|
|
Post by packer on Feb 5, 2023 16:48:19 GMT -8
Surprised no one started this yet:
Mostly finished up this GN box, another one in the background. I'm not certain if they needed the grabs on the roof if they have a short ladder, or only on the end with the long ladder.
Also took advantage of the weather being dry, warm, and not windy to break out the airbrush and lightly hit some tankers. I did pretty much everything one isn't supposed to do (harbor freight airbrush, walmart craft paint, krylon, and windex as a thinner), but I like the result.
Need to go back and do the trucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by slowfreight on Feb 5, 2023 19:14:55 GMT -8
The railing on top is a good question. I did at least 1 converted car (ICG) that retained the roof-top L grab after losing the roofwalk. Not sure what the FRA required at that time.
|
|
|
|
Post by arandall70 on Feb 5, 2023 19:25:41 GMT -8
I'm willing to bet that the rooftop grab iron was required on the end with the handbrake. It would have been a handhold for a trainman that climbed the ladder and needed to round the corner of the car to reach the handbrake.
|
|
|
|
Post by dti406 on Feb 5, 2023 19:31:55 GMT -8
Here is what I completed in the last couple of weeks! irst a 50' Atlas FMC 5503 Boxcar kit, painted with Scalecoat II Tuscan and Silver Paints, then lettered with Herald King Decals. Car was in General Service on the SP and SSW, The SP had several hundred cars in this class. _IMG_0285.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) Next a Proto 2000 PS 4427CF Covered Hopper kit, added a Plano Roofwalk and car was painted with Scalecoat II ATSF Red Paint and lettered with Oddballs Decals. This was a replacement for the 40' boxcars previously used in the grain service. _IMG_0284.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) Next an IMWX 1937 AAR Boxcar kit with Yarmouth Sill Steps painted with Scalecoat II Black and Orange paints then lettered with Highball Graphics decals. The NH sold off a large number of boxcars in the mid 50's and then had them refurbished and leased them back in the new McGinnis paint scheme. _IMG_0278.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) Next, a Tangent PC G43C 52'6" Gondola kit, painted with Floquil PC Green and Rust Paints then lettered with Dan Kohlberg decals. The PRR started the G43 gondola fleet and G43A, B and C classes followed under Penn Central until 3,500 of these cars were built replacing old G31 and other classes that were worn out. The various classes had various floors along with coil racks and other applicances. _IMG_0277.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) A pair of Kato SD-45 painted for the PC with a general freight, I find doing models of the PC is very interesting with all the varied equipment and repaints. _IMG_0946.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) Finally, a couple of Athearn FP7's pitching in as replacement power on an abbreviated "General" so far have received 8 of the 13 cars that Walther's is doing. Train is running on the Strongsville Club layout. _IMG_0280.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) |
|
|
|
Post by danpik on Feb 6, 2023 6:59:17 GMT -8
Added a couple more to the roster...   |
|
|
|
Post by nsc39d8 on Feb 6, 2023 13:49:19 GMT -8
As Promised the photos of the Walthers Proto N&W SD45 and the ST Southern SD45. The two locos:   Cab roof of each loco: Proto  ST:  Trucks: Proto 1 up & 1 down(big reason I ordered one)  ST front with ATC shoe;  I have started to repair the ST roof by cutting off the offending tab inside the cab that fits into the Short high hood. I still need to remove some more molding off the hood on the inside. |
|
|
|
Post by slowfreight on Feb 7, 2023 10:23:11 GMT -8
Was the 1 up / 1 down a quirk of that unit or an N&W thing?
