The photo below shows something a bit unusual. Cattle in wagons that are not stock wagons.
The caption reads that it was an emergency measure in the late 1940's to move starving animals from badly affected drought areas.
I wonder if they ever did that in North America?
If anyone is interested the URL to the article is:
http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/stockwagons.htm?200518" target="_blank" title="http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/stockwagons.htm?200518">http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/stockwagons.htm?200518
Sorry, I don't know what is wrong with the URL. Copy this and paste to your browser:
http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/stockwagons.htm?200518
doctorwayne wrote: I went digging through my old copies of RMC for the answer, which I couldn't find. What I did find was a photograph of cattle being loaded into the upper deck of a bi-level stock car. These were not calves: judging from the photo, they were about chest-high to a man. The photo is dated 1968, and was taken on UP's Yellowstone Branch, in Idaho. The car dimensional data is legible, showing an inside length of 40'6" and an inside height of 10'0''. Wayne
I went digging through my old copies of RMC for the answer, which I couldn't find. What I did find was a photograph of cattle being loaded into the upper deck of a bi-level stock car. These were not calves: judging from the photo, they were about chest-high to a man. The photo is dated 1968, and was taken on UP's Yellowstone Branch, in Idaho. The car dimensional data is legible, showing an inside length of 40'6" and an inside height of 10'0''.
Wayne
The October and November 2004 RMC issues had a 2 part article on building and operating a meat plant. I know the author of these articles. He has done presentations in the past about this subject. From his material, found in a 1941 UP directory,
Cattle per car, animal weights ranging from 300lbs to 1400lbs, 36ft car = 60 to 19; 40ft car = 67 to 21.
Hogs per car, animal weights ranging from 100lbs to 400lbs, 36ft car = 130 to 47; 40ft car = 145 to 52.
Sheep/Lambs per car, animal weights ranging from 50lbs to 180lbs, 36ft car = 155 to 75; 40ft car = 170 to 83.
Those are figures for single deck cars. In loading hogs or sheep in double-deck cars the number loaded in the upper deck should be eight to ten less than that recommended for loading in lower-deck cars, especially in hot weather.
Jeff
Thanks Jeff,
We could probably make some estimates from those numbers. He gave us a pretty wide spread though.
Are there any butchers or farmers out there who would like to give me a feel for an "average" steer off the the slaughterhouse? I guess at around 1,000 lb, but might be way out. An extension of the guesstimate, somewhere around 35 to 40 head of cattle to a 36 foot car?
Similarly for pigs (hogs) and sheep. For sheep I would think 200 head to a 36 foot double deck wagon would not be far off the mark.
So I will make my stock yards accordingly. However, a new question now comes up. How much area of stock yard does one need for say 100 head of cattle? always more -
The handout I have listing the number of animals per car (also listed in the RMC article) is broken down into different weights. I just gave the high and low numbers.
It also lists typical market ready weights of today. For cattle, 1200 lbs; 22 into a 36ft car, 23 into a 40ft car. For hogs, 250 lbs; 68 into a 36ft car, 76 into a 40ft car. Sheep and Lambs; 125 lbs, 96 into a 36ft car and 104 into a 40ft car.
Thanks for the additional information, Jeff. I had forgotten about the packing house articles. I just went into the layout room to check on how many steers were in each of those pens in the stockyard in the picture that I posted earlier: there are 16, although there's probably enough room for another 8 in each, so one car per pen. This was just a lucky coincidence, as I built the pens in proportions that I thought pleasing to the eye, and yet still of a small enough size to allow room for four open pens, plus the two covered ones. Here's a view of the pens from a different angle, taken before the livestock showed up from the paintshop.
(click on image to enlarge)
doctorwayne wrote: ... I just went into the layout room to check on how many steers were in each of those pens in the stockyard in the picture that I posted earlier: there are 16, although there's probably enough room for another 8 in each, so one car per pen. This was just a lucky coincidence, as I built the pens in proportions that I thought pleasing to the eye, ... Wayne
... I just went into the layout room to check on how many steers were in each of those pens in the stockyard in the picture that I posted earlier: there are 16, although there's probably enough room for another 8 in each, so one car per pen. This was just a lucky coincidence, as I built the pens in proportions that I thought pleasing to the eye, ...
I don't think luck had much to do with it. Your reason (pleasing to the eye) may have been a little off but I suspect that the prototype pens may have been built specifically to match the capacity of one car. It would surely have been easier to chase all of the steers from one pen into a car than to have separated out only a carload from a larger pen or to have had to move them from more than one pen to fill a car.
