Lone Wolf and Santa FeWhen I’m shopping for models and I search for ‘CP’ I get Central Pacific and also Canadian Pacific.
I think that is because you are using only a portion of the reporting mark. From what I see on the net, Central Pacific's reporting mark was CPRR, while Canadian Pacific was either CP or CPR.
Concerning the ampersand, I think it did happen in the 70s. The B&LE used the ampersand reporting mark, but equipment brought in after the 70s sports BLE. There's Chessie equipment roaming around that still has B&O or C&O on it, which means they haven't been painted since the 70s either.
There are numerous instances of identical car numbers. there have been several photos in Trains over the years. I think one was in Decatur Illinois after N&W merged with Wabash. However the reporting rr while listed in this case under N&W was listed as Wabash. There are still a couple of hundred PRR cars floating around (at least there were last time I checked an ORER.
There may be a few, but the majority aren't "true" PRR. They were stenciled as such for bookkeeping purposes during the Conrail breakup. PRR went to Norfolk Southern and NYC to CSX. Curiously, PRR marked locomotives were way more common on NS and NYC rolling stock on CSX. A lot of the Conrad hoppers that gained NYC marks kept them even after getting the CSX paint jobs. The PRR marks I've seen tended to still sporting Conrail colors.
Rutland seems an interesting case. Officially their reporting mark was RUT, I think, but I've seen several pictures of gondolas with just "R". Boxcars didn't event seem to use reporting marks, and just had RUTLAND written out.
My favorite rr, MAINE CENTRAL, couldn't use MC because it was already used by NYC subsidiary Michigan Central. Ironically, in the early 90's when Maine Coast Rr took over the MEC Rockland branch, they were able to use MC!
What was Rock Island's? Was it CRIP, RI, or did it become ROCK in the 70's?
Bubbytrains
the Soo Line appears to also go beyond 4 characters, even on the ends:
http://www.westernrailimages.com/keyword/boxcar/i-PTZchKg/A
BubbytrainsBoxcars didn't event seem to use reporting marks, and just had RUTLAND written out.
.
A lot of GORRE & DAPHETID equipment did not have reporting marks. Some said G&D in the logo on the right side of the car. The left side had the road name spelled out and the car number.
Of course, John Allen did not follow reality if his ideas were better.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
And other photos at the same site, Bob, show D&RGW reporting marks on box cars...
Cheers! Ed
gmpullman And other photos at the same site, Bob, show D&RGW reporting marks on box cars... Cheers! Ed
Now, THERE'S a find!
I looked through the reporting mark list in my July 1945 ORER. Rio Grande is the ONLY reporting mark with 5 "letters". Or more.
So I went back to my oldest copy: November 1926. There are NO reporting marks with more than 4 "letters".
So, you ask, what about D&RGW? Well, in that copy, it's D&RG.
Ed
7j43kRio Grande is the ONLY reporting mark with 5 "letters". Or more.
Sure enough —
Plenty more at Fallen Flags:
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/drgw/drgw67416jpb.jpg
Remember the silver "Cookie Box" cars?
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/drgw/drgw60037jpa.jpg
Regards, Ed
The Pennsy also had cars with no reporting marks on the side, they just had "PENNSYLVANIA" on the side, no PRR.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Bubbytrains Rutland seems an interesting case. Officially their reporting mark was RUT, I think, but I've seen several pictures of gondolas with just "R". Boxcars didn't event seem to use reporting marks, and just had RUTLAND written out. My favorite rr, MAINE CENTRAL, couldn't use MC because it was already used by NYC subsidiary Michigan Central. Ironically, in the early 90's when Maine Coast Rr took over the MEC Rockland branch, they were able to use MC! What was Rock Island's? Was it CRIP, RI, or did it become ROCK in the 70's?
Rock Island was RI. After the new image debuted in 1975, ROCK also became a Rock Island reporting mark.
Reporting marks can be reused after a mark has been discontinued by the original assigned entity. I believe the time interval is 5 years. Each edition of the Official Railway Equipment Register had a section that listed changes to assigned marks.
