0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
So time for some good news, bad news.Good news: The rack came off pretty easily and I only managed to break one pin. Most of the mounting pins weren't even glued in.Jason
From Jim Panza's "Thirty-five years of Trailer Train" in the July 1990 RMC "the bridge plates were removed from the rack cars in the mid-1960s and portable aluminium bridge plates were used at each loading and unloading facility instead."
Jason, how have they done the flat itself? Is it just a deck insert for the wheel paths ? I'm just wondering about future intermodal Twin 45/Triple 28 and general purpose releases for the F89F flat.
I'll try and take a closer look tomorrow, but it appears that the whole deck is metal. I don't think the flat is going to lend itself to other projects very well unfortunately.Jason
There's no way to discern with an ORER what racks went with what cars, but I can say in the number series that the BTTX cars fall, there are a ton more RTTX (tri-level) cars listed. It wouldn't surprise me if there were more tri-level cars with this same rack than bi-levels.
I picked up five of the six in order to draw the artwork for the anti-vandal panels,
Bryan,Are you going to make these panels available for purchase?
Mike: I don't know about the "referrer=", not having any experience in IP programming, but it does make sense, and fits the symptoms.
I keep re-reading this trying to work out what you're looking for. Remember TT only supplies the flat itself and the RRs supply the racks, often with a separate rack number, so the TT listing in the ORER won't help too much in terms of matching racks with flats.
I'm just saying that for the class of the Athearn flat, in this case an F89FH, there are way more tri-level cars listed (in 1966) than bi-level.
I just can't know if the tri-level racks are the same W&K racks Athearn is using.Jason
Jim Eager (23 July 14):Note that a road's absence (UP bilevels, for example) just means that I have yet to run across a photo or other documentation that a road had these racks, not that it definitely did not have any. I'm sure more roads/paint schemes will show up now that the cars have been announced.For general information, here are roads that I have confirmed as having W&K racks on BSC F89FH flats and/or near look alike ACF F89GHs.BilevelsBN (ex CB&Q & NP) with added side panels, B&O, CB&Q (including FW&D), CNW, D&RGW, GM&O, IC, ICG repaints, L&N, MP, N&W, N&W ex WAB blue w/ reverse herald, NW with added side panels, NP, NYC, RI, SAL, SCL (ex SAL), SLSF, SOU, WAB, WPClearly lots more paint schemes for Athearn to do, especially when you count both mineral red flats and yellow repaints.TrilevelsARCC, D&RGW, GM&O, GN, MP, N&W, N&W ex WAB blue, NP, RI, SLSF, SP, SSW, UP, WAB
It should be noted that you're referring to RR-owned racks on TT cars. Therewere a few other owners of these flats, including CRI&P (93056-93059),Merchants Despatch (MDAX 2300-2399, NYC rack) and I think SP. Another veinfor Athearn to mine.
> Jim...> Thanks for the informative post, as always! I was hoping that you would chime in...> A question for you...> When a railroad put a rack on a flat, were they assigned consecutive car numbers, or were the cars plucked randomly out of a series?It depends. I have seen examples of a particular road's racks applied to sequentially numbered TT cars, especially if the cars were built and delivered immediately prior to the racks being applied. More common was a *nearly* sequential block, punctuated by another road's, or roads' racks that were ordered for application at the same time. On the other hand, if the cars came from the builder's or TT's inventory the racks could have been applied in random order and even on flats from different builders (BSC F89Fs and ACF F89Gs for example). And if the cars had been in some other service prior to being racks, or were being reracked, then they would certainly be in random order.As for for sequential car numbers in pools, I have seen single rack orders assigned to two or more different assembly plants and even split among different auto makers, so the rule of thumb would be no.Jim Eager
> Did the SP have any of these flat cars for auto racks or other > service?Assuming you mean Bethlehem F89Fs, yes:SP 515050-515099 F-70-42 BSC 1=2-65 W&K TRISP 515100-515149 F-70-28 BSC 1=2-65 W&K TRISSW 84634-84683 BSC? 2-65 W&K TRIsimilar:SSW 84584-84633 ACF 5-64 W&K TRI Jim Eager
Based on further review of the photos posted on the Atlas Forums of preliminary test shots of the models shown at the World's Greatest Hobby show in Chantilly, VA:Athearn's new model is based on the 89-foot flat cars with canted C- side sills built by Bethlehem Steel between late 1963 and mid-1967 for trailer-on-flatcar piggyback and autorack service.The main user of these flats was Trailer Train, which designated the cars as their F89F and F89FH classes. (The H indicates a car equipped with end-of-car cushioning.) The cars were numbered in Trailer Train's 150000-155732, 910000-914200 (mixed-builders and classes) and 930000-931361 series, but reporting marks depended on what service the cars were in. The 150000s were mainly noncushioned tofc flats with a few autoracks mixed in. The 910000s and 930000s were cushioned autoracks, vehicle chain flats and special service cars.The first cars delivered in 1963 were mainly used in autorack service as there was no pressing need for 89-footers in the era of 40ft vans. BTTX reporting marks were used on bilevels, RTTX on trilevels. (These marks were later changed to TTBX and TTRX in 1968.) A few railroads and other car pool operators bought their own cars from Bethlehem for autorack service, including D&RGW, MP, SP/SSW, Merchants Despatch (NYC), and North American Car.As nose-mounted reefer units became more common, making 