Date   

locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

George Eichelberger
 

Andrew:

One of the first things we show visitors to the archives are examples of our ink-on-linen drawings. When I explain they are high thread count linen cloth coated with starch then drawn on using ink pens, I’m never sure if I am believed. College students tell me they have never seen similar drawings. The twenty-six foot long drawing of John Sevier yard I mentioned was several pieces of linen spliced together and then used for the drawing. The SRHA archives contain hundreds of linen originals, some dating to the 1880s that are in perfect condition. Some early versions of ink on Mylar suffer from separation between the Mylar base and the coating that holds the ink. Even moving one of those drawings can result in a blizzard of flakes as more of the top layer detaches.

We also have many whiteline and blueline prints. If they are not exposed to light, they hold up well except many were folded and stored in file cabinets for years. The folds become quite dark and are hard to scan. Sometimes the folds become so brittle, opening them is difficult.

It has not happened often but there are times when we realize putting a drawing in a carrier (a plastic sleeve) and running it through the scanner might damage it beyond further use. Our logic (some may disagree with) is that in most cases we do not consider a drawing as an artifact. It is the information on the drawing that we can preserve with the best quality scan we can make.

Ike

PS We also show people some of the hundred thousand or so drawings on microfilm aperture cards in the collection. The 35mm microfilm is mounted in standard (circa 1960s) IBM 80 column Hollerith punch cards that could be sorted and the punches read. (I was carrying a tray of them in the elevator at NS one day when some IT people asked what they were. I pulled one of them out, showed them how the punches were laid out and told them they were the new way we would be storing data. The door opened and I stepped out leaving them wondering what I was up to.)



On Apr 4, 2021, at 6:01 PM, aramsay18 <aramsay37@...> wrote:

Hello all

Such old engineering artifacts are not seen very often and are highly respected for what they represent.  

I just want to point out that aside from its historical significance, this drawing is a strikingly excellent example of engineering mechanical drafting/drawing state-of-the-art practice in the 1940s to late 1970s.  It is a what-if markup of an existing blueprint.  It appears to be all hand drawn (using various drafting instruments such as french curves, possibly customized french curves, large radius compasses, etc.) from tables of survey data.  The person or persons who prepared this document spent many, many hours, more likely many weeks, working to first draw it, then to validate it.  He would be given a design, perhaps at the top level, and would be expected to take it to the detailed level shown.  He would have to have significant operational knowledge of how the rail layout should work to meet a complex set of functional requirements which change over time as rail operations progress. Drawing and validating this layout would require painstaking, meticulous work by hand to fit curves to the survey data and to ensure the fit was highly accurate as to the actual layout.  A senior designer and draftsman, a highly respected engineering professional, would have supervised its preparation, and possibly done much of it himself.  Not to mention this is a blueprint.  The original would have been prepared on a vellum surface (like parchment) or high-grade paper using India ink. Mistakes in that media would be wiped off with an alcohol/water mix or scraped off with a razor blade.  The original would have taken months of work.

Nowadays this would all be generated using computer-based tools.  The curve fitting to match the digital survey data would be generated in a few minutes on a PC-scale computer.  Any misfits would be easily adjusted graphically.  This quick cycle would enable many iterations of what-if drills to optimize the layout to its corresponding requirements.  It would also enable collaborative reviews for approval.  The tabular form would be taken directly from highly accurate digital survey data collected on the ground, possibly supplemented by overhead imagery to include LIDAR to show elevation data.  There is an impressive contrast in engineering productivity over almost 80 years.

Were these proposed changes/additions implemented?

Respectfully,

Andrew Ramsay
Berryville VA

On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 9:52 PM George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:
We don’t post many drawings or maps to the .io group simply because so many are quite large. Here’s one @ 207M fits that category. It’s from file discussing the expansion of Cincinnati Union Terminal in 1943. There are several CUT files in the archives starting with an early plan to build “Cincinnati Union Station”. Something certainly worth of research and a TIES article?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10RLlRwVzltBPI2nyNCHSuk2x0XxWKYT1/view?usp=sharing

Ike








locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

aramsay18
 

Hello all

Such old engineering artifacts are not seen very often and are highly respected for what they represent.  

