My other brother Derrell has provided yet another unexpected treatise. This time on modern refrigerator cars. If you haven't had your fix of C&S reefers yet, this should help you out. Thanks again d!
 |
| Best – Poole Collection |
Derrell Poole - In the above photo we
see a well-worn paint scheme suggesting it is of some age. This photo was taken
in 1936. The Circular Trademark came about 1925. So this example could be ten
years old. For the most part we have no reason not to believe it is more or
less the original scheme with a few minor changes to the data markings. All of
the hardware on the side – well, anywhere, actually – appears to be a darker
color than the base color of the side. But it isn’t a color as dark as the
black of the Trademark. We can safely assume this color is the standard freight
car color or C&S red.
 |
| Poole Collection |
This view of the Alma
“yards” with an obviously yellow reefer spotted east of the depot further
reinforced my conviction of the red hardware on the late ‘20s Circular
Trademark Refrigerators. The side ladder especially defies that the hardware
was painted yellow.
 |
| Poole Collection |
Car 1117 is fairly
typical of a narrow gauge reefer in the late 1930's. By this point the narrow
gauge was well on its way to abandonment and any pretense of ornate was cast
aside. Unfortunately most of the photos of SUF reefers were taken during this
final period and our vision of the cars is dominated by this homogenized
scheme. The truth is they only looked like this for perhaps 6 or 7 years.
Previous schemes were more complex and interesting. A careful study of this car
discloses the locations of both the “C&S” Herald and the 10” REFRIGERATOR
as paint “shadows” of the old Block scheme. In the discussion about the 1910
reefers I suggested this large refrigerator may have been omitted after 1912
but this car leans to the notion that the word was ALWAYS on the cars during
Block Herald use.
 |
| Wiess - Poole Collection |
The two cars at
Leadville were likely refurbished in Denver before being permanently locked
into the Leadville Climax run when the South Park was abandoned. Both cars are
still fairly clean and whole in this 1940 view. It is likely the underframe and
trucks were now painted the Standard C&S freight car red and that black was
limited to the Lettering. Leadville scheme seems to only applies to 1109 and
1118 as I have not noticed it on cars out of Denver.
 |
| Kindig - Poole Collection |
Compare 1105 to 1103 in
Photo 1. Even tho the view of 1103 is two years older than this photo (and 3
years older than that of 1117) this car still has enough lettering on the
button that it can be read. The scheme on 1105 and 1117 seem to
represent a later version of the Circular Trademark likely applied in the early
‘30s. Take note of the location of the repacking data located between the rungs
of the end ladder. What other odd details are visible on this car?
 |
| Gibson - Poole Collection |
Dated 29 March 1937 this
photo was taken at Como. If indeed this was 1113 (and the age of the paint
scheme which does not match 1103 in 1936 leads us to accept that it is 1113 –
besides Art marked the back of the photos as 1113) it would become RGS property
in Oct. 1938. Again the clues lead us to believe this scheme was an early
1930’s version of the Circular Trademark. Unlike 1105 it still has a rain guard
over the doors and the red patch of paint to the left of the side ladder at the
bottom edge is the wipeout of the tag; UNITED STATES SAFETY APPLIANCES now no
longer required by the ICC.
 |
| Author Photo |
Which brings us to this
photo. Would not this scheme seem to correspond with the car in photo 1? Of
course this would be an earlier view of the scheme as applied in the late
1920’s. The weigh date is, in fact, Oct. 1926. The Circular Trademark began to
appear perhaps as early as 1925. By the late ‘20s all refrigerators were
painted in this Herald.
 |
| Author Photo |
Not exactly what we were
expecting….
 |
| Author Photo |
Except for the ICC tag
next to the side ladder the model scheme is accurate (I did not have a a
"Safety Appliances" tag in black). What really astonished me is that
the bright Reefer Yellow of the 1927 car appears darker than the deeper custom
yellow of the 1910 cars in this B&W view… oh well!
 |
| Author Photo |
This launched a bit of
an investigation. With a dark background and a “newly” painted boxcar there
isn’t any mistaking that the reefer is a much lighter color. However the
weathered coal in the background isn’t that much darker than the yellow car.
 |
| Author Photo |
So I tried a light
background and found that the contrast was even greater between the yellow and
either red.
 |
| Author Photo |
Overall the light
background, which might equate to a lighted sky, does drive the value of all
the colors on the cars down.
 |
| Poole Collection |
And so it would seem in
this view of Alma around 1930. By this point the boxcar was a bit faded and the
background was not quite so bright. While I am perhaps one of the earliest to
suggest the railroad had Red Reefers I have never embraced the notion fully and
despite photos that seem to defy any expectations of yellow in B&W photos I
am ever more skeptical of such paint schemes… sorry Duncan.