I modeled a CNW unit configured that way, but it appeared to be a repair.
|
|
|
|
Post by csxt8400 on Feb 7, 2023 12:41:12 GMT -8
Was the 1 up / 1 down a quirk of that unit or an N&W thing? I modeled a CNW unit configured that way, but it appeared to be a repair. It's the half measure for the low slung brakes reaching up to the handbrake chain. Plenty of units came with it, not just CNW or NW. |
|
|
|
Post by mvlandsw on Feb 7, 2023 13:09:52 GMT -8
Doesn't the height of the cab walls need to be reduced to make the roof surfaces line up?
|
|
|
|
Post by nsc39d8 on Feb 7, 2023 14:28:42 GMT -8
Was the 1 up / 1 down a quirk of that unit or an N&W thing? I modeled a CNW unit configured that way, but it appeared to be a repair. I am not sure but as CSXT8400 pointed out it is not a quirk. I think N&W had one complete order like this unit. I will ask the N&W list why they did this. I believe you can add EL to the list of roads that had this as well. The cab has a tab that fits into the high short hood that does not let it sit flush. I believe there is some material that still needs to be removed from the short hood to let the cab sit down some more. If you look closely you can see an open space between the cab and the sub base, this is one thing I noticed as I took the model out of the box. |
|
sp3205
Junior Member
Posts: 93 
|
Post by sp3205 on Feb 7, 2023 17:09:38 GMT -8
Was the 1 up / 1 down a quirk of that unit or an N&W thing? I modeled a CNW unit configured that way, but it appeared to be a repair. It's a step in the evolution of the 2nd generation Flexicoil truck (the first being the version on the SD7/9/18/24/ and early 35-series. Originally each truck had 4 low-mounted brake cylinders. This iteration is often referred to as 2-high/6-low, in that locomotives delivered had 2 high-mounted brake cylinders located at the right-rear and left-front. Ultimately, the design evolved so that all 8 cylinders were located in the high positions. Story is that it improved braking performance. Of course, N&W sometimes specified 12 brake cylinders (2 per axle per truck), much like the old SD7/9 style. It's great that Walthers offered this option. Years ago (many years) I modeled this option on a SP SD45. Oddly, the units from the order this model represents was delivered will all high brake cylinders, but many units seemed to have the trucks swapped with those from an earlier order.
Elizabeth
|
|
wsor
Full Member
The Route of the Ruptured Duck
Posts: 138
|
Post by wsor on Feb 7, 2023 17:52:49 GMT -8
Was the 1 up / 1 down a quirk of that unit or an N&W thing? I modeled a CNW unit configured that way, but it appeared to be a repair. It's the half measure for the low slung brakes reaching up to the handbrake chain. Plenty of units came with it, not just CNW or NW. On the early low-mount cylinder trucks, one would have to cut out the truck (turn a valve which releases the air pressure in the cylinders), apply the handbrake, then cut the truck back in. If the hand brake was spun on without doing that, it could release unexpectedly. GE also used the low-mount cylinders. The hand brake releasing in an undesired fashion may have been a cause of the Lac Megantic wreck. Later on, many of the cylinders that the hand brake acted on were changed to the high mount, which worked better for securement, and not getting knocked off in a derailment. |
|
|
|
Post by wp8thsub on Feb 7, 2023 18:23:30 GMT -8
I'm not certain if they needed the grabs on the roof if they have a short ladder, or only on the end with the long ladder. The regulation required a roof grab on the B end only if the car retained full height ladders there, since that's the end where crews could reach it. See www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/231.27 . |
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Feb 7, 2023 18:36:56 GMT -8
It's the half measure for the low slung brakes reaching up to the handbrake chain. Plenty of units came with it, not just CNW or NW. On the early low-mount cylinder trucks, one would have to cut out the truck (turn a valve which releases the air pressure in the cylinders), apply the handbrake, then cut the truck back in. If the hand brake was spun on without doing that, it could release unexpectedly. GE also used the low-mount cylinders. The hand brake releasing in an undesired fashion may have been a cause of the Lac Megantic wreck. Later on, many of the cylinders that the hand brake acted on were changed to the high mount, which worked better for securement, and not getting knocked off in a derailment. The only relation handbrakes had in relation to the Megantic runaway was the train was left tied down on a hill without enough of them on to actually hold it there without air on as well. When the lead unit had to be shut down during the night due to an engine fire, they lost the air, and thus they lost the train. |
