Subject:
|
Re: Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Aug 2000 19:26:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
791 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi writes:
> I have noticed that box cars and hoppers (not all but a lot of them) are
> the same height as engines, flat beds with truck trailers are a bit
> higher, double stacks are a bit higher, autoracks are a bit higher, and
> tanks are a bit lower. So where do cabooses fit in? I would guess that a
> caboose without a cupola would be the same height as an engine too, but
> what about a caboose with a cupola? I would guess that the main roof
> line is level with the box cars and engines and the cupola sticks up a
> bit. Is that right or should the main roof line of the caboose be a bit • shorter?
>
Does someone have copies of the various plates?
Chris, what I can say is that there are different "plates" (Loading gauges),
the common one is Plate "C", and that -just about everywhere- in the US is a
minimum of Plate "C" clearances. Double Stacks, Hi-Cube's and Autoracks are
all outside of Plate "C", however, even Dome cars are within it.
Tank cars, and Hoppers for some materials (the shorty ones) are limited by the
density of whatever you are carrying. Another portion of Plate C is the
maximum axle weight allowed, which is something in the order of 30 tons. It is
much easier to fill up a hopper car to this weight, or a tankcar than it is to
fill a boxcar to this weight...hence Hi-Cubes. Container trains can be
semi-articulated because of the maximum weights that containers are allowed to
weigh are less than the maxiumum load that a single axle can carry.
I'd like to add that my real knowlage is of UK trains, and the max axle weight
in the UK is 25.5 Tons/axle (I'd assume 2240 lb tons) Double stack trains are
not possible in the UK due to the limited loading gauge. There are substantial
areas of the US and Canada that are off limits to them, because you require a
clear height of around 17 ft to run them.
As for Cabeese, they are nearly the same dimensions as a boxcar...I know of at
least one converted boxcar caboose (the one at Vancover Island Model
Engineers/SHAS in Victoria, BC). The Cupola is above the normal roof height,
how much would depend on exactly how high the clearance above the track
was...Cabeese are not as regulated as interchange stock, although there are
special rules concerning material of construction/strength.
James Powell
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
| (...) Thanks James, Way more detail than I was looking for but your response is greatly appreciated. I really was just wondering what everyone was doing height wise, and if I needed to make my caboose taller (to make it as tall as my engine). I plan (...) (24 years ago, 23-Aug-00, to lugnet.trains)
| | | Re: Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
| (...) Right. And cabeese in hilly country often had to have specially reinforced frames because they might have several pusher units coupled on behind them to help get over steep grades. ++Lar (24 years ago, 23-Aug-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Relative height of cars and cabooses
|
| I have noticed that box cars and hoppers (not all but a lot of them) are the same height as engines, flat beds with truck trailers are a bit higher, double stacks are a bit higher, autoracks are a bit higher, and tanks are a bit lower. So where do (...) (24 years ago, 22-Aug-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