In summary the Steel
UnderFrame Refrigerators built by the C&S were painted in at least 5
schemes between 1909 and 1942. Yet our typical image of a C&S narrow gauge
reefer is based on the last two schemes which really represent two of the least
colorful and atypical versions. Granted the first scheme was the shortest lived
(Jan. 1909 to June 1912) but for the next roughly 20 years they really didn’t
appear so much like what we expect these cars to look like. It seems clear
hardware was always painted a different color than the car sides right up until
the early ‘30s. When I finished painting the model of 1113 I wasn’t entirely
comfortable with it. The scheme was based on the the best information I have –
that being photos (some of which I share here). So I am confident the scheme is
accurate as can be expected. Still. It’s a little hard to put my brain around.
The car itself is a
Triangle Scale Models kit built by an unknown modeler. It came to me from Dan
Kempf and perhaps at one time it belonged to my friend Bob Axsom who passed
away in 2012. It was lettered as RGS 2102 – thus 1113 as the logical backdate
to a C&S number. The build job was not bad but I felt the car could be
improved with a few upgraded parts. These included ladders and brake hardware
(staffs brackets cylinder piping etc.) as well as an old but correct modern
roof walk not suitable for my 1910 cars. I didn’t try to add the sub-flooring
to the frame. The car isn’t perect; I feel that the dimensions of the body are
a little off and a crooked grab iron or two detracts a little from the overall
appearance. And, as I pointed out, one part of the lettering was not available
to me. Still it is an interesting car and I will be sending it along with
several other modern cars for use on Darel’s Dickey layout. Watch for them
there (D will be expected to take photos of the doin’s at Dickey from time to
time).
I truly hope the
information I share helps many of you in your modeling fun. Please keep in mind
that it is my pleasure to share with you but also that all of the material is
provided with the understanding that anything more than personal use is beyond
my permission. Please don’t copy any of it. Thanks!
Keep the Faith – God Models Sn3!
Derrell Poole
Hamilton, MT
Okay so Brother Big D (Doug Heitkamp) pointed out a color slide of a Leadville reefer - which I have and even glanced at when I put together the article - and suggested I have some 'splainin' to do. In the paragraph under the photo of 1118 (the other Leadville reefer) I suggested; "It is likely the underframe and trucks were now painted the Standard C&S freight car red and that black was limited to the Lettering". It seems pretty clear that the trucks under 1109 were black. It is likely then that 1118 also had black underframe parts. Photos of Denver cars vary. It is more likely they too were black and what we see is the lightening of that color by weathering mechanisms. But it is still possible - even probable some cars did have red trucks or even underframes. As always, study photos and use your best judgement. Derrell can be wrong but Derrell knows this and tried to qualify the difference between established fact and Derrell's opinion.
ReplyDeleteAs to the rest of the scheme I call the "Leadville Arrangement"; to be specific, the data markings under the car number is small, perhaps 2 inch lettering, where as all previous lettering appears to have been 3 or 4 inch lettering. This and the lack of the word REFRIGERATOR over the button are the primary difference from the early '30s version of the Circular Trademark scheme. Both of these differ from the original Circular Trademark scheme in a number of ways but the biggest would be the coloring of the hardware on the sides.
Hope this helps.
d
Derrell,
ReplyDeleteWhat's your take on the redsided reefer at Alma, on pg 262/263 of Mineral belt 2? To my tired eyes it appears to have Bettendorfs so I'm picking a steel underframe car. Can't say I've seen a Red Reefer in the usual books before either.
I see you haven't lost any of your talents as far as the modelling goes.
Chris
in New Zealand
Hi Chris,
ReplyDeleteThanks on my modeling skills. Its actually just a heightened degree of nervous energy (and maybe a neurotic esteem of historic accuracy).