|
|
|
Post by slowfreight on Feb 7, 2023 22:19:24 GMT -8
On the early low-mount cylinder trucks, one would have to cut out the truck (turn a valve which releases the air pressure in the cylinders), apply the handbrake, then cut the truck back in. If the hand brake was spun on without doing that, it could release unexpectedly. GE also used the low-mount cylinders. The hand brake releasing in an undesired fashion may have been a cause of the Lac Megantic wreck. Later on, many of the cylinders that the hand brake acted on were changed to the high mount, which worked better for securement, and not getting knocked off in a derailment. The only relation handbrakes had in relation to the Megantic runaway was the train was left tied down on a hill without enough of them on to actually hold it there without air on as well. When the lead unit had to be shut down during the night due to an engine fire, they lost the air, and thus they lost the train. To add to the complexity, the rule book specified an insufficient number of handbrakes to hold a train, even if followed completely. And when the fire department hit the emergency fuel shutoff on the loco with a stack fire, the department didn't notify the railroad in a timely fashion. The list of things that went wrong in Lac Megantic was huge, including an improperly classified hazmat cargo due to (chronic) shipper error. |
|
|
|
Post by 690 on Feb 8, 2023 0:52:08 GMT -8
And as a result, CMQ went completely overboard with handbrake rules (admittedly not entirely without reason, but in most cases we were putting on excessive amounts of brakes).
|
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Feb 8, 2023 8:36:25 GMT -8
Banged out the other remained painted automax cars this weekend. BUt of course i messed up. Did both EL cars on the A units and the CNJ on the B units. So i had to go and pull the remaining undecorated cars out, clean, reassemble and paint to fix my screw up. Hopefully my extra decals come this weekend so i can finish them all. They do look pretty frickin sweet though  20230205_163422 by Tripps Pics79, on Flickr |
|
|
|
Post by packer on Feb 8, 2023 10:16:05 GMT -8
I'm not certain if they needed the grabs on the roof if they have a short ladder, or only on the end with the long ladder. The regulation required a roof grab on the B end only if the car retained full height ladders there, since that's the end where crews could reach it. See www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/231.27 . Thanks for that. |
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Feb 8, 2023 11:46:01 GMT -8
The only relation handbrakes had in relation to the Megantic runaway was the train was left tied down on a hill without enough of them on to actually hold it there without air on as well. When the lead unit had to be shut down during the night due to an engine fire, they lost the air, and thus they lost the train. To add to the complexity, the rule book specified an insufficient number of handbrakes to hold a train, even if followed completely. And when the fire department hit the emergency fuel shutoff on the loco with a stack fire, the department didn't notify the railroad in a timely fashion. The list of things that went wrong in Lac Megantic was huge, including an improperly classified hazmat cargo due to (chronic) shipper error.
You're saying Canadian rule books did not have a "sufficient number of brakes" rule (which means exactly what it says) like NORAC & GCOR. That would be "odd" to say the least since that rule goes back to the earliest years of railroading.
NORAC 10th Ed:
109. Hand Brakes
a. Cars or Drafts of Cars Left Standing
A sufficient number of hand brakes must be applied on cars to make them secure when left standing on any track. If necessary, car wheels must be blocked.
GCOR 6th Ed:
7.6 Securing Cars or Engines
Do not depend on air brakes to hold a train, engine, or cars in place when left unattended. Apply a sufficient number of hand brakes to prevent movement. If hand brakes are not adequate, block the wheels...
