This thread and its two predecessors are if nothing else good reminders that while we now have much great information for prototype modeling, and some good sources for finely detailed parts, there is still much we do NOT have. Inverse dreadnaughts in multiple versions among them. And there are things we used to have but don’t now, including many of the rare and obscure freight car trucks and other parts that Red Ball and others used to offer (in a quality that few would find acceptable today). For that matter a look at just about any Car Builder’s Cyclopedia shows that there are many many freight cars which have yet to be offered to us, including in resin. Tank cars in particular.
I don’t necessarily buy into the “there has never been a better time to be a model railroader” mantra in other words. I am not anti building and modifying but there are some things that are just darn hard to build or modify and some projects are just going to kept on the back burner as a result.
At least the NYC cars seem to have used leaf springs (less bounce) in the trucks.
The PRR was an early contributor to the War Effort with X32 box cars converted to troop sleepers as well as converted box cars pressed into service as coaches.
The later Pullman-built troop sleepers had Allied Full Cushion trucks which, despite some problems, certainly rode better than the average freight car truck of the day.
I’m doing some preliminary planning on the temporary war caboose. So far, my understanding is that it was constructed from a 36’ wood boxcar.
Q1: From the re-posted photo below, does it appear that the end platforms are “included in” or “in addition to” the overall length of the 36’ boxcar?
I’m inclined to say “in addition to” because of the slightly notched and slightly wider bracketed wood siding above the right end platform entry.
If that is the case then that would require end platform “systems” (i.e. platform, stairwells, modified end panel, coupler gear box, brake detailing, etc. as a single unit) that are secured to the end of the boxcar and to the underbody frame by an extended coupler gear box underneath. That leads to my 2nd question:
Q2: Would that be enough to keep the gear box/coupler from flexing too much laterally?
Given that this is at the end of the train I would say no.
I have no reason to doubt your sources about 36 ft but you’d think that such a conversion would be “quick and diry” involving as few expenditures and work-time as possible. But to me the wheelbase and roof both look like they “fit” the current length of the car, which to my eyeballs looks closer to 40 feet, which means new parts and more work were allocated to this conversion than I’d think likely.
One thing that looks like 36’ foot car is that the wood “ends” would be where the original wood ends were - but that means a really old 36 ft double sheathed car, more like a reefer. And would that also suggest that the 7/7 ends were taken from a different car? Once again that sounds like more futzing and expense than I’d associate with a “git 'er done” project of this sort. .
It is also hard to tell if the side sill stops where we can see it just beyond the end of the truck bolster. There seems to be no space for it behind the steps. So perhaps the side sill supports the 36’ idea.
By the way Tom, today I was by chance reading the November 2004 issue of RMC and one of Ted Culotta’s “Essential Freight Cars” articles, this one #17 on Illinois Central single sheathed automobile cars, later rebuilt into single door and making for a very unusual looking car, but the IC had thousands of them They had 7/7 Murphy ends (not inverted). What Culotta used for his model was a resin kit originally issued by Rensselaer Railroad Shop - that goes back a ways – later acquired and issued by Funaro & Camarlengo. It looks like they still sell the kit
I hear and agree witih what you are saying, Dave. I was wondering to myself whether it would be “easier” to go with a 40’ wood boxcar kit, scratchbuild a 36’ shell from Evergreen freight siding stock, add the existing roof from the kit to the top, and leave the 40’ base in tact. I would use Evergreen I-beams for the side sills and cut those to whatever length I need. I would probably need to notch the base in order to fit the four inset stairs on the side ends. Those I can either scratchbuild…or canabalize from another caboose - like I did with my original kitbashed proof-of-concept caboose.
I like the idea of utilizing the Tichy 7/8 end panels and creating a 7/7 panels from those using an X-acto knife and liquid cement. I can try just using those “non-inverted” for t
From the pictures you have posted the answer is pretty clear that the its a 36 ft boxcar and the 36 ft is to the metal ends, not the bulkhead of the compartment.
In your terminology, the platforms are “included in” the 36 ft.
Look at the trucks and the position of the wheels relative to the end. Either they spend thousands of dollars to splice in new center sill and rebuild the structural parts of the car (not really an “emergency” car then is it?) or they just cut through the side sills. Since the car no longer carries a load, other then a couple crewmen and a stove, there is no need for huge load carrying capability.
Assuming that the Accurail 36 ft boxcar is accurate, it has 12 ribs on the roof and your caboose has 12 ribs in the roof. I rather doubt they could lengthen the body without adding roof panels.
Conclusion: The car is 36 ft to the end panels.
Since its a stock underframe right off a 36 ft boxcar, there is no “flexing problem”. It’s the regular underframe.