MTL Gunderson Husky Stack well car

[jagged ben]

Um - couldn't one put a 48' container in the well with a 53' on top?

George

Sure, if you want to model 1998. 

(Neither of the 53' schemes MTL has released would have been appropriate for that time period.)

[Missaberoad]

Sure, if you want to model 1998. 

(Neither of the 53' schemes MTL has released would have been appropriate for that time period.)

It depends on the Railroad you're trying to represent. 48' wells were still pretty common on CN into the late 2000's. CN Intermodals were often a dogs breakfast of equipment.
CP however was much better at keeping their trains made up of uniform 53' wells (at least 101/102 and 103) so 48's were rare after the turn of the century...
Mind you Canada can be odd 54' container flats were common up to the 2000's as well...

[eric220]

Sure, if you want to model 1998. 

Is there something wrong with modeling 1998?

[nickelplate759]

Sure, if you want to model 1998. 

(Neither of the 53' schemes MTL has released would have been appropriate for that time period.)

Actually, I want to model 1958, at least most of the time.

George

[jagged ben]

It depends on the Railroad you're trying to represent. 48' wells were still pretty common on CN into the late 2000's. CN Intermodals were often a dogs breakfast of equipment.
CP however was much better at keeping their trains made up of uniform 53' wells (at least 101/102 and 103) so 48's were rare after the turn of the century...
Mind you Canada can be odd 54' container flats were common up to the 2000's as well...

My photo collection admittedly contains very little from Canada.  But it covers the US pretty well, and you know what?  I surveyed my collection from 2005 to 1998 (377 photos) and couldn't find a single clear instance of a 53' container on top of a 48' container in a standard Husky-Stack.  That's of course not to say it never happened, but it would have been a rarity.  The AP Husky-Stack was quite a bit more common clearly preferred for premium intermodal service, for obvious reasons, but even they are less common than articulated cars.   The standard 48' Husky's were relegated to ISO trains and trash trains already by the late nineties as far as I can tell.  I agree with the comments/questions regarding whether the MTL car would be the AP version.  Because Athearn did a pretty good standard Husky Stack (in all the prototypical schemes and then some), but the Con-Cor AP version could stand to be improved on.  And it would be more appropriate for more prototype trains.

BTW, are you saying 48' wells were common for domestic container service on CN?  (i.e. all 48' and 53' boxes?)  Did CN divide domestic from ISO service much?  Saying that 48' wells were common for ISO transport is not very relevant to people who want to model Z trains full of 53' containers. 

Is there something wrong with modeling 1998?

Of course not, but you wouldn't want to use MTL's CIMC 53' container then.     The only appropriate 53' container schemes would be JB Hunt and the white APL scheme, both sheet post types.

See above.

[Missaberoad]

I surveyed my collection from 2005 to 1998 (377 photos) and couldn't find a single clear instance of a 53' container on top of a 48' container in a standard Husky-Stack.  That's of course not to say it never happened, but it would have been a rarity.  The AP Husky-Stack was quite a bit more common clearly preferred for premium intermodal service, for obvious reasons, but even they are less common than articulated cars.
   
BTW, are you saying 48' wells were common for domestic container service on CN?  (i.e. all 48' and 53' boxes?)  Did CN divide domestic from ISO service much?  Saying that 48' wells were common for ISO transport is not very relevant to people who want to model Z trains full of 53' containers. 

CN did run solid Marine trains but their domestic trains have always had large cuts of marine containers.

I dug out my old CD's to have a little more to go on then my memory.  Looking at a few outings in the summer of 2007 There was still a large 48' presence on CN, 53' was the majority but it seems from my shots 1/4 to 1/3 of the cars on Domestic trains were various versions of 48' wells. Articulated and drawbared sets (both standard and AP) were more common, but I did shoot a few Single Gunderson and Thrall 48' wells.

Including this one with a CN 53' (this months MTL  ) on top of a BN 48'







I only have a few shots of Gunderson single unit well cars but I remember seeing lots of them. especially BN/BNSF ones.
By 2010 most of the 48' cars were gone except the odd Canadian owned car running out its last miles...

I did shoot this Articulated set that I really like... 5 platforms with 6 48' containers in '07!

[James Costello]

The only appropriate 53' container schemes would be JB Hunt and the white APL scheme, both sheet post types.

Whilst the APC/APL 53' sheet and post "Big Bird" kicked off the 53' revolution:
http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part3/images/apcu530582.jpg

and JB Hunt followed soon after with a few different styles of composite sided cans, lets not forget that the late 90s also saw:

53' Exterior Post Cans - APC/APL, EMP, etc
APC - http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part3/images/apcu530246.jpg
APC exNS - http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part3/images/apcu531325.jpg
APL - http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part3/images/apcu537173.jpg

and maybe EMP too?

and other Sheet and Post roads:
Santa Fe - http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part3/images/sftu230079.jpg
Conrail - http://www.matts-place.com/intermodal/part3/images/crmu231047.jpg
amongst a few others.