I just want to point out that aside from its historical significance, this drawing is a strikingly excellent example of engineering mechanical drafting/drawing state-of-the-art practice in the 1940s to late 1970s.  It is a what-if markup of an existing blueprint.  It appears to be all hand drawn (using various drafting instruments such as french curves, possibly customized french curves, large radius compasses, etc.) from tables of survey data.  The person or persons who prepared this document spent many, many hours, more likely many weeks, working to first draw it, then to validate it.  He would be given a design, perhaps at the top level, and would be expected to take it to the detailed level shown.  He would have to have significant operational knowledge of how the rail layout should work to meet a complex set of functional requirements which change over time as rail operations progress. Drawing and validating this layout would require painstaking, meticulous work by hand to fit curves to the survey data and to ensure the fit was highly accurate as to the actual layout.  A senior designer and draftsman, a highly respected engineering professional, would have supervised its preparation, and possibly done much of it himself.  Not to mention this is a blueprint.  The original would have been prepared on a vellum surface (like parchment) or high-grade paper using India ink. Mistakes in that media would be wiped off with an alcohol/water mix or scraped off with a razor blade.  The original would have taken months of work.

Nowadays this would all be generated using computer-based tools.  The curve fitting to match the digital survey data would be generated in a few minutes on a PC-scale computer.  Any misfits would be easily adjusted graphically.  This quick cycle would enable many iterations of what-if drills to optimize the layout to its corresponding requirements.  It would also enable collaborative reviews for approval.  The tabular form would be taken directly from highly accurate digital survey data collected on the ground, possibly supplemented by overhead imagery to include LIDAR to show elevation data.  There is an impressive contrast in engineering productivity over almost 80 years.

Were these proposed changes/additions implemented?

Respectfully,

Andrew Ramsay
Berryville VA


On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 9:52 PM George Eichelberger <geichelberger@...> wrote:
We don’t post many drawings or maps to the .io group simply because so many are quite large. Here’s one @ 207M fits that category. It’s from file discussing the expansion of Cincinnati Union Terminal in 1943. There are several CUT files in the archives starting with an early plan to build “Cincinnati Union Station”. Something certainly worth of research and a TIES article?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10RLlRwVzltBPI2nyNCHSuk2x0XxWKYT1/view?usp=sharing

Ike







locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

George Eichelberger
 

Chris:

SRHA had a very successful convention in Cincinnati years ago. The Erlanger depot had just been (beautifully) restored and it was still possible to go into the tower at the Terminal. We should plan another session there!

We would also like to see a RPM/train show in Chattanooga next year. If (!) that happens, maybe we can get some of the folks down from Cincy and along the CNO&TP.

Ike

PS Here are three scans (Presidents’  File  Box 180 File 6355) of the cost estimate for the proposed “Union Passenger Terminals” for Cincinnati from March 25, 1909. (Note the reference on Pg 2 to “five portfolios of drawings”. Do they exist?)





On Apr 4, 2021, at 2:59 PM, CMayhew <chris.mayhew611@...> wrote:

It downloaded fine here as well. I've seen either this drawing or a similar one to it previously. The development of McClean Avenue Yard, which was later removed to make way for Cincinnati Union Terminal...and then Gest Street Yard was created is something I'm working on actively. Of course, once CUT's concourse was demolished, Southern Railway purchased that property to create the pig yard still in use today. That actually could be a series of articles. It's a lot of change to cover. The creation of McClean Yard is quite the tale all by itself!

Here is a scan of a print donated by Lee Vaughn of the creation of Gest Street Yard on Nov 20 1930, looking north. All that fresh earth came from Bald Knob, which is in the background in this photo. Two steam shovels that were once used to build the Panama Canal took the entire top of Bald Knob off to create all the fill necessary to build Cincinnati  Union Terminal.

And when it comes to large document scanning, I'm working on a plan to have all the Cincinnati Railroad Club oversize drawings scanned more locally. We've got more than 1,000 of them (basically one of the only complete CUT diagram sets in existence). 