(I 've been qualified on both)
Sufficient means "tie down every car if necessary".
|
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Feb 8, 2023 13:03:50 GMT -8
To add to the complexity, the rule book specified an insufficient number of handbrakes to hold a train, even if followed completely. And when the fire department hit the emergency fuel shutoff on the loco with a stack fire, the department didn't notify the railroad in a timely fashion. The list of things that went wrong in Lac Megantic was huge, including an improperly classified hazmat cargo due to (chronic) shipper error.
You're saying Canadian rule books did not have a "sufficient number of brakes" rule (which means exactly what it says) like NORAC & GCOR. That would be "odd" to say the least since that rule goes back to the earliest years of railroading.
NORAC 10th Ed:
109. Hand Brakes
a. Cars or Drafts of Cars Left Standing
A sufficient number of hand brakes must be applied on cars to make them secure when left standing on any track. If necessary, car wheels must be blocked.
GCOR 6th Ed:
7.6 Securing Cars or Engines
Do not depend on air brakes to hold a train, engine, or cars in place when left unattended. Apply a sufficient number of hand brakes to prevent movement. If hand brakes are not adequate, block the wheels...
(I 've been qualified on both)
Sufficient means "tie down every car if necessary".
There was and is a rule like that in the Canadian rulebook. The rule of thumb that the running guys had to make it easy was "10% +1". On a 100 car train, you'd tie 11 brakes. Note: this was NOT the official rule. Works great on flat ground and on slight grades, maybe less so on a steeper one. But that is why you test to make sure nothing is going anywhere, and throw on a couple more if needed. When the engineer left the train on that fatefull night (single man crew, btw - since nobody has brought up that little tidbit yet) not only were there not even "10% +1" brakes on, (I think there were 7?) but the engineer had either forgotten or just could not be bothered to do an 'air off' hold test with the automatic and independent released to even check of the brakes would hold. Which, of course, they did not. |
|
|
|
Post by slowfreight on Feb 8, 2023 13:16:31 GMT -8
To add to the complexity, the rule book specified an insufficient number of handbrakes to hold a train, even if followed completely. And when the fire department hit the emergency fuel shutoff on the loco with a stack fire, the department didn't notify the railroad in a timely fashion. The list of things that went wrong in Lac Megantic was huge, including an improperly classified hazmat cargo due to (chronic) shipper error. You're saying Canadian rule books did not have a "sufficient number of brakes" rule (which means exactly what it says) like NORAC & GCOR. That would be "odd" to say the least since that rule goes back to the earliest years of railroading.
NORAC 10th Ed:
109. Hand Brakes
a. Cars or Drafts of Cars Left Standing
A sufficient number of hand brakes must be applied on cars to make them secure when left standing on any track. If necessary, car wheels must be blocked.
GCOR 6th Ed:
7.6 Securing Cars or Engines
Do not depend on air brakes to hold a train, engine, or cars in place when left unattended. Apply a sufficient number of hand brakes to prevent movement. If hand brakes are not adequate, block the wheels... (I 've been qualified on both) Sufficient means "tie down every car if necessary".
No, I'm saying that per the investigation report I read, MMA's rule book did not prescribe sufficient hand brakes. Why it would depart from GCOR or NORAC, I can't say. |
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Feb 8, 2023 16:37:02 GMT -8
You're saying Canadian rule books did not have a "sufficient number of brakes" rule (which means exactly what it says) like NORAC & GCOR. That would be "odd" to say the least since that rule goes back to the earliest years of railroading.
NORAC 10th Ed:
109. Hand Brakes
a. Cars or Drafts of Cars Left Standing
A sufficient number of hand brakes must be applied on cars to make them secure when left standing on any track. If necessary, car wheels must be blocked.
GCOR 6th Ed:
7.6 Securing Cars or Engines
Do not depend on air brakes to hold a train, engine, or cars in place when left unattended. Apply a sufficient number of hand brakes to prevent movement. If hand brakes are not adequate, block the wheels... (I 've been qualified on both) Sufficient means "tie down every car if necessary".
No, I'm saying that per the investigation report I read, MMA's rule book did not prescribe sufficient hand brakes. Why it would depart from GCOR or NORAC, I can't say.