ChuckAllen, TX
Jason
Modeling the Fort Worth & Denver of the early 1970's in N scale
Wayne,
Those are nice looking stock yards. I gather from what you wrote that you scratchbuilt them. If I am wrong in that deduction would you mind telling me what kit you used?
About the only thing significant I would do differently is to paint them weathered wood instead of white. You guys must be a lot neater in Canada than we are own under. Cannot recall any railway stock yards benefitting from a coat of paint where I came from. Our railways were run by the government in those days, while the Canadians were private industry (I think). So maybe that is the benefit of private operators - they paint their stock yards.
However, if that is a kit I have to get it. It could save me a lot of fiddly work like I did on my old layout.
John, the pens are scratchbuilt: I used Evergreen 3"x8" for the horizontals and the posts are 6"x6", except in the covered pens, where round posts were used. All of the ramps (there's one facing the parking lot for truck loading/unloading, too) are built up board-by-board. I built each wall, including integral gates, by pinning a sketch of the post spacings to a sheet of 1/4" balsa, then pinning the posts in place and adding the horizontal slats. Corner posts, and on longer sections, some intermediate posts, were left longer on the bottom ends to allow for insertion into holes drilled into the layout. The ramps were the only fiddly part of construction. In Canada, the pens could have been owned by the railroad or held privately. Stockcars were supposed to be treated with lime, according to government regulations, as a disinfectant. Because this usually left the cars looking pretty ratty, the railroads decided to paint the lower part of the cars white. I suspect, although I'm not certain, that there may have been similar regulations governing the stockpens too. Most of the photos that I've seen show the pens in pretty good condition, including the white paint. The only other stockpens on the layout currently are the ones picture below, also in pretty good condition. Plans call for at least one more similar to this one, and one or two consisting of just the ramp and gates. These will be in a slightly poorer state of repair.
For some reason, this doubledeck car is the only one that I can find a photo of, and it's not the best demonstration of the lime/ white paint treatment. Single deck cars were white only to a height of 4' or 5'.
Thanks for that description. I will try that. It is pretty close to what I have done before.
It is interesting to find out what is done in different countries. I have never seen anyone use lime on yards or stock cars. I wondered why the North American stock wagons were white in part.
NSW cattle wagons were emphatically not white.
Neat car, John. I like that radial roof, and the straw/manure hanging out over the sidesill is a touch that we modellers often neglect. How long is the car in the photo, and in what era would it have been in service? Except for a pair of missing slats at the top of the sides and ends, and the lack of ladders or grabirons, and sill steps, a car very similar to what was common all over North America. By the way, what's the gadget below and to the right of the door? (Looks a bit like a lug wrench for changing tires - where do they keep the jack?
doctorwayne wrote: Neat car, John. I like that radial roof, and the straw/manure hanging out over the sidesill is a touch that we modellers often neglect. How long is the car in the photo, and in what era would it have been in service? Except for a pair of missing slats at the top of the sides and ends, and the lack of ladders or grabirons, and sill steps, a car very similar to what was common all over North America. By the way, what's the gadget below and to the right of the door? (Looks a bit like a lug wrench for changing tires - where do they keep the jack? Wayne
That's the car's handbrake. Most RR that derived from UK practice (colonies and S America except Canada -- yes I know Canada is north of the US... so is Argentina if you go far enough...) most British engineered RR used/use hand brakes that wind on or lever on from the side of the car with the worker on the track not the car. The UK view was that no-one should have to get onto/off of cars except to load/unload or for maintenance and that the car should be stopped with the brake applied when that happened. So the US/Canadian practice of climbing on stirrups and end ladders to access brakes not only doesn't occur but is designed out.
It is also a feature of UK (and much European) stock to have curved rather than ridged or flat roofs. Quite often they have multiple curves... sharp near the edges and shallow across the middle.
Strangely Eu cars tend to have side buffing not combined with the draft gear until recent years but their colonies had centre-buffer-couplings as per US parctice and this car's buckeye coupler. As a rule Eu framed side-buffer cars have the frame strength in the side frames while US cars have the strength in the centre cill with almost only load carrying strength provided at the sides. One system appears to be as good as the other. I have no evidence but I suspect that early RR practice simply followed cart building practice. Old world carts had side frames, New world wagons had a centre spine. Anyone know any more on this???
Railroad wheel tyres are steel and can't be changed line-side!
I don't know if they can actually be changed at all but they can be re-profiled. The cars or locos are pushed into a big shed with computer controlled grinding wheels in a pit. the doors are shut and sealed and something frightening goes on in there. Wheels need re-profiling mainly when a brake has been left on or dragged and caused a flat on a wheel - that's what makes cars bang as they roll - "leaves on the line" also cause this damage.