I've had a couple of questions about the car in that photo. The visible details as well as the vintage of the photo (late '20s - early '30s) and that there were only two options available at that time narrows the options down to just two choices - the SUF cars and the St. Charles built cars. The S. C. cars were tall so if this was one of those it would stand above the other cars. Since only reefers had ladders at this time it has to be a reefer. And yes the Bettendorf trucks reinforce this conclusion.They were all 30 feet in length so if the car seems shorter it is just an illusion of the view.
Is the car red? I think it is a possibility but is it a probability? Vintage of the photo is about when Panchromatic film began to displace the old Orthochromatic films and as we all know Pan films convey values more correctly. But we don't know which type of film was used. Still one can argue that pan or ortho should show Chrome or Cadmium or Zinc or whatever pigment yellow was used more or less correctly - certainly lighter than the reds. And not that the reds (which when fresh are very much like the color Scale Coat calls CP Tuscan Red (S69) - a cool yet brighter red than standard Tuscan) are really very dark in this view. (Next time you get inside 1006 at Silver Plum lift the lid of the bench and see C&S Freight car red it for yourself.)
I "discovered" the phenomenon of how the environment (lighting conditions) can influence the value of various surfaces recorded to photo for myself in the model photos presented in the above article. The fresh model of the SUF boxcar was strikingly darker than the reefer even in the dark background but became more so in the light background. However the coal car, which has been weathered (the red is discolored and washed out) was not so greatly different in value from the yellow reefer. If the reefer was weathered similarly (and on the prototype they certainly would have been with only the age of the paint being a significant variable) it is reasonable to expect the coal car and reefer might look even closer in value. In the photo note that the immediate background is dark altho there is a huge area of ski overall.
to be continued...
The fact is that even in this photo (I have a transparency of the original photo given to me by Richard Ronzio many years ago) there is indeed a slight variation of value between the roof/fascia of the car and the side and certainty the boxcar next to it. Keep in mind that nearly all of the cars in the view have been repainted and lettered within the last few years of this view. And there is lettering visible (besides the button) on the reefer tho it must be black; you cannot quite read what number the car was - but almost.
ReplyDeleteSo the first argument against red for the reefers is that the photos are not entirely trustworthy. But there is another argument. I turn your attention to the first photo of the above article. In 1936 car 1103 shows a very logical amount of wear to the paint scheme last fully applied several years prior - in fact as much as 10 years. We don't know exactly when it was repainted to the new Herald but generally it would have been after 1925. Yet cars that were repainted in the early 30's show less weathering than this car even a few years AFTER the view of 1103 was taken in 1936. The tentative conclusion is that 1103 in 1936 had an older more weathered paint job than 1117 and 1105 had when their photos were taken in 1938 and '39! This then is the reasoning to conclude 1103 is still in the original Circular Trademark as applied in the late '20s. And if that is the case we see that 1103 was painted yellow. We also have the cropped view of a 1927 plus reefer at the same station that when viewed in the shadows is definitely lighter in color than the other cars around it - and even the hardware in the side of this reefer (second photo above). So now we have the argument that if some cars were painted red why were they all not painted red since the painting was initiated by a complete replacement of an outdated Herald?
Our last argument might be that we haven't a logical reason (not that there isn't one) that the railroad would use red instead of yellow - or some light color - when industrial standards - and in fact tradition - compelled the use of yellow on reefers? Keep in mind that the railroads were to whatever degree under the strong influence of several organizations, including the Federal Government, all bent on "standardizing" EVERYTHING. These organizations included the individual Railroad Companies themselves. Nothing can significantly withstand that argument without some pretty compelling evidence and a strong dose of "good reason".
So! Was this car red? The possibility can't be ruled out. BUT it does seem less and less likely.
Derrell
'What's your take on the redsided reefer at Alma, on pg 262/263 of Mineral belt 2?'
ReplyDeleteMore important, why does it have a placard on it indicating a hazardous cargo? Were they shipping cold dynamite, perhaps?