-Chris  <Nov 20 1930 looking north Gest Street Yard.jpg>


locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

 

It downloaded fine here as well. I've seen either this drawing or a similar one to it previously. The development of McClean Avenue Yard, which was later removed to make way for Cincinnati Union Terminal...and then Gest Street Yard was created is something I'm working on actively. Of course, once CUT's concourse was demolished, Southern Railway purchased that property to create the pig yard still in use today. That actually could be a series of articles. It's a lot of change to cover. The creation of McClean Yard is quite the tale all by itself!

Here is a scan of a print donated by Lee Vaughn of the creation of Gest Street Yard on Nov 20 1930, looking north. All that fresh earth came from Bald Knob, which is in the background in this photo. Two steam shovels that were once used to build the Panama Canal took the entire top of Bald Knob off to create all the fill necessary to build Cincinnati  Union Terminal.

And when it comes to large document scanning, I'm working on a plan to have all the Cincinnati Railroad Club oversize drawings scanned more locally. We've got more than 1,000 of them (basically one of the only complete CUT diagram sets in existence). 

-Chris 


locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

Jim Thurston
 

Ike:

Downloaded fine
Came thru as 198 MB tiff
Opens fine in PS

Jim Thurston


From: "Ike Eichelberger" <geichelberger@...>
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Sent: Sunday, April 4, 2021 1:39:53 PM
Subject: Re: [SouthernRailway] Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

Would someone please tell me of they succeeded in downloading the Cincy drawing in the Google Drive link?

You will see a message saying it is too large for Google Drive to display a view but if you click on the download icon (looks like a tray with a down arrow just above)) it will send you the entire .tiff file. You can open and expand it locally. (It may take a while to download depending on your Internet speed.)

Ike


locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

George Eichelberger
 

All:

Rick Bell does most of our large (!) scanning on our 42" machine. Large drawings, sometime is very poor condition, take a lot of work so we always have blueprints and drawings unscanned in files where most of the regular letter size docs have been scanned. The largest scan we have ever made was a linen of John Sevier yard that was 26 feet long! Needless to say, big drawings require multiple people.

If anyone has blueprints or any large drawing, they can bring it to an archives work session to be scanned...if time permits. If it is a Southern, L&N or Central of Georgia drawing and you want to put it in the archives, you are welcome to take a digital version. If you just want to make a scan but not donate the drawing, you'll need to leave a digital version. If you do not want to leave the original(s) but want to scan more than a small number, you need to be a SRHA member and/or make a cash donation to the archives.


locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

rwbrv4
 

I got it just fine.  Looks good
  Wonder who scanned it?  Seems familiar.
Rick Bell




On Sunday, April 4, 2021 George Eichelberger <main@SouthernRailway.groups.io> wrote:

Would someone please tell me of they succeeded in downloading the Cincy drawing in the Google Drive link?

You will see a message saying it is too large for Google Drive to display a view but if you click on the download icon (looks like a tray with a down arrow just above)) it will send you the entire .tiff file. You can open and expand it locally. (It may take a while to download depending on your Internet speed.)

Ike


locked Re: Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

George Eichelberger
 

Would someone please tell me of they succeeded in downloading the Cincy drawing in the Google Drive link?

You will see a message saying it is too large for Google Drive to display a view but if you click on the download icon (looks like a tray with a down arrow just above)) it will send you the entire .tiff file. You can open and expand it locally. (It may take a while to download depending on your Internet speed.)

Ike


locked Drawing and Maps in the SRHA Archives

George Eichelberger
 

We don’t post many drawings or maps to the .io group simply because so many are quite large. Here’s one @ 207M fits that category. It’s from file discussing the expansion of Cincinnati Union Terminal in 1943. There are several CUT files in the archives starting with an early plan to build “Cincinnati Union Station”. Something certainly worth of research and a TIES article?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10RLlRwVzltBPI2nyNCHSuk2x0XxWKYT1/view?usp=sharing

Ike


locked Passenger train discontinuances - PRR letter 1965

George Eichelberger
 

The demise of passenger trains in the 1960s is well known. The Southern Railway Presidents’ files in the SRHA archives contain many letters and memos on the subject. The attached is a letter from the PRR to the AAR BOD asking the ICC to speed up passenger train-off petitions.

