Hi all,
Does anyone know what size(s) of lumber was commonly used for the decking of wood decked flat cars? My guess on gut feeling would be 2x6 but that’s completely off the wall.
Thanks!
1 Like
Someone on another forum mesured some O scale brass cars and the boards were 8". I looked a Youtube video on current cars and the sizes seemed all over the map, to my eye anyway. I’m guessing the workers would use whatever is available locally but I’m only guessing.
Simon
1 Like
I think your gut feeling is pretty good, but that Simon is also correct in that the width and thickness of the timber used varied between builders.
These plans of a PRR standard flat car would suggest that the deck planks are about 4.8-4.9 inches wide. Unfortunately, there are not enough dimensions to guestimate the decking thickness, but again your 2” can’t be too far wrong.
https://prototopics.blogspot.com/2018/04/pennsylvania-railroad-fm-flat-car.html
Just my 2 cents, Cheers the Bear. 
1 Like
This company sells 3" X 6" X 10 foot planks for railcar decks:
Also found this info:
The timber dimensions for flat car decks can vary based on the design and manufacturer. Here are some common dimensions and types of lumber used:
These dimensions are essential for model railroaders looking to replicate flat car decks accurately in their models. It’s important to verify the specific requirements for the flat car model you are working with to ensure compatibility with the decking materials.
3 Likes
I presume that this information was AI-generated?
1 Like
All you needed to see was ‘Birch Plywood’ in the list.
Artificial Stupidity.
1 Like
I don’t know if it was AI generated or not. I believe not, since it seemed to have several different options based on the type of car. In any case I think the plank size options is the important info.
I did see the birch plywood info, and I concluded that info was provided from someone’s modeling attempt.
I can’t find the original from where I copied that info, and I’m darn well not going to waste my time looking right now. I’m a little tired of individuals chiming in that something is “artificial stupidity” or other such criticisms when they have nothing else to offer.
1 Like
I don’t mind it being AI generated, I just like to know. I’m sorry that you were offended. My guess was based on the end summation about it, as it seems common amongst AIs. In reality, it doesn’t matter.
1 Like
No, you did not offend me. Others have that honor.
1 Like
So you think that flatcars might be decked with 1/32 birch plywood instead of 3x6 double-tongue-and-groove?
Yeah, we know what produces ‘lists’ like that. The problem comes when people who don’t know it’s crook information trust the answer when they want to learn. Or repeat it without comment for the unwary.
1 Like
No, I don’t think that. What I think was that was an individual’s attempt to simulate decking on a model. But I already stated that. Now we’re getting around to those that annoy me.
Sadly, that problem is not confined to AI…
1 Like
Let me be clear in saying this isn’t about maxman; it’s about artificial intelligence that when asked about flatcar decking is literally too stupid to distinguish between prototype and model material, and literally conflates them in what it frames as ‘bullet points’ of curated example. I actually started reading that as birch plywood as a face decking of some kind for, say, specialty wood-products cars, and came across the fractional-inch dimension with disbelief that actual cars would use anything that thin. Then I read about the scoring to simulate decking, and I knew what we had. The point to me is that there is one discussion about prototype materials and deck systems, and there is a very different discussion about modeling those materials and systems, and they should never be conflated. Here ‘one of these things was not like the others’ but was presented as if it were… and to the unwary or inexperienced, that might be significant. To say nothing of the cumulative effect when the result comes to be used as additional uncurated training data…
2 Likes