Keith Hayes
Leadville in Sn3
Keith, as I said in the above post (I'm sure you've read it) it is tempting to say the car was red but the truth is we don't know. In talking to Big D on the phone today I explained to him how when I start to lean toward "these are just yellow cars captured in prevaricating photos", I feel the gravitational pull toward "no, they are something other than yellow". And when I feel the suction toward "these have to be red", I am pulled back toward "what possible reason would the RR have for painting the cars just like a boxcar and then letter them in black (with white lettering on the ends)". Like the Tiffany cars we can pontificate 'til dooms day and never really know the certain answer. I told Doug we need something on the order of a Hubble Telescope to figure this out (since it seems to be a colossal mystery on the order of the Universe) - unless of course we can find a document that tells us what they were painted.
DeletePersonally I think (at least at the moment) that the cars were yellow and my above arguments sort of explain why. But my opinion isn't any more valid than anyone else’s.
As to the placards, indeed the RR did haul LCL hazardous cargo in these cars. I've seen waybills for dynamite, bug spray and other nasty substances... I don't feel so bad for baking volatile paints in the family oven anymore!
Derrell
Derrell,
ReplyDeleteWow, what a great answer, I knew you would be able to articulate a decent "take" on this. Looking at the C&S Inventory Special train of '29 photo, the one at Dillon (pg 186 Min Belt2) shows a reefer between a boxcar and a ph1 stockcar. No doubt in my mind exists that it is yellow sided given the door hardware is distinctly visible. Now in the Alma photo on pg 263 the lettering REFRIDGERATOR is visible above the Bullseye yet the car number is undefined. As you said, all but one coalcar in that photo are freshly painted, the C&S along with the round Herald very distinct and sharp on all other cars 'cept the one coalcar too! I don't recall seeing this amount of fresh paint in any one gathering before either. Getting back to the Alma reefer, given that the fresh paint be everywhere and the sides of that reefer are not to my eyes appearing as a light colour, looking all the world like the red boxcar alongside, I throw into the ring the idea that was, could this car painted green?
Standard gauge reefers on the Burlington lines were green w/ black lettering from what I've seen so could that "Burlington Route" philosophy have infiltrated the C&S management in regards to painting of reefers with the new "look" ? I am fully aware of just how single-minded certain RR officials in management could be as regards to pushing their ideas. Just a thought. I based my idea on the way the Valuation Special appears whilst sitting at Buffalo(pg46Min Belt2) knowing those passenger cars are green and appear very dark in comparison with the black tender. The Dillon picture has the same passenger cars reflecting the light somewhat, probably due to the varnish, that the lighter reefer doesn't.
In conclusion I just have to say that the Alma reefer doesn't appear to be a light colour.
I'll leave you to the last word on this.
Chris
in New Zealand
p.s. Would you believe it is 20 years since we were side by side in the contest room?
Chris, the reefer on page 186 MB2 is a St. Charles car. Note how much taller it is than the car at either end. It does look like yellow sides and I believe it is probably marked in the Circular Trademark. It also looks like it has post 1919 SUF style ladders. Cannot tell what configuration the ice hatches are in but as built they had the tails (unlike the SUF cars). All 6 cars were still in service in 1929.
DeleteGreen would certainly be an option as that could very well give the cars a much lower value in B&W photos. Can't rule it out. But there are photos of the same vintage that suggest the cars - at least some of them - were indeed a light color. Yellow. Were they? I can't say as fact. The photo of 1103 in the above article strikes me very succinctly that this was an original Circular Trademark paint scheme and via panchromatic emulsion it was almost certainly yellow. Maybe some cars were painted one color and others were painted another. That seems unlikely but can't say it wasn't so either. I will point again to the photos of my models in which we can see different conditions can vary how the cars of different colors compare. I'm using an electronic camera - Orthochromatic film is still available - but the effects of light are still evident.
Here is the best advice I can offer - paint your cars yellow as that is the conventional wisdom. If we are all wrong, well, then we are all wrong together. Or not - I encourage adventurism...
I'm not sure what you are referring to on page 46 MB2 - just text in my copy. Could you correct this?