Ike


locked Re: ICC valuation

Kevin Centers
 

John,

Good guesses on the abbreviations. You’re correct. 

Kevin



On Apr 2, 2021, at 2:51 PM, Carl Ardrey <carlardrey2005@...> wrote:


We currently have an ongoing 3-part series in Ties about this fascinating and historic line.
CEA
On 04/02/2021 1:26 PM John Stewart <jstew@...> wrote:
 
 

HI folks

 

So, is it correct that this line was built on the 1870s & 1880s?

 

In the summary regarding pipe culverts, “L J & CIP” – is that Lock Joint and Cast Iron Pipe? 

 

Is “VCP” vitrified clay pipe?

 

It is interesting reading considering the lack of heavy equipment at the time.  Old mule drawn draw scrapers would be HARD to pull…!  As noted, haul distances would be SHORT.  Pans would have been ideal in this type of material, and haul distances much more economical, but would have seemed like something from the “great beyond” to those folks at the time.

 

Thanks for sharing

 

John

 

John R Stewart

www.bhamrails.info

205-901-3790

 

<image001.jpg>

 


locked Re: ICC valuation

Carl Ardrey
 

We currently have an ongoing 3-part series in Ties about this fascinating and historic line.
CEA

On 04/02/2021 1:26 PM John Stewart <jstew@...> wrote:
 
 

HI folks

 

So, is it correct that this line was built on the 1870s & 1880s?

 

In the summary regarding pipe culverts, “L J & CIP” – is that Lock Joint and Cast Iron Pipe? 

 

Is “VCP” vitrified clay pipe?

 

It is interesting reading considering the lack of heavy equipment at the time.  Old mule drawn draw scrapers would be HARD to pull…!  As noted, haul distances would be SHORT.  Pans would have been ideal in this type of material, and haul distances much more economical, but would have seemed like something from the “great beyond” to those folks at the time.

 

Thanks for sharing

 

John

 

John R Stewart

www.bhamrails.info

205-901-3790

 

image004

 


locked Re: ICC valuation

John Stewart
 

HI folks

 

So, is it correct that this line was built on the 1870s & 1880s?

 

In the summary regarding pipe culverts, “L J & CIP” – is that Lock Joint and Cast Iron Pipe? 

 

Is “VCP” vitrified clay pipe?

 

It is interesting reading considering the lack of heavy equipment at the time.  Old mule drawn draw scrapers would be HARD to pull…!  As noted, haul distances would be SHORT.  Pans would have been ideal in this type of material, and haul distances much more economical, but would have seemed like something from the “great beyond” to those folks at the time.

 

Thanks for sharing

 

John

 

John R Stewart

www.bhamrails.info

205-901-3790

 

image004

 


locked Re: Streamline Passenger Trucks

Michael Cathey
 

Pullman Standard Library says 41-N-11 trucks with Decelostats(?)  and clasp brakes for post-war cars.     Mike Cathey

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Michael Cathey via groups.io
Sent: Friday, April 2, 2021 10:04 AM
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Subject: Re: [SouthernRailway] Streamline Passenger Trucks

 

Allen,   I believe Southern used 41N trucks. Still looking for documentation.     Mike Cathey    Orange, Va.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Allen Cain
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 9:20 AM
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Subject: [SouthernRailway] Streamline Passenger Trucks

 

What make and model of trucks were used on Southern Streamline passenger cars in the 50s?

 

Thanks 

 

Allen Cain


--
Allen Cain
Modeling the Southern in 1955 in HO Scale

 

 


locked Re: ICC valuation

Carl Ardrey
 

Recently went through the complete Valuation Notes for the Akron Branch.  This summary was fascinating.


locked SRHA wearables

Kevin Centers
 

All,

SRHA recently partnered with Squadlocker to provide wearable items for its members. We currently offer hats, ladies and men’s polo shirts, and lightweight jackets. All are embroidered with the SRHA logo. The caps and polos can even be personalized at a marginally extra cost. Our company store can be found here:
You simply choose the items you want, along with the size, and place your order. Typically you will receive your order with 10-13 days. The quality is great and they items look very nice. 
BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE...
For the month of April ONLY, you can order our items in black or green. Trust me they both look great. And we’ve included an overnight/gym bag too. But remember the bag and black items will go away after April. So order yours today. Below are some photos of the items. 