Yes, I have a couple of kits for those waiting to be made up. That example is out of the last batch ever built in 1971. They were in service until the railways stopped carrying livestock in the 90s. The photo is dated 1985. Nominal 36 foot wagon.
The "gadget" you noticed is the yard brake wheel. At least I think that is what you mean. A sort of a cross shaped thing - wheel without a rim? I must have a careful look at North American cars. They should have a yard brake somewhere. However, looking at photos in the MR October issue they are not obvious on any of the models.
The straw is interesting. Bob Grech posted some photos of empty stock cars complete with straw. All the "experts" told him it was not prototypical. Must allert him to this photo.
Dave,
In Australia (at least in NSW - every state was different) we had side buffers until relatively recently. Many steam engines were never fitted with auto couplers. They used hook and link right to the end of service. Many freight wagons were fitted with the auto couplers, but retained buffers. Some had "transition couplers" so that they could attach to either type and act as compatibility cars. Sometimes these wagons went along just for that purpose. To allow a steam engine to couple to a train fitted with auto couplers.
The cattle wagon in the photo was built after the time it was necesary to cater for old style coupling in a train.
One of the guys, who is more industrious than I am, wrote up an article that he titled ""Poleys" up Hooks". It is a good read for anyone, but essential info for someone modelling NSWGR.
http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/marshal.html?200618" target="_blank" title="http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/marshal.html?200618">http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/marshal.html?200618
PS: "Poleys" are wagons without buffers, hooks are the old wagons with buffers and hook couplings.
The url thing is not working - again!! Copy and paste to browser:
http://www.geocities.com/james_mcinerney2000/marshal.html?200618
____________________________________________________ On Yahoo!7 Messenger - Make free PC-to-PC calls to your friends overseas. http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
Dave-the-Train wrote: Railroad wheel tyres are steel and can't be changed line-side! I don't know if they can actually be changed at all but they can be re-profiled.
I don't know if they can actually be changed at all but they can be re-profiled.
At least in the US, wheels on freight and passenger cars and on Diesels are solid and have no tires (you guys never have learned to spell that word, have you? ) BUT...
While they could not be changed "line-side", tires on steam locomotives and on at least some electrics (PRR's GG1 in particular) were changed out when they became worn or loose. The practice on the PRR was to hang a gas ring around the tire in close proximity to the wheel. After heating the tire enough to expand it but not melt it, the tire was carefully hammered onto the wheel with sledge hammers. You would think that this would be tight enough when the tire and wheel reached the same temperature but a loose tire was a not uncommon cause of derailment of steam locomotives. (Aside: I had a Lionel Berkshire once with loose tires. It could slip its drivers without its tires moving.)
The reverse of the above process was used in the NYC's Collinwood (Cleveland, Ohio) Diesel Shop to install a new axle. The axles came with only a hole in the end for mounting the roller bearing assembly on the journal (end of the axle). A bushing had to be inserted in that hole and then a bolt threaded into the bushing. Those bushings were kept in a chest-type freezer (like you might find in a kitchen). The frozen bushing would be hammered into the end of the journal and when it warmed to the temperature of the surrounding journal, it would be almost as tight as it would be if the two were one piece of metal. I never did understand why a bushing was needed; probably had to do with the ideal hardness of the axle versus that of the bushing.
Other railroads may have used techniques different from those I described but I'll bet they were pretty similar. There was (and is) a lot of "cross-pollination" of ideas between railroads that are otherwise very competitive.
And by the way, what the heck does this have to do with Livestock Trains? Oh, well. we're just a tad off-topic here. So what else is new?
John, what you refer to as a "yard brake" has a counterpart on North American equipment, although they're more often used as "parking brakes", after a car has been spotted on a customer's siding. While nowadays they are mounted low on the "B" (brake) end of the car, in steam and early diesels days, they were mounted high on the car end, the reason for those sill steps, and side and end ladders, along with the roofwalks found on freight cars of the era. Here's a photo of a car end, although not the subject of the picture, showing the handbrake, a power (geared) wheel. This was connected to the rodding associated with the car's airbrake connection to the trucks, which allowed the brakewheel to mechanically apply the brake shoes to all of the car's wheels.
Thanks Wayne,
Yes, now that I think about it I was aware that US cars have brake wheels somewhere that necessitated those roof walks and ladders.
Would have been a pity not to have them. Think of all those movie scenes of the guys running along the roof and shooting at each other or wrestling around on the roof that we would have missed out on!
Yard brake or park brake, means the same thing. The cars are parked in the yard, then the brake is applied to stop them rolling off on their own accord.
