While visiting the Virginia Museum of Transportation recently, I was asked by museum docent Charles Hardy if I could help him answer a question. Is the AMOX tank car that they have at the museum the oldest tank car in America? Well, I believe I already know the answer to that question; No, it isn’t…maybe. I’ve seen pictures of used to be a Densmore tank car on static display in Titusville, Pa… However, the car doesn’t have the actual oil tanks still intact on the flatcar frame. So I thought maybe I could pose the question "Is the AMOX #9465 one of the oldest “bottle on wheels” tank cars in America? The oldest from what I can gather would be the 1918 NWP#MW 849 at the Northwestern Pacific Railroad museum in Campo, Ca.The AMOX was built in 1919 and used by AMOCO to haul oil all over the country. Mr. Hardy is hoping to have the tank car considered for restoration, as it has been sitting in the elements since arriving at the museum. Despite this fact, the car appears to be in relatively good condition. The biggest need would be replacing the wooden running boards. The trucks, wheels, handrails and steel exterior all seem to be in fairly good condition. We even found some gooey grease in the journal box’s.
If anyone has more information about other early 1900’s steel tank cars, we would appreciate it.
That’s correct: the “ARA III” spec eventually became the ICC103. This is an ordinary tank car with a dome on top. The ICC (or DOT) 111 doesn’t have a dome covering the manway valves and vents.
Other letters and numbers on the specifications indicate various modifications. The tank that has been giving the politicians fits lately is a DOT-111A100W1. I don’t know what the “A” specifies (it seems to be on nearly every tank built–may have to do with the type of steel used)…the “100” is how many PSI pressure that the tank has been tested for, and the “W” means that the tank is welded (your ARA III has a riveted body). I’ve seen 1, 2, or 3 used after the “W”, but I’m not sure what those signify, either.
I tried to locate the story of an ‘elderly’ tank car that had apparently been cut off from being moved back to an active railroad connection.
The Story was the subject of a General Discussion Thread on this Forum some time back… It was apparently found to be on the grounds of a Power Plant (?) in the area of Springfield, IL. It had apparently been there for many years, and the conjecture was about it being recovered and used [ Had its 'Life" expired?]. There was also a brief mention that it might have to be salvaged ‘in place’.
Does anyone here have any idea as to the outcome of this story?
The car in Springfield would still have been viable, IIRC. It was an 111A type, if I remember correctly. It had roller bearings, for one thing, which would have made it a lot easier to get permission to be moved, even if age otherwise prevented it.
As to the “other letters and numbers in the specifications” they indicate different specifications, within the class DOT 111. The A is simply a place holder between the class (111) and the test pressure of either 60 or 100 pounds.
The trailing letters and numbers differentiate the specifications. The W indicates welded steel, while ALW indicates welded aluminum. The trailing digit is what designates the specification. Most of the differentiation in the specification has to do with top loading, bottom outlets, and bottom washouts.
In simple terms:
W1 is basic flammable liquid car typically with top loading capability and a bottom outlets, though both are optional.
W2 is basic acid car which may not have a bottom outlet, but usually has bottom outlet.
W3 is W1 with insulation required, but a W1 may be insulated.
W4 is rare bird with no bottom outlet and no bottom washout.
W5 is a lined tank. Most often rubber lined for Hydrochloric Acid. No bottom outlet, no washout.
W6 is alloy (stainless steel) with fittings same as W1.
See 49 CFR Section 179.201. Also shows variety of Class 103 tanks, but they are now getting rare.
Thanks Sam… As for the other “answers”…You’re splitting hairs here… As usual, a general question being answered by people who have no real intention of helping, but rather of showing off their own knowledge.
And I point you at a possible reference to a car built in 1918, which might also be relevant to Charles Hardy’s question, and your comment is only
What answer were you expecting?
At this point I’d have to wonder that if anyone were reckless enough to actually comment on older tank-car construction, the other thing your original post was asking for, they’d only be accused of showing off that knowledge. I agree that digressions into newer car construction are a bit excessive… but you could have gently steered the discussion back on track instead of responding as you have.
That was EXACTLY the link I was trying to associate with that abandoned “SOEX” tank car. I had thought that the SOEX tank might have been a pretty old one. In the 1960s/70’s Creosote was named as a carcinogen and a lot of its uses were being curtailed then.
I was just fuzzy on the time it had been sitting and its potential to have been much older than the length of time it was abandoned.
Thanks to Overmod: who said "…At this point I’d have to wonder that if anyone were reckless enough to actually comment on older tank-car construction, the other thing your original post was asking for, they’d only be accused of showing off that knowledge. I agree that digressions into newer car construction are a
The original poster was purportedly asking on behalf of a museum curator, who would, I’d like to think, be informed enough about his exhibit to answer any questions that might come up. The incorrect reference to the classification (ARA 111) that prompted a correction from Mac (and my subsequent elaboration) was conveniently later deleted–so of course it looked like we were spouting off about nothing.
Don’t worry, Papazahn, it won’t happen again, as far as you’re concerned…and I won’t be buying any of your pijjas, either.
I think if the original question had been phrased that way, the thread might have stayed more on track, if you will. Now that it has more or less returned to what I presume was its original intention, I will jump in.
CP, and I presume CN, both used what could be described as astoundingly/absurdly old repurposed oil tank cars as water cars for OCS and MOW purposes. WWI era or earlier. They were finally disposed of in the '80’s and some went to museums or tourist RR’s. A man my age likely would not have seen as many riveted tank cars in his youth, growing up in the US.
I think looking into museums in Canada that have tank cars would yield some surprising results. I tried looking into Heritage Park’s, here in Calgary, roster, but they have recently redesigned their website to be all flashy, and boring stuff like this is no longer on their website. Unfortunately, I have nothing more specific, but I hope it gives you guidance on where to look.