Thanks,

Kevin Centers
Treasurer SRHA




locked Re: ICC valuation

Kevin Centers
 

Ike,

Of course you know I find this topic marginally interesting since it’s how I earned my living for a while. I’m going to add a little more dryness to the pot if that’s ok.
To shed a little more light on the V03/ER column, ICC accounts were/are broken down into sub accounts when there is a material differentiation in asset types and depreciation. So railroads today account for freight cars in ICC 53, but break them out between major car types since plain gons wouldn’t have the same life as an equipped 50’ equipped box, for example.
It should be noted that until 1982, railroads practiced betterment accounting. So if an asset was improved - 85# rail replaced with 100# rail for instance - there would not be a retirement of the 85# rail and only the differential between the two would be capitalized. As a result A’s and B’s are really important. Thankfully that process is no longer used and assets are retired as they are replaced, not just made better.

Kevin

On Apr 2, 2021, at 10:13 AM, George Eichelberger <geichelberger@bellsouth.net> wrote:

It’s important to understand there are multiple ICC reports than can provide quite detailed history on a railroad’s rolling stock and fixed plant. I’ve uploaded four examples* to Google Drive (the uploaded page sequence is different) at:

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Fdrive%2Ffolders%2F1EFXR6UNGkJQDejfVXOaxvny5Sqv0IFJm%3Fusp%3Dsharing&;data=04%7C01%7C%7Cc310d3d6c8894b5dcdda08d8f5e173ef%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637529695948604271%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=qKZ0IXFQHibkfs7I3fIsJPpilVYeeTyBqczK%2FeqTxmI%3D&amp;reserved=0

Item 1 Period from 1916-7-1 to 27-12-3, Southern Railway Account 53, Freight Cars.
ICC Form 1742 shows the initial inventory as prepared from the Date of the ICC Valuation Order (VO) until the initial valuations was to have been completed 12-31-27. Even then, the work was not done. The 1742s were sent to the ICC to be approved. There was a lot of back-and-forth between the roads and the ICC to get to final valuations. The goal of the exercise was to establish a railroad cost basis to establish rates, ROI, etc, so potentially inflated values would skew later rate calculations. There were apparently court cases and the ICC did not finalize and accept the Southern valuations until about 1932.

Sheet 13 includes a page of “plain” box cars built in 1915.
The range of dates showing cars destroyed and “A&Bs” (Additions and Betterments) show changes from the time of Valuation Order 3 in 1916 and when the final report had to be submitted in 1927. The car series road numbers, descriptions, capy., car builder and cost are usually included. Individual car numbers may/may not be broken out but cars (in this example) that were destroyed before 1927 are excluded from the 1-1-1928 inventory at the bottom of the sheet. A&Bs are typically do not show individual car numbers.

The last column is complicated but potentially very useful. Each group of similar (but not necessarily from the same carbuilder or order) were assigned either a “VO3” or “ER” (Engineering Report) Group number. That number was used to identify cars from the group through out their service lives.

Sheet 7 (1 of 2 pages) covers the same valuation study period for a different group of cars that had valuations changed by A&Bs but many were destroyed before 1927. Note at the bottom, the number of cars from this group that were “Destroyed”, “Renewed” or “Transferred” are shown. “Renewed” may (!) refer to a complete rebuild but in many cases it refers to the application of a steel underframe (SUF) or new roof. Although individual car numbers may/may not be shown, subsequent change forms (following sheets) can give a picture of the entire series.

Sheet 37 is another example page with many A&Bs shown. “Converted” refers to a car that was changed to another ICC Account code. That shows as a double entry in the valuations, first as it left its original account (53 is revenue freight cars) and then as it was eneted in the new account, Account 57 is MoW equipment for example. Multiple changes were not uncommon.