Thanks
Derrell
I mentioned above that Doug Heitkamp and I had a long chat together on the phone. We discussed at length the color of the reefers particularly that of the car in the photo on page 263 MB2. Big D is of the opinion that the cars were a color other than yellow - perhaps orange and I have to say I cannot argue very confidently against that. There is a photo of C&S reefer 597 as rebuilt in May of 1902 (published in Grandt Pictorial Vol. VIII, page 83). The poster testifies to the early date of the photo as well. This car is about as dark as the recently repainted coal car also in the view. This just isn't a yellow car! I'll repeat a point I made in one of the articles; at this point in time the C&S was a going concern, a Colorado Company, and very much adverse to its dubious heritage as a former Union Pacific subsidiary. The PR dept. went out of their way to distance themselves from the poor reputation the UP had in Colorado. In the Spirit of the "Colorado Road" it is not hard to imagine that a color other than that which was likely used by the UP was chosen for the rebuilt cars (and cars not yet rebuilt) to reinforce how "home grown" the C&S really was. Orange makes a good deal of sense as that color - this photo could well support that reality. Unlike the red for Modern Reefers in the late '20s I am quite comfortable with orange ex-Tiffanys. Nor is it hard to project the use of that color onto the SUF cars. I think the photo of both 1103 and the unknown car at Alma in the second photo of the article present fodder for an argument but there would still be no possibility of a factual conclusion. I plan to paint my 26 and 27 foot reefers orange for 1910.
DeleteAnother topic we got onto was that of Ice Hatch tails; Doug pointed out that the car in the photo on page 263 MB2 didn't appear to have tails. He was looking for the latest record of a car without tails and the Alma car seemed to be it. He asked if the drawings of the cars showed tails and of course they don't include tails. Then we got to looking at photos including those in the article and doggonnit if most of the reefers didn't have tails on their Ice hatches even as late as 1939! We are conducting more research and will likely collaborate on yet another article for the blog. It will consist of more prototype photos as well as our own efforts - Doug is working on a PBL kit and I have already begun to see some revisions on my own cars.
Derrell
Um.... PS. let's not talk about geezerfication - We had a good time didn't we?
DeleteDoug is working on a PBL kit?
DeleteWullllll.......
DeleteYesterday he was.....
Don't know about today.
Well, let's hope it is a C&S kit!
ReplyDeleteKeith
Yes, it's a C&S kit in Sn3 - Very scary, isn't it!
ReplyDeleteDarel, I am enjoying the blog. . . .
ReplyDeleteHaving spent a lot of time working in a darkroom, I just wanted to remind everyone that black and white films of the 20s rendered reds very differently, as they were not as sensitive in certain spectrums--which is why they look almost black in some cases. I think that your photos rendered the reds lighter is entirely expected. In my mind, this argues for the scheme you have. Wherever you fall in the color discussion, one should keep this in mind.
Although Panchromatic film, which is more sensitive to UV, Red, and Green was developed around 1920, it was not uniformly adopted until later due to cost. That, and Panchromatic film was gradually improved. That puts you right in a sweet spot for odd renditions that might not be comparable to current expectations.......You may want to experiment with decreasing sensitivity to red, and see what that does with your digitals.....
Just a thought. . . .as I said above, always enjoy the blog and like your work a lot.
Thanks Peter. Indeed you are correct about the sensitivity of photographic materials. But would that it was only that factor confusing us. The degrees of emulsion sensitivity contribute to the confusion. I'm not an expert on historic film manufacturing practices so I could not describe how careful or even how aware the manufacturers were of the speed and color interpretation charactoristic between batch of film; my suspicion is that it was a significant variable and an unknown we will never be able to solve. But that is less complicated than all of the external variables starting with human judgements, weather conditions, time of day and season (the intensity of the light, angle, back lighting), exposure to aperture ratios (under stopped, over stopped) and whatever else (color of the objects, how clean or not clean they were, faded, shadow exposures etc. etc. etc.). It's overwhelming! My feable experiment with the models was perhaps an experiment in futility but maybe it was also fun to just see what might be possible using modern photo technology. You have suggested trying to immulate the old ortho film by manipulating the colors artificially - sort of the same thing actually. No solid answers but fun to investigate. Still these exercises can at least broaden our understanding of how nearly infinite the quest is. Let's face it; we cannot expect answers to come from B&W photos alone. Somewhere there is a piece of paper that has the answers on it. Until then we share our opinions and try to be as accurate as we can.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you have enjoyed the articles and I appreciate your comments.
Derrell