Jeff
A railroad can own and use multiple reporting marks. During the CR split, the CSXT and NS reactivated the NYC and PRR reporting marks. The UP built a new series of hi-cap covered hoppers and used CMO reporting marks. A lot of their ballast hoppers are in SI reporting marks
dehusmanA railroad can own and use multiple reporting marks.
The STRATTON AND GILLETTE uses the following:
SGRR (Stratton & Gillette Railroad)
SGRT (Stratton & Gillette Refrigerated Transport)
SGMF (Stratton & Gillette Motor Freight)
SGPF (Stratton & Gillette Prioritized Freight)
Refrigerator car lines had to be incorporated separately from the railroads, so for example Burlington Refrigerator Express (BREX), although affiliated with the Burlington Route, was a separate private company...at least on paper...with separate reporting marks. Same for the Santa Fe and the Santa Fe Refrigerator Despatch (SFRD).
Like I mentioned earlier, the requirement that railroads or private companies limit their reporting marks to 4 letters didn't happen until like 1960, maybe a little later, so it's not hard to find earlier examples that are longer.
Keep in mind too it only affected cars used in interchange, a railroad could pretty much do what it wanted if a car was only used on-line. The DM&IR had that issue come up when all-rail ore trains became more common. Since their ore cars originally were rarely off the railroad, they didn't have the DMIR reporting marks on them, just the railroad herald with the car no. underneath it. That's why you came to see the Missabe ore cars with DM and IR stencilled over the herald, so those cars met the regulations when used in all-rail trains.
wjstix Refrigerator car lines had to be incorporated separately from the railroads, so for example Burlington Refrigerator Express (BREX), although affiliated with the Burlington Route, was a separate private company...at least on paper...with separate reporting marks. Same for the Santa Fe and the Santa Fe Refrigerator Despatch (SFRD).
I suspect "had to" is not correct--that it is more correctly "chose to". Based on circumstances. If there's a "had to", I'd surely like to know what it was.
As an exception to the statement, I'll note that there were 100's of express refrigerator cars with the reporting marks PRR on the side. And that GN had a fair number, also. These cars did NOT stay on home rails.
But, for the general case, it is true that railroads did not roster very many refrigerator cars under their own reporting marks.
Actually, it IS very difficult to find earlier examples that are longer. For me. I only found one: D&RGW.
As I noted earlier, in the November 1926 ORER, there are ZERO roads listed with more than four letters. EXCEPT for the narrow gage D&RGW. Which was not exactly an interchange road, at least not to a nationwide extent. Interestingly, there is a note that D&RG (the wide-gage part of the operation) was adding the "W" "as we speak".
From 1927 to approximately 1973, D&RGW was the only 5 letter reporting mark that I could find. Sometime in the following two years, the "4 letter rule" happened. But even in 1980, D&RGW was still listed as a reporting mark.
7j43kActually, it IS very difficult to find earlier examples that are longer. For me. I only found one: D&RGW.
"Actually, it IS very difficult to find earlier examples that are longer. For me. I only found one: D&RGW."
Not too rare:
CRI&P - Rock Island
CMStP&P - MilwaukeeRoad
M&StL - Minneapolis and Saint louis
DSS&A - Duluth South Shore and Atlantic
MStP&SSteM - Soo Line
CTH&E - Chicago Terre Haute and Eastern
...
How's PACIFIC as a rep mark?
Steve
If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!
NWP SWPHow's PACIFIC as a rep mark?
Not legal. Four characters max (and maybe an ampersand). As people have been saying.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
arbe1948Not too rare: CRI&P - Rock Island CMStP&P - MilwaukeeRoad M&StL - Minneapolis and Saint louis DSS&A - Duluth South Shore and Atlantic MStP&SSteM - Soo Line CTH&E - Chicago Terre Haute and Eastern
The ones longer than four characters (not counting ampersand) weren't the reporting marks. For example:
CMStP&P - reporting mark MILW
MStP&SSteM - reporting mark SOO
Reporting marks are four characters or fewer. Plus maybe an ampersand.