Off topic? Undoubtedly. However, all for the good cause of educating me.
doctorwayne wrote:
That's one beautiful photo, Wayne; worth duplicating in this post.
Although they were and are used as "parking brakes", I never heard them referred to as anything but "hand brakes". Of course, if you go back to the pre-Westinghouse days, they were probably just called "brakes".
For your info, John, hand brakes on freight and passenger cars in the US are not always set by turning a wheel. Many cars, particularly passenger cars, hoppers, and gondolas have lever activated hand brakes. In this case, the brake is set by pumping the lever a few times. I never saw much advantage to the levers (except on drop-end gons) and, for the very few times I had to set brakes on freight cars, preferred the wheels.
Chuck
Thanks for the kind words regarding the photograph, Chuck. Of course you are correct about them being called handbrakes: the reason that I referred to them as more like "parking brakes" was because I mistakenly thought that the ones described by John were used to actually stop the car, in lieu of airbrakes. Thanks for the info on the lever hand brakes. I had always assumed that they applied the brakes with a single movement of the handle. A ratchet arrangement makes a lot more sense.
doctorwayne wrote: Thanks for the kind words regarding the photograph, Chuck. Of course you are correct about them being called handbrakes: the reason that I referred to them as more like "parking brakes" was because I mistakenly thought that the ones described by John were used to actually stop the car, in lieu of airbrakes. Thanks for the info on the lever hand brakes. I had always assumed that they applied the brakes with a single movement of the handle. A ratchet arrangement makes a lot more sense. Wayne
In the days before "Fully Fitted" (with automatic -air - brakes) the brake wheels or levers were used to stop the car(s)... in fact the whole train. That was why they had the roof boards on US trains (and others0 so that the brakemen could move up and down the train as it rolled and set or release the brakes as required... not just so tha ernest Borgnine could have fights on top of trains. This was also why the early brake wheels stood up high above the brake end. In the UK and elsewhere where train riding was frowned on the train would stop and the crew would screw down (or in the UK "pin down") sufficient brakes for the train to drag and hold on the down grade... setting brakes was done before the grade started. The train would then stop again at the bottom of the grade for the brakes to be released before moving on.
In addition hand brakes are used to stop cars inlieu of airbrakes... whenever the car is not coupled to a live source of air. This is exactly the same as not relying on a hydraulic ram to hold something up except when it is powered and an operator present. The risk is that the air will leak off and the car(s) / train roll away. So enough brakes are applied to hold the train. In near flat yards this doesn't take many brakes even on a long train.
Actually, you missed one use of hand brakes in the US, Dave. Or, at least, you didn't mention it specifically. I'm thinking of what we called "rider hump yards". In the days before powered retarders in hump yards, a brakeman (or "rider") rode each cut of cars down the hump into the appropriate classification track. The rider used the hand brake on one of the cars in the cut to slow the cars to a reasonably safe coupling. He then released that hand brake before walking back up to the top of the hump to do it all again for eight hours. Just imagine what that might have been like at night in a snow storm!
And before you youngsters all assume this was back in the dark ages, you might be interested to know that PRR's yard in Richmond, IN was a rider hump yard as recently as 1969. (OK, maybe 1969 was the dark ages.) I was working in Richmond the week after the NYC-PRR merger and saw this operation. It fortunately didn't last long after that. I don't know if there were any more recent examples.
marknewton wrote:... yard brakes were intended to be applied by an employee riding the vehicle while it was moving, a practice colloquially referred to as "leg-roping".
Interesting. Wonder where the term "leg-roping" came from? Here in Texas, it has a very different and definitely non-railroad meaning. Leg-roping here looks to me like a particularly nasty way to bring down a steer but there is a rodeo event (team roping = 2 cowboys vs 1 steer) where that's the only legal way to first rope the critter.
Going right back to the start of this thread: "BLI now offers cattle cars with three different sounds (cattle, hogs, and chickens)." I wonder why they would offer such a thing, or more pointedly, why would anyone buy them?
I bought one for the enjoyment of my grandson!! (and mine!) Before this car he didn't see the point of "cattle cars" on the layout. Hearing the cows got his interest, and got "us" reading about them - a good lesson.
lvanhen wrote: Going right back to the start of this thread: "BLI now offers cattle cars with three different sounds (cattle, hogs, and chickens)." I wonder why they would offer such a thing, or more pointedly, why would anyone buy them? I bought one for the enjoyment of my grandson!! (and mine!) Before this car he didn't see the point of "cattle cars" on the layout. Hearing the cows got his interest, and got "us" reading about them - a good lesson.
Hello Ivan,
You are right. When I wrote that comment I was being far too serious. Good enough reason you give there. Just enjoyment for the kids (of all ages).