I've managed to catch 48' Husky's on most of my USA trips - here's one in 2006 on the BNSF (Winslow, AZ) in original TT paint

[James Costello]

We run into this often, the 53' containers (different from the Kato by the way)

Could you please elaborate on this a bit further @Shipsure Joe? How is it different from Kato and/or deLuxe?

From memory, the MTL preview of the 48' container is an exterior post model - is it different from the Walthers model? Hyundai? Stoughton?

[GaryHinshaw]

I heard rumors awhile back that another company was doing or getting ready to do a 53' well and given our strength is not modern for any number of reasons, real or imagined, decided to try and make a better version of the 48 Husky Stack.

Well, I don't really get the argument that it's better to compete with a known product than a rumoured one, but that's really none of my business (literally).  Given that the focus is on 48 footers, I decided to remind myself what prototype sets were produced and came up with this list (with corresponding models in parentheses):

Gunderson:
Husky Stack (Athearn, N Scale Kits)
Husky Stack All Purpose (Con-Cor)
Maxi-III articulated (Deluxe, N Scale Kits)

Thrall:
Single unit, 3-unit drawbar-coupled (Walthers)
5-unit articulated (Walthers)

National Steel Corp:
Single unit, 3-unit drawbar-coupled (N Scale Kits)

Oddballs: (no models, but these prototypes were pretty rare)
Trinity 5-unit articulated
Thrall single unit with fairings
Thrall 4-unit drawbar-coupled, all purpose

So every major 48' prototype is represented by at least one model already.  In my opinion, the Gunderson AP car is definitely the best candidate for an upgrade, with the NSC car being second.  Here are some nice shots of the AP car (login required):

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=51339
http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=54667

Here is the oddball Trinity car, with a new image TTX logo, no less:

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=61494

And here are the two unusual Thrall cars:

http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=78204
http://www.railcarphotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=21246

For comparison, there is exactly one RTR model of a 53' well: the Kato Maxi-IV, and one kit: N Scale Kits 53' AP well; but many more kits to come!

[James Costello]

Gunderson:
Husky Stack (Athearn, N Scale Kits)
Maxi-III articulated (Deluxe, N Scale Kits)

For completeness, both these are (or have been) also available from N Scale of Nevada / Wiseman Models.

Fine-N-Scale also did the Husky Stack and maybe the Thrall car too.

For comparison, there is exactly one RTR model of a 53' well: the Kato Maxi-IV, and one kit: N Scale Kits 53' AP well; but many more kits to come!

Deluxe also has the Maxi-IV....

[jagged ben]

Ryan and James, nice pics and links, thank you.  I'll just point out though: none of them feature a 53 on top of a 48 on top of a Husky Stack.   

Ryan I had thought all those BN and NACS boxes were pretty much gone by 2007, now I know where they went.  To Canada!   

Gary, there are some Canadian oddballs too, and I don't have to find a link for you.  They are right there in Ryan's pictures.     I don't think these venture off Canadian roads though, at least I've never seen one in the western US.

[nscaler711]

I model early to mid 90s SF, so I am excited to see these... Again because the Athearn/ MDC are basically useless... Especially when run as empties...
As for the 1998 comment, I hope you know that's when the IVs were out... I.e. 53' you started seeing 53' become common after 1995.

[jagged ben]

I model early to mid 90s SF, so I am excited to see these... Again because the Athearn/ MDC are basically useless... Especially when run as empties...
As for the 1998 comment, I hope you know that's when the IVs were out... I.e. 53' you started seeing 53' become common after 1995.

Definitely the Husky Stack is good for your era.    I disagree about the Athearn/MDC cars, I have fixed up several of the MDCs with GMM details and FVM wheels and I'm quite happy with them.  Hence my disappointment.   I suppose if you end up really digging the MT car then it's one of those 'you can thank me for my modeling efforts that guaranteed an RTR version'.   Already felt like I was there with the Athearn, actually.   

BTW, I was not aware that Maxi-IVs were built as early as 1998, I thought they started in 1999.  Some NSC single well 53' cars were built in 97 and 98.  Anyway, that's some thread drift... 

---

Look everyone, some people made comments that you can put a 53' can on top of a 48' can in a 48' well.  I made a comment about 1998 because that particular arrangement really defines a certain, rather narrow intermodal era on most railroads, namely the 2nd half of the 90s.   And obviously people asking for 53' wells are not trying to model that era, because 53' wells hardly existed then.   I stand by my point.   

[James Costello]

Ryan and James, nice pics and links, thank you.  I'll just point out though: none of them feature a 53 on top of a 48 on top of a Husky Stack.   

Stumbled across this today @jagged ben 

http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/rail/prints/atsf/scan078.jpg

Another request for these though:

http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/rail/prints/atsf/scan079.jpg

[Missaberoad]

Ryan and James, nice pics and links, thank you.  I'll just point out though: none of them feature a 53 on top of a 48 on top of a Husky Stack.   

Ryan I had thought all those BN and NACS boxes were pretty much gone by 2007, now I know where they went.  To Canada!   

It's difficult to see because of the angle, but the First picture in my post is a 53' CN container on top of a 48' BN container in a husky stack

The only reason I lack more examples is my own fault not capturing them. I do concede that what was the case up here was not the case everywhere.