40ft reefer vans that much longer, the piggyback flats began entering service in 1964, both TTX-marked cars equipped with two hitches spaced to carry two 40 foot vans, or one 45 and one 40, and XTTX-marked cars equipped with four hitches to carry two 40s, or one 45 and one 40, or three 28 foot pup trailers. In the 1980s many of these cars were reconfigured to carry two 45ft vans (STTX, WTTX, KTTX, RTTX), and in the 1990s even mated in drawbarred pairs to load three 53 or 57 foot trailers (TTEX).These cars were also used in other service. Some were equipped with two chain tracks and pedestals at one end to haul new set-up highway trucks and marked ITTX, while cars set up to carry military equipment were marked TTDX. Unequipped cars for hauling long items were marked MTTX, while those equipped with railroad or shipper-owned special fixtures were marked JTTX.Based on photos of preliminary test shots of the cars it appears that Athearn is doing at least the following versions (in HO):1 - as-built TTX with two hitches and chain tie-down racks beside the tire area (this would have to be a very early car as I've never seen a TTX F89F with the chain racks that were commonly applied to F85s)2 - as-built XTTX with four hitches3 - 1980s KTTX back-to-back Twin 45 conversion with two fixed hitches4 - 1980s RTTX back-to-back Twin 45/Triple 28 three hitch conversion of a former autorack car with reinforced side sills5 - 1990s TTEX paired Long Runner quad 45/Triple 53-57 with five hitchesAt least three different hitches were shown: collapsable ACF Model 4, modified fixed ACF Model A, Trailer Train fixed A-frame.Jim Eager
Athearn has tooled an autorack version of their F89F with reinforced sides sills as converted to RTTX tofc service in the 1980s.If we want to see them do an actual autorack version of this car then it is up to us to come up with drawings for the racks.After going through my own files and published photos I'd have to say that the most common rack applied to the F89F was a Whitehead & Kales fixed-deck Auto-Pack like these cars:BTTX 913672 w/ SAL W&K bilevelhttp://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=667169TTBX 910421 w/ SLSF W&K bilevelhttp://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=50564RTTX 913075 w/ N&W W&K trilevelhttp://www.boxcars.us/Boxcars_M_Z/R/pages/image080.htmlRTTX 910440 w/ SLSF W&K trilevelhttp://gelwood.railfan.net/ttx/rttx910440csa.jpgI have confirmed that the following roads had this type of rack mounted on Bethlehem X89FH and F89XH (89-4) C-sill flats and the very similar ACF F89GH.Bilevel: BN (ex-NP or SLSF), CNW, D&RGW, GM&O, IC, L&N, MP, N&W, SAL, SLSF, WABTrilevel: D&RGW, MP, NP, N&W, RI, SLSF, SP, SSW, WABThat's 15 roads, minimum, which should make it worth Athearn's wile to do this car as an autorack.BUT, they need drawings to make it happen, and good photos to prepare artwork for the lettering. I urge anyone with contacts at the various historical societies for the listed roads to check to see if drawings or photos of the racks might be available and if so, get copies to Athearn.Jim Eager
Tim O'Connor wrote:> Jim, I have scans of Southern-BTTX #477129, C&O-BTTX #100499Both 85-footers> and N&W-RTTX #912411.An ACF F89G, which is close enough.> Are there simple spotting features to distinguish the type of W&K> rack you are describing?Check the four photos I linked to: Symmetric, 6 + 6 slender columns with two very close together in the center, two large X braces with a horizontal wide channel across their center (the left one is usually covered by a lettering panel).Jim Eager
> Jim,> Since the reinforcements in the sills of the flats are essentially > just extensions of the rack's side posts, would the location of > those reinforcements be different dependant on the builder and > style of rack applied? In other words, would the location of the > reinforcements on the Athearn model dictate and/or limit what type > of rack could be applied?Yes, they would, Dave.For example, this ex-MDT/NYC Conrail bilevel has very differently spaced reinforcements because it carried a different design of W&K rack:http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=45614Furthermore, it looks like the current Athearn ex-rack version has a large lettering plate covering the center portion of the side sill:http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c310/leafwalker7/AthearnF89_Ex_AutorackWTTX.jpgso it would further limit its usefulness to racks that also had this feature, such as this one:http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=50564A new side sill would be required to do cars like this one:http://www.boxcars.us/Boxcars_M_Z/R/pages/image080.htmlbut that's not a problem since mounting pins or holes would also need to be added to mount the rack super structure, so let's assume an all- new side sill version would need to be tooled, with a separate lettering plate to maximize flexibility.Jim Eager
We've discussed this before on the MFCL list, but one cool thing about a F89F/W&K rack model would be the non-standard Trailer Train paint & lettering that could be applied to some of them. So far I have:C&O grey rack on Enchantment Blue Trailer Train flatWabash and N&W blue rack and blue TT flatNYC Century Green rack and green TT flatSLSF yellow rack and yellow TT flat (different from the later TT yellow scheme)Jim Eager
here are a couple road names in that list that interest me.> How late into the '80s could some of these still had the racks on > them?The RTTX/TTRX trilevels disappeared pretty rapidly, displaced by ETTX fully enclosed trilevels, but the bilevels lasted into the mid-late 1980s as TTGX enclosed bilevels could not carry full size vans and larger suvs, or military humvees.Jim Eager
Author
Topic: Athearn Bi-Level Auto-racks now hitting the shelves... (Read 7053 times)