GS&F Sheet 1 shows motor vehicles but it is a good example of changes were reflected in the valuations over the years. It is dated June 30, 1962. Updates were to be submitted on every June 30 and December 31. The initial, VO3, or later additions (shown on the change forms) then subsequent updates have to be reviewed to see a car/groups' entire history.

Note: I’ll admit this material only an intro and “dry as a bone” to explain but understood, and taken in their entirety, the ICC Valuation records are among the best information available. The copies in the SRHA archives were kept by the Southern with the originals sent to the ICC. All (most?) of them for every railroad reside in a warehouse in MD and can be reviewed.

Note 2: I’ve thought this would not be the most interesting presentation to many people but I’ve considered proposing the subject for a session at the CCB RPM. That’s still possible if there is enough interest??

Ike








locked Re: ICC valuation

A&Y Dave in MD
 

Ike,

Thanks for sharing.  Not everyone finds this kind of info interesting, but there are a few of us.  You'll have to sound out the RPM organizers to see what they think.  Heck people thanked me for sharing after I droned on for an hour about the A&Y.  You just have to find the right audience I guess. ;-)  The RPM meet has quite a few interested in the early 20th century freight cars and more than a few interested in the Southern.

Dave

Friday, April 2, 2021, 10:13:04 AM, you wrote:

> It’s important to understand there are multiple ICC reports than can provide quite detailed history on a railroad’s rolling stock and fixed plant. I’ve uploaded four examples* to Google Drive (the uploaded page sequence is different) at:

> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EFXR6UNGkJQDejfVXOaxvny5Sqv0IFJm?usp=sharing

> Item 1 Period from 1916-7-1 to 27-12-3, Southern Railway Account 53, Freight Cars.
> ICC Form 1742 shows the initial inventory as prepared from the Date of the ICC Valuation Order (VO) until the initial valuations was to have been completed 12-31-27. Even then, the work was not done. The 1742s were sent to the ICC to be approved. There was a lot of back-and-forth between the roads and the ICC to get to final valuations. The goal of the exercise was to establish a railroad cost basis to establish rates, ROI, etc, so potentially inflated values would skew later rate calculations. There were apparently court cases and the ICC did not finalize and accept the Southern valuations until about 1932.

> Sheet 13 includes a page of “plain” box cars built in 1915.
> The range of dates showing cars destroyed and “A&Bs” (Additions and Betterments) show changes from the time of Valuation Order 3 in 1916 and when the final report had to be submitted in 1927. The car series road numbers, descriptions, capy., car builder and cost are usually included. Individual car numbers may/may not be broken out but cars (in this example) that were destroyed before 1927 are excluded from the 1-1-1928 inventory at the bottom of the sheet. A&Bs are typically do not show individual car numbers.

> The last column is complicated but potentially very useful. Each group of similar (but not necessarily from the same carbuilder or order) were assigned either a “VO3” or “ER” (Engineering Report) Group number. That number was used to identify cars from the group through out their service lives.

> Sheet 7 (1 of 2 pages) covers the same valuation study period for a different group of cars that had valuations changed by A&Bs but many were destroyed before 1927. Note at the bottom, the number of cars from this group that were “Destroyed”, “Renewed” or “Transferred” are shown. “Renewed” may (!) refer to a complete rebuild but in many cases it refers to the application of a steel underframe (SUF) or new roof. Although individual car numbers may/may not be shown, subsequent change forms (following sheets) can give a picture of the entire series.

> Sheet 37 is another example page with many A&Bs shown. “Converted” refers to a car that was changed to another ICC Account code. That shows as a double entry in the valuations, first as it left its original account (53 is revenue freight cars) and then as it was eneted in the new account, Account 57 is MoW equipment for example. Multiple changes were not uncommon.

> GS&F Sheet 1 shows motor vehicles but it is a good example of changes were reflected in the valuations over the years. It is dated June 30, 1962. Updates were to be submitted on every June 30 and December 31. The initial, VO3, or later additions (shown on the change forms) then subsequent updates have to be reviewed to see a car/groups' entire history.

> Note: I’ll admit this material only an intro and “dry as a bone” to explain but understood, and taken in their entirety, the ICC Valuation records are among the best information available. The copies in the SRHA archives were kept by the Southern with the originals sent to the ICC. All (most?) of them for every railroad reside in a warehouse in MD and can be reviewed.

