
|
Bill Welch
This would make a great Resin kit. The cylinders could have a cavity molded in to accommodate weights.
Bill Welch
|
|
|
|
gastro42000 <martincooper@...>
Hi: it also makes a nice brass car, but very heavy. Marty Cooper
On June 9, 2020 at 9:15 AM Bill Welch <fgexbill@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Bill Welch
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 10:56 AM, gastro42000 wrote:
<!doctype html>
Bill Welch
|
|
|
|
Tony Thompson
Marty Cooper wrote:
There was at least one brass version which had turned aluminum tanks. Tony Thompson
|
|
|
|
gastro42000 <martincooper@...>
On June 9, 2020 at 2:04 PM Tony Thompson <tony@...> wrote: po
|
|
|
|
On 6/8/20 8:37 PM, Richard Wilkens wrote:
U.S. Army Tank Car USAX 16503 at Taylor Yard in Los Angeles on May 24, 1958. Wonder what nasty stuff was in those tanks?From the shape of the tanks, the "Poison Gas" placards, and my many young hours spent on the catwalk above Taylor, my guess would be chlorine. Cheers, Bruce A. Metcalf
|
|
|
|
Paul Koehler
All:
Not true, MTS Brass car with the Aluminum tanks, I can run anywhere in a train and any length train. Three cars to over thirty, as you can see it’s first out in front of the caboose in this train.
Paul C. Koehler
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of gastro42000
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 11:34 AM To: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io; Tony Thompson <tony@...> Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Tank Car United States Army USAX 16503
|
|
|
|
mel perry
i believe, in the real world, that's a no-no mel perry
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 10:16 AM Paul Koehler <koehlers@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Allen Cain
All else fails, place it directly behind the engine then the other cars will not be impacted. But if all cars are properly weighted to NMRA standards, I would not think that there would be a problem unless the curve radius are REALLY tight? Just my 2 cents. Allen Cain
|
|
|
|
Tony Thompson
mel perry wrote:
In later years, yes. In the 1950s, no. Tony Thompson
|
|
|
|
Paul Koehler
Mel:
What’s a no no? Can you site a Tariff or special instructions? Thanks
Paul C. Koehler
From: main@RealSTMFC.groups.io <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io> On Behalf Of mel perry
i believe, in the real world, that's a no-no mel perry
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020, 10:16 AM Paul Koehler <koehlers@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
mel perry
i stand corrected, apparently in the 50's railroader's were expendable, wonder what changed that thinking? OSHA? mel perry
|
|
|
|
Tony Thompson
mel perry wrote:
Not expendable, but expected to use common sense on their own. Occasional failures to do so led to OSHA. Tony Thompson
|
|
|