Source: 1953 Official Railway Equipment Register
Suggested reporting marks for NWP SWP
NSWP
WPNS
NPSP
WNSP
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
7j43k wjstix Refrigerator car lines had to be incorporated separately from the railroads, so for example Burlington Refrigerator Express (BREX), although affiliated with the Burlington Route, was a separate private company...at least on paper...with separate reporting marks. Same for the Santa Fe and the Santa Fe Refrigerator Despatch (SFRD). I suspect "had to" is not correct--that it is more correctly "chose to". Based on circumstances. If there's a "had to", I'd surely like to know what it was.
Actually, "had to" is exactly correct. It goes back to federal regulations enacted during the Progressive / Theodore Roosevelt "trust busting" era of the early 1900's.
The history of refrigerator car companies, lease agreements, regulations re billboard lettering etc. gets complicated. There is a good book (see below) that covers it quite well.
100+ years ago, it wasn't uncommon for a railroad to lease cars to a private company. That's why you'll sometimes see pictures (or models) of 1890's cars with a railroad name on one side of the door, and a private company name on the other. The railroad didn't sell advertising space to the company (some folks think that's what "billboard reefer" means - it doesn't), they leased the car to that company for dedicated service.
I believe in general the issue was that if say packing company A leased reefer cars from XYZ railroad that served it's plant(s), packing company B (who was also served by XYZ railroad, but owned their own reefers or leased them from someone else) felt that XYZ railroad gave company A preferential treatment re service times, shipping rates, etc.
The federal government intervened, and required railroads to separate themselves from leasing of cars to companies. This generally was accomplished by the railroad setting up a separate refrigerator car company, either by itself or in conjunction with neighboring railroads. Railroads could still own reefers for general freight service, but (as I understand it) they couldn't lease cars to private companies like they had in the past. In some situations, a railroad would set up a reefer car company and transfer all it's reefers to that company, and then lease them back.
https://www.amazon.com/Great-Yellow-Fleet-American-Refrigerator/dp/0870950916
Stix,
The topic is about reporting marks. You said, or implied, that refrigerator cars were not allowed to be run under a railroad's reporting marks. I cited two. You did not respond.
I will also throw in, from the July 1945 ORER:
B&M 13101-13216 Refrigerator, Steel Underframe, Friction Draft Gear
B&M 13231-13298 Same
Going to your general case of railroads not being allowed to own refrigerator cars, I would appreciate your citing your source for your statements. I have just read the first chapter of "The Great Yellow Fleet", where he discusses early reefer ownership; and I see nothing that backs up your assertions.
Mr. White says that early reefers were almost all privately owned, because the railroads didn't want them because they were too expensive to build and maintain. But they WERE willing to transport them. The companies owning them were the ones who ran into trouble with the government, and were required to make "concessions":
"While the number of private cars failed to diminish, their ownership was radically altered due to Federal intervention. The formation of Fruit Growers Express was but one instance. Railroads found it advantageous to maintain the semi-independent operating companies that remained, at least superficially, private car lines. It also permitted joint ownership, thus spreading the investment burden over several railroads."
It would appear, from what Mr. White writes, that railroads were NEVER told they could not own refrigerator cars. They just found it advantageous NOT to.
Of course, I could be misreading White.
7j43k Stix, The topic is about reporting marks. You said, or implied, that refrigerator cars were not allowed to be run under a railroad's reporting marks. I cited two. You did not respond.
In my earlier reply I said "Railroads could still own reefers for general freight service, but (as I understand it) they couldn't lease cars to private companies like they had in the past." Obviously, these cars would have the railroad's reporting marks. I never said a railroad couldn't own reefers. But after the regulation(s) came into effect about 100 years ago, the majorty of reefers were not owned by railroads. Yes, I'm sure there were situations where it turned out to be beneficial to the railroads to separate the refrigerator line out, but my understanding is the main cause was anti-trust rulings / regulations.