The CROR or whatever rule book that was in use book did prescribe sufficient handbrakes in the format of some version of "sufficient number of hand brakes to prevent movement" rule. There is no ambiguity. Not complicated, has worked well for decades. Until people start taking shortcuts.
The crew violated the rules and bad things happened because of it. Then lawyers got involved.
I was a trainmaster.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Feb 8, 2023 16:39:49 GMT -8
You're saying Canadian rule books did not have a "sufficient number of brakes" rule (which means exactly what it says) like NORAC & GCOR. That would be "odd" to say the least since that rule goes back to the earliest years of railroading.
NORAC 10th Ed:
109. Hand Brakes
a. Cars or Drafts of Cars Left Standing
A sufficient number of hand brakes must be applied on cars to make them secure when left standing on any track. If necessary, car wheels must be blocked.
GCOR 6th Ed:
7.6 Securing Cars or Engines
Do not depend on air brakes to hold a train, engine, or cars in place when left unattended. Apply a sufficient number of hand brakes to prevent movement. If hand brakes are not adequate, block the wheels...
(I 've been qualified on both)
Sufficient means "tie down every car if necessary".
There was and is a rule like that in the Canadian rulebook. The rule of thumb that the running guys had to make it easy was "10% +1". On a 100 car train, you'd tie 11 brakes. Note: this was NOT the official rule. Works great on flat ground and on slight grades, maybe less so on a steeper one. But that is why you test to make sure nothing is going anywhere, and throw on a couple more if needed. When the engineer left the train on that fatefull night (single man crew, btw - since nobody has brought up that little tidbit yet) not only were there not even "10% +1" brakes on, (I think there were 7?) but the engineer had either forgotten or just could not be bothered to do an 'air off' hold test with the automatic and independent released to even check of the brakes would hold. Which, of course, they did not. "rule of thumb" = death. Writing as a former trainmaster. Part of my job was accident investigation & reporting, unfortunately too frequently.
When I was a conductor we took shortcuts, got inattentive, lazy, slept. People drank. But almost everyone took responsibility if/when they got caught. No one ever got killed in a rule violation I was involved in though.
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Feb 8, 2023 17:53:53 GMT -8
www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2013/r13d0054/r13d0054.htmlI'd recommend reading the report on the Lac Megantic derailment. Lots of factors at work. In the US Emergency Order 28 went into effect in the aftermath of the derailment which specified a number of things including performing securement tests before leaving trains unattended.
|
|
|
|
Post by csxt8400 on Feb 9, 2023 10:04:42 GMT -8
Banged out the other remained painted automax cars this weekend. BUt of course i messed up. Did both EL cars on the A units and the CNJ on the B units. So i had to go and pull the remaining undecorated cars out, clean, reassemble and paint to fix my screw up. Hopefully my extra decals come this weekend so i can finish them all. They do look pretty frickin sweet though 20230205_163422 by Tripps Pics79, on Flickr I'm not a big "what if" guy, though there are certainly certain ones I get a kick out of. This is a great group of cars to pick to do this with though, and I look forward to seeing them together. |
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Feb 13, 2023 4:32:33 GMT -8
Banged out the other remained painted automax cars this weekend. BUt of course i messed up. Did both EL cars on the A units and the CNJ on the B units. So i had to go and pull the remaining undecorated cars out, clean, reassemble and paint to fix my screw up. Hopefully my extra decals come this weekend so i can finish them all. They do look pretty frickin sweet though 20230205_163422 by Tripps Pics79, on Flickr I'm not a big "what if" guy, though there are certainly certain ones I get a kick out of. This is a great group of cars to pick to do this with though, and I look forward to seeing them together. Thanks. i'll have pics up later of one of them put together. Not all names look good or fit on cars. These did. I was messsing with ms paint and other names and there are some that just don't look right. |
|