> Note 2: I’ve thought this would not be the most interesting presentation to many people but I’ve considered proposing the subject for a session at the CCB RPM. That’s still possible if there is enough interest??

> Ike





>





--
David Bott

Sent from David Bott's desktop PC


locked Re: ICC valuation

George Eichelberger
 

It’s important to understand there are multiple ICC reports than can provide quite detailed history on a railroad’s rolling stock and fixed plant. I’ve uploaded four examples* to Google Drive (the uploaded page sequence is different) at:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EFXR6UNGkJQDejfVXOaxvny5Sqv0IFJm?usp=sharing

Item 1 Period from 1916-7-1 to 27-12-3, Southern Railway Account 53, Freight Cars.
ICC Form 1742 shows the initial inventory as prepared from the Date of the ICC Valuation Order (VO) until the initial valuations was to have been completed 12-31-27. Even then, the work was not done. The 1742s were sent to the ICC to be approved. There was a lot of back-and-forth between the roads and the ICC to get to final valuations. The goal of the exercise was to establish a railroad cost basis to establish rates, ROI, etc, so potentially inflated values would skew later rate calculations. There were apparently court cases and the ICC did not finalize and accept the Southern valuations until about 1932.

Sheet 13 includes a page of “plain” box cars built in 1915.
The range of dates showing cars destroyed and “A&Bs” (Additions and Betterments) show changes from the time of Valuation Order 3 in 1916 and when the final report had to be submitted in 1927. The car series road numbers, descriptions, capy., car builder and cost are usually included. Individual car numbers may/may not be broken out but cars (in this example) that were destroyed before 1927 are excluded from the 1-1-1928 inventory at the bottom of the sheet. A&Bs are typically do not show individual car numbers.

The last column is complicated but potentially very useful. Each group of similar (but not necessarily from the same carbuilder or order) were assigned either a “VO3” or “ER” (Engineering Report) Group number. That number was used to identify cars from the group through out their service lives.

Sheet 7 (1 of 2 pages) covers the same valuation study period for a different group of cars that had valuations changed by A&Bs but many were destroyed before 1927. Note at the bottom, the number of cars from this group that were “Destroyed”, “Renewed” or “Transferred” are shown. “Renewed” may (!) refer to a complete rebuild but in many cases it refers to the application of a steel underframe (SUF) or new roof. Although individual car numbers may/may not be shown, subsequent change forms (following sheets) can give a picture of the entire series.

Sheet 37 is another example page with many A&Bs shown. “Converted” refers to a car that was changed to another ICC Account code. That shows as a double entry in the valuations, first as it left its original account (53 is revenue freight cars) and then as it was eneted in the new account, Account 57 is MoW equipment for example. Multiple changes were not uncommon.

GS&F Sheet 1 shows motor vehicles but it is a good example of changes were reflected in the valuations over the years. It is dated June 30, 1962. Updates were to be submitted on every June 30 and December 31. The initial, VO3, or later additions (shown on the change forms) then subsequent updates have to be reviewed to see a car/groups' entire history.

Note: I’ll admit this material only an intro and “dry as a bone” to explain but understood, and taken in their entirety, the ICC Valuation records are among the best information available. The copies in the SRHA archives were kept by the Southern with the originals sent to the ICC. All (most?) of them for every railroad reside in a warehouse in MD and can be reviewed.

Note 2: I’ve thought this would not be the most interesting presentation to many people but I’ve considered proposing the subject for a session at the CCB RPM. That’s still possible if there is enough interest??

Ike


locked Re: Streamline Passenger Trucks

Michael Cathey
 

Allen,   I believe Southern used 41N trucks. Still looking for documentation.     Mike Cathey    Orange, Va.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Allen Cain
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 9:20 AM
To: main@SouthernRailway.groups.io
Subject: [SouthernRailway] Streamline Passenger Trucks

 

What make and model of trucks were used on Southern Streamline passenger cars in the 50s?

 

Thanks 

 

Allen Cain


--
Allen Cain
Modeling the Southern in 1955 in HO Scale

 

721 - 740 of 2450