7j43k I have just read the first chapter of "The Great Yellow Fleet", where he discusses early reefer ownership; and I see nothing that backs up your assertions.
I have just read the first chapter of "The Great Yellow Fleet", where he discusses early reefer ownership; and I see nothing that backs up your assertions.
I'd suggest you keep reading. I haven't read/re-read the book in a while, but as I recall Mr.White does an excellent job of explaining the changes in federal regulations in the early 20th century that caused the formation of the refrigerator car leasing companies affiliated with railroads (Great Northern / Western Fruit Express, Burlington Route / Burlington Refrigerator Express, etc.)
So how did PRR have PENNSYLVANIA on their cars as rep marks?
I am utterly confused!
Let's back up a minute...in re-reading some of the posts, I might have muddied the waters by not saying things clearly. Let's see if I can "drain the swamp" (to coin a phrase).
This is just an educated guess, but I believe if you looked at all refrigerator cars in service in the US in 1925, you'd see something like this:
- A small percentage, maybe 10% (probably less) were owned and maintained by private businesses, most likely large food or beverage companies. These cars would have reporting marks ending in "X" indicated the cars were not owned by a railroad.
- A similar number, maybe 10% (could be a bit more) were owned and maintained by a railroad. These would carry the railroad's normal reporting marks.
- The rest, say 80%, would be owned by refrigerator car leasing companies, who would lease cars to private companies, and / or to railroads. These cars would have an "X" on the end of their reporting marks, as the cars were not railroad-owned.
I don't have as good a guess on the numbers, but I suspect if you went back to say 1895, you'd have a majority of reefers beign railroad-owned cars, but with many being leased by the railroads to private businesses (as I noted, with both the railroad name and the private business' name on the car). That's what changed in the early 20th century due to regulation changes by the federal government. Railroads couldn't directly lease cars to private businesses, it had to go through a separate (at least on paper) entity.
Another good book with lots of information - which actually now that I think of it might deal with the business side more than the 'Great Yellow Fleet', is "Billboard Refrigerator Cars":
https://www.amazon.com/Billboard-Refrigerator-Richard-Kaminski-Hendrickson/dp/1930013221
NWP SWP So how did PRR have PENNSYLVANIA on their cars as rep marks? I am utterly confused!
Probably because it's not really a reporting mark. But it does clearly identify the Railroad. Possible those dealing with the cars and paperworhk knew it was PRR.
Another thought, the PRR was a very large system, lots of home road business, perhaps they were cars not used in interchange.
Anybody know or find an article with an explanation?
wjstix I don't have as good a guess on the numbers, but I suspect if you went back to say 1895, you'd have a majority of reefers beign railroad-owned cars, but with many being leased by the railroads to private businesses (as I noted, with both the railroad name and the private business' name on the car). That's what changed in the early 20th century due to regulation changes by the federal government. Railroads couldn't directly lease cars to private businesses, it had to go through a separate (at least on paper) entity.
According to a table in White's book, in 1895 railroads owned 7040 refrigerator cars. 21,000 cars were privately owned.
So, your suspicions appear to be in error.
Rather than urging me to "keep reading", perhaps you should dig out your copy and read it yourself. Sometimes one's recollection of a book is not accurate. I just re-read the entire first chapter, and I stand by my comments.
I don't see any comment in White that railroads "couldn't directly lease cars to private businesses". It may be true. I'd like to know the source.
wjstix - The rest, say 80%, would be owned by refrigerator car leasing companies, who would lease cars to private companies, and / or to railroads. These cars would have an "X" on the end of their reporting marks, as the cars were not railroad-owned.
I think you are likely referring to the FGEX WFEX PFE etc. buncha companies. I have my doubts that they did much leasing out. I believe they operated the cars themselves. What are the companies that leased them? They would have been sizeable and thus prominent. And thus knowable.
And WHY would they lease them? That would just be introducing a middle man to suck up some of the profits.
Well then my line is the Great Sunset Route so would rep marks SNST work?