This photo of Coach No. 266 at Weehawken, New Jersey, has it waiting for an assignment to a train to take some of the vacationers to the Catskill resorts after they have exited the ferry terminal at the stub end of the yards. This is one of the cars that have been converted to electric lighting, as witnessed by the generator in back of the truck in the foreground and the battery box between the two truss rod queenposts in the center of the car. This photo is well known and often published, but this version is from the author’s collection.

Modeling the O.& W.

“The Great Timber Fleet”

Wide Vestibule Wooden Coaches

MCB/AAR Class PB

207-269 Series Pullman/Harlan & Hollingsworth 63’ Coaches

198 – 210 Series Ohio Falls 57’ Coaches

Part I

By Mal Houck

_____________________________________________________________________________

For those who have read previous columns on this Website about modeling O&W equipment, my use

of the term “signature” will be a familiar one. While the O&W has acquired an historic status of being

recognized as one of the “Anthracite Roads,” which it certainly was, its role was much more. The hard coal

business of the O&W was [not to simplify or minimize its importance] more to serve as a “conveyor belt” for

the export of fuel to the home heating grates of New York, New England and the Northeast from the

Northern Field of Pennsylvania; -- that is, beyond what was needed for local and domestic consumption.

Clearly, coal cars and coal trains were a signature of the O&W, but the system wide service the O&W

provided was replete with many other “signatures.”

The passenger service of the O&W was, for an all too brief period of time, that part of the O&W

which touched all the residents of each and every community intersected by O&W rails. The means of this

daily contact were the O&W passenger trains; -- all made up with consists switched in and pulled from the

inventory of hundreds of wooden passenger cars. In a lightly veiled [and modestly unkind] metaphor to the

New Central System’s “Great Steel Fleet” the O&W passenger car fleet was called by many “The Great

Timber Fleet.” If there is to be a “signature” (not forgetting, of course, the supremely handsome Otto Kuhler

designed Mountaineer) of the O&W passenger service it is that “Great Timber Fleet.” In the heyday of the

O&W passenger service, and in concert with the vacation in the “Mountains” preferences embraced by many

urban dwellers, the O&W served as yet another “conveyor belt”; -- and that was to transport the millions of

vacationers to the Borscht Belt of the Catskills. Many of those travelers went via the coaches of the “Great

Timber Fleet.”

While the “Great Timber Fleet” contains many others of the style of wood cars; -- such as Baggage,

Baggage-Mail, Combine and Parlor Cars, contained within that large roster are yet other “signatures” in the

form of the 63’ closed [wide] vestibule wooden coaches from Pullman and Harlan and Hollingsworth, and

the shorter (and to some degree, lesser known) 57’ coaches from Ohio Falls; -- and both of those cars are the

subject of a current modeling effort. In shorthand, I’ll further refer to these [wide vestibule coach] cars by the

Master Car Builder/ AAR Classification designation of “PB.”

A study of others of the various members of the “Great Timber Fleet” and the O&W passenger

operations is included in the 2007 Observer; -- “Ridin’ the Rails – Passenger Equipment of the NYO&W Ry.”

So, for this column I’ll impose the coverage limitation of only these specific PB cars, but then as one of the

building blocks, as in the prototype, of the “trains.”

With all of that in mind, addressing first the larger and more plentiful 63’ PB cars, and whereas they

remained in service over four decades until ultimately sold or scrapped in the frenzy of the O&W Bankruptcy

proceedings, there came to be several different variations of the 63’ PB cars. Originally delivered with Frost

Gas lighting, some of these 63’ PB cars were converted to electric lighting, with all of the “spotting” features

that equipment suite provides. Others were rebuilt with steel underframe components, also with distinctive

visual features. Then, as if to complicate, some cars were delivered [thankfully within consecutive roster

numbers] trucks of differing construction and wheelbase.

All of the 207-268 Series PB coaches were built and delivered over a period of years from 1901 to

1910. They were delivered in batches of most commonly from five to ten cars from builders at the Pullman

Company and Harlan & Hollingsworth. The batches of cars, car numbers and dates of delivery are well

tabulated in the diagram appearing below in the lower right hand corner, but the diagram data leaves

unanswered an interesting question.

If a part of the charm and allure of the O&W is its very existence as an anachronism, [though

somewhat overstated, since many roads, and not only the O&W, relied upon wooden cars as late as the end

of the 1930’s, with some roads even later] then very much a case in point is the method used for lighting in

the majority of the 206-268 Series coaches, as well as in other cars. According to the Diagram data, 43 of

these 63 cars were listed as being lighted by “gas” but the diagram does not further specify. That interesting

question, for modeling purposes anyway, was which cars were gas lit and which cars were electrified, and

what were the noticeable differences? The difference between the cars employing differing lighting methods is

quite noticeable in the presence or absence of roof ventilators for the gas lights and the battery boxes and

generators for the electrified cars. These differences represent what has now come to be known as “spotting”

features.

The internal O&W references, and equipment record keeping, are most commonly to either simply

“gas lighting” or “Frost lights”. The Frost system used gasoline, and while that may seem a rather risky choice

of fuel, it was in reality quite safe; -- using a fuel system whereby the gasoline was soaked into fuel tanks

loaded with cotton waste (and in the industrial usage of the term “cotton waste” that material was not used or

dirtied, but rather was to refer to new and clean cotton fibers too short to be spun into the cotton yarn for

textile manufacture). Only the vapors were drawn off to the Frost Gas lamps, which were referred to as

“carburetors” [technically, another correct nomenclature so far as a “carburetor” is simply a device to

vaporize [any] liquid fuel and mix it with air to create a combustible mixture for that particular chemical

composition]. At the time when the Frost Gas system was developed kerosene (or “paraffin” as it is called by

the British) was the most desirable product from the refining of crude oil, due its need as lamp gas in those

times before electric lights. Gasoline naturally occurring at the wellhead, and sometimes known as

“Casinghead” gasoline was an annoyance for the most part to be flared and burned off at the wellhead vent.

Only with the development of some uses, including the Frost Gas system, did gasoline then begin to acquire a

value.

One of the reasons that the coaches of the “Great Timber Fleet” lasted as long as they did was that they were light; -- weighing in at a nominal 45 tons each, as opposed to the AC&F steel coaches (the first steel PB cars on the O&W) of lesser capacity (72 fares in the AC&F cars vs. 77 for the H&H – Pullman 63’ coaches pictured here) which tipped in at a nominal 52 tons. The OB steel coaches of 1922 had a nominal weight of 60 tons; -- all meaning that the eight plus car consist here would’ve needed one of the O&W “Light 400” engines to haul the same train of an equal number of steel cars, which was a purpose for which those elegant engines were purchased. Here, at Summitville on August 31, 1939, is one of the accommodation trains to the camps and small hotels of Sullivan County. This’s an extra train, as evidenced by the white flags on Class U-1 4-6-0 No. 246 and its 30,400 pound tractive effort is more than adequate to handle its 320 ton (or so) train on this last weekend before Labor Day. The “stand-offs” for the Frost Gas Carburetors are just visible on the roof top of the first car, and what is visible beneath the rest of the cars suggests they too are some of the gas lighted throw backs that made the O&W so delightful to the enthusiasts of today – but likely less so to the cramped, sweating and anxious vacationers within. The orientation here appears to be Northbound; -- with the tall stack on the building to the far right of this image telling us that it’s the pump house for the Summitville water tank and Sheffield Water Crane system for replenishing locomotive tenders. The berm above the roofs of the two parked cars is next to the culvert for an historic version of one of the feeders for the D&H Canal; -- with the larger bridge over the later version of the Canal just ahead of the engine. Original Image - Collection of Walt Kierzkowski

The answer to the riddle of car numbers gas lighted or electrically lighted was turned up in research

for the 2007 Observer “Ridin’ the Rails,” and from the years of looking at and over so many O&W

images……an exercise which (although prompted by the gathering and harvesting of information for

modeling) ultimately led to that historical work in the form of the Observer. The written survey of April 22,

1937, prepared in anticipation of the O&W Bankruptcy filing, provided an answer to which of the wooden

closed vestibule PB cars were still gas lighted and which of them had been electrified. A typescript of that

portion of the survey relating to passenger cars (then remaining on the O&W roster) is reproduced as a series

of images in Appendix A to the 2007 Observer.

The small cylindrical vents for the gas lamps on the coach ceilings appear to exit through large

squares on the car roof. In one E-mail inquiry an interested correspondent asked me what the “hatches” were

for on some O&W passenger car roofs. These are (or were) actually a standoff, to allow some fresh air from

the outside to be vented into the burning light, and fitted with a baffle and screen to keep out the elements,

insects or the ever present cinders. They are a spotting feature for any of the O&W cars that relied on or

retained gas lighting. Back in the mid -1980s, old brass model importer Nickel Plate Products produced some

models of these 63’ O&W coaches, as well as wooden baggage and RPO cars. The coaches were produced in

two different versions, one as electrified and one as a version using gas lamps. The square ventilators for the

gas lamps, on that model of car, were clearly and correctly affixed to the car roof tops.

To tabulate the differences [variations], from several sources, of the 63’ PB cars, those in roster

numbers # 207 to #269, the following apply:

• #207 – #252; -- 8’-10” Pullman Composite 4-wheel trucks,

• #253 – #269; -- 8’-0” Commonwealth Cast Steel 4-wheel trucks,

• #236 - #244, #246, #248, #249 – Electric Lighting [and all on 8’-10” trucks, as above],

• #262 – #269; -- Electric lighting, and Commonwealth Steel Casting Company under frames, and

• Those O&W PB cars not otherwise listed as having electric lighting remained with gas lights

throughout their existence, and those not otherwise designated having wooden underframes.

This is a railroad diagram of the 207-269 Series 63’ PB wooden coaches. Diagrams were prepared by the draftsmen in the engineering department, so that basic and important dimensions and car specifications could be available to any of the several car and repair shops on the line. These diagrams were made well after any of the equipment depicted was acquired by the railroad, and so do not reflect with complete accuracy all of the details of the car or its construction. Often, as cars were updated or modified, the data set out in the diagram table was changed but not the diagram proper. These diagrams were assembled into paper books and distributed as needed. This diagram was “page 2” in the version of the book, compiled ca. 1942, from which it was taken, as noted in the circle at the lower right. This diagram has been copied from a plate in the author’s collection of passenger car and other equipment diagrams. Many of the existing plates have been compiled in Appendix B, included in “Ridin’ the Rails.”

A careful examination of this diagram reveals a couple of interesting features. First, although the side

elevation view shows a slight difference in the spacing of the first window (left on the Diagram), at each end

from the vestibule side door jamb, the overall interior view shows more clearly differences between the layout

of the washrooms at either end of the car. Using the above included diagram, the reader will notice that the

washroom to the left is larger and contains both a toilet and sink, whereas the washroom (“salon” as

designated in the diagram) to the right depicts only a toilet; - and a correspondingly smaller dimension. That

smaller interior dimension of the one washroom over the other is also reflected in the side elevation images of

the time.

Secondly, the diagram shows a car with a straight end fascia; -- but then there are two differing end

fascia treatments – along with rooftop configurations to these cars as well. Compare the end roofline of the

left hand image below to the right image and the difference is plainly evident! The straight vestibule end fascia

was a favored construction detail (in wooden car construction) often used by Harlan & Hollingsworth (and

specifically on the O&W as applied to some of the H&H built Parlor [PC] cars). Comparing this treatment to

other O&W cars from Ohio Falls and Pullman and the differences and preferences for finishing off wooden

cars ends is clearly seen.

So, along with some cars gas lighted, some with 8’10” Pullman Composite trucks, some cars with 8’

0” Commonwealth Cast Steel Trucks, yet others with Commonwealth Cast Steel underframes there’s this

further variation of straight versus curved end fascias and roof lines. Not only was the whole of the O&W’s

practice of renumbering cars a portal to confusion and madness, so too is the (are the) differences of end

construction and the varying equipment suites for these PB cars.

A comparison of these two images clearly shows the differences in the spacing(s) of the washroom-salon windows from the vestibule side door jamb (and which also corresponds to the interior vestibule bulkhead itself). In reviewing some of this image data recently with OWRHS member Bill Schneider he suggested that we (the collective and editorial “we”) understand that now there is a “left” and a “right” side (but more properly, without knowing the air brake layout beneath the car which then establishes an “A” or “B” to the (to any) car); -- or simply that there are two different side wall-window configurations to these cars.

With that parsing complete, then what to do about this, and the modeling of these Great Timber Fleet

63’ PB signature cars? Long ago . . .back now several decades, and as the very first O&W passenger car

models I’d built, the starting point I chose was the LaBelle HO-4 Coach kit to model the cars in the number

series 207-269. These kits back then, and still now, can be made into one of the more credible of O&W

models, with perhaps the least effort in the way of modification of any similar model.

Old friend, OWRHS member, law school classmate and an E-mail re-acquaintance in recent years,

Jay Diamond, collaborated with Bob Mohowski in putting together a periodic column in the old O&WTHS

Observer about modeling the O&W called “Modeler’s Notes.” One of Jay’s subjects too, in the “Notes”

column for the Spring 1971 issue, concerned the O&W coaches to be made from the LaBelle HO-4 kits.

In those early and enthusiastic modeling years not only was there little information about the O&W,

there was even less in the way of models, but there seemed to be something about the passenger service that

gave me some spark. Jay’s column noted that the LaBelle kit rendered a car that was short by one window,

so a visually accurate model would require, somehow, the lengthening of the car and car side. Just counting

the windows the stock kit has 19 windows and the 207-268 Series 63’ PB coaches of the O&W have 20. So,

simply stated, the modification requires that an additional window be spliced into the car side. Wayne Sittner

also came to this conclusion in his description of just this same modification in the Parlor Car OWRHS

Observer of 1984.

The term “kitbashing” hadn’t yet made its way into the modeling lexicon, but I viewed these LaBelle

kits as a “starting point”. To lengthen the LaBelle car, you must cut at least one window from one end of each

of the LaBelle kit sub-sides. From an additional set of subsides for this kit you must then cut off, from the

corresponding end a section of subside containing one more window. The two pieces can then be butt

spliced together to create a side with the correct twenty window openings.

Gas lighted and riding on the 8’ 10” Pullman composite trucks is No. 229 awaiting its July 18, 1937 departure to the “Borscht Belt” from the Wickham Ave. Depot. This view adds yet another “mystery” to the internal construction and layout of these cars; -- so far as the sheathing immediately adjacent the vestibule door is yet another wide panel. According to the car Diagram there is a settee behind this panel and opposite the entrance to the larger of the car washrooms (with the “privacy window” at the opposite end of this car providing light to the small toilet only equipped washroom). All of this suggests perhaps two additional conclusions, namely; -- first that the car sides were indeed identical with wide sheathing panels on both ends of the cars [on one side for the settee and on the other side for the large washroom] and second whereas the Diagram floor elevation doesn’t clearly show the difference(s) the O&W draftsman didn’t either know about or care so much for the differences in the width of the side end sheathing panels! Either way it is only a caution and warning to be taken

when relying on Diagram data (from any Diagram of any equipment). The Diagrams, along with being “dated” in some instances, are not particularly to “scale’ in respect of some dimensions. Below: 0n this same July day in 1937 No. 239 awaits a departure from AV. The electric lighting suite on this car is evidenced by the visible generator to the right of the near truck, and the absence of the roof top carburetors for the Frost Gas system.

As I sit to write this column, [some while ago due to the necessary modeling “holiday” occasioned by the

composition and preparation of the 2007 Observer “Ridin’ the Rails”] there’s even yet another model of an

O&W wooden coach, in the form of the Ohio Falls 57’ PB, that can be made from this LaBelle HO-4 kit

building and modification effort. That was only realized and discovered as a renewed passenger car model

building effort and the composition of this text was commenced (though I know it was there just waiting to be

found!).

This image is of the partially completed Ohio Falls 57’ PB car model that’s built up using the “left over” subside parts after the cutting and splicing to lengthen subsides to make the 63’ H&H – Pullman 63’ PB cars. The subside splice can be seen above the third window divider in from the right end. For this column (with more images and construction details in a following second part), I’ll describe

the construction of two HO scale models of two O&W PB cars in the #207-#269 Class, with the variations of

electric lighting and steel underframe and then one with Frost lighting, wood underframe and 8’-10” wheel

base trucks

Following is a brief outline of the procedure to modify the basic kit, and then with some specifics with

several detail pictures. The lengthened coach ends up with an overall length of about 71’ over the pulling

faces of the couplers, as compared to the Diagram dimension of 71’ 5” over the buffers. This makes the

model a bit less than a foot or so too short, thereby “shorting” the length in the car end washrooms. I’d given

some thought to making yet another splice, but the gain never seemed to me to be quite worth the extra effort

and fiddling. The inside car length, between the vestibule bulkheads is also not quite a foot too short, for the

same reason.

The vestibules in the basic HO-4 kits as I modify them are also too shallow. This comes from the

trained eyeball, which tells me that the doors provided with the LaBelle kits look a little too narrow, compared

to the O&W cars. There are no actual dimensions to scale out, but this is just the feel I get when I try to

resolve, in my mind, where the little flaws are to be found. Whereas the exact car length dimensions don’t

precisely match our prototype O&W car, the proper number of windows creates at least the pleasing effect

and aspect ratio of the car.

In this image of a partially completed 63’ PB model with spliced LaBelle HO-4 sides I’ve used some Grandt

Line plastic door castings to replicate a more pleasing effect to the finished model – the exact dimensional

variations I’m willing to overlook. This will finish off as one of the long wheelbase trucked, steel underframe

and electrified cars.

Some care must be taken with the spliced sides, since they are wood pieces that are butt glued

together along a fairly slight cross section. With a small bit of stiffening added inside above the letterboard,

and once the scribed siding has been glued to the subside, at least over the splice joint, the sides can be

handled quite easily. The floor sections likewise have to be cut and spliced together from two LaBelle HO-4

floor sections, but the corresponding [poor] butt joint is in end grain wood. Once the sides have been glued to

the lengthened floor section “break apart” dangers quite nicely subside. The roof can be sectioned together

from two different LaBelle roof pieces, and that’s a somewhat more tricky undertaking than splicing sides and

floor, but not insurmountable. In an initial effort to model one of these cars I did splice LaBelle roof sections,

but was never happy with the appearance of the rather (to my eye) overly thick edge of the clerestory. In

recent modeling I have replaced the roof with one fashioned from a Bethlehem Car Works styrene molded

roof.

If a reader has been doing a little bookkeeping over my overview description, a simple calculus

suggests that it takes two HO-4 kits to make one complete car. In reality, three HO-4 kits can be combined to

make two of these 63’ PB cars, by cutting splice pieces from first one end of the subsides in the “sacrificial”

kit, and then by cutting splice pieces from the other end. To make a single car, which is what might be all

that’s desired for those folks modeling the O&W in its later years when these coaches had been relegated to

company service on work trains, wrecker outfits, or with the signal department, there’s another solution; -- at

lesser expense than purchasing two kits and then having to relegate left over parts to a scrap box.

LaBelle Woodworking, like many other small manufacturers today will sell direct at, of course, retail

prices. Given the trends today, with so much now assembled and ready to run, it’s now somewhat difficult to

find LaBelle kits, or any craft type rolling stock kits, on hobby store shelves, and most hobby dealers, along

with any number of the correspondents to various Yahoo! Forum lists, lament that kit building has largely

become passé. Even though the LaBelle firm has changed hands a couple of times in recent years, the

current owners (who seem to be the ones answering and filling phone orders) are quite willing to sell

additional parts to their kits. I’d discovered this some years ago, first by ordering up additional sides to splice

together O&W Parlor Car sides [and that’s a story related in earlier Columns about building H&H Parlor

Cars], and again as I’ve ordered kits more recently. If a single car is all that’s needed, one HO-4 kit and an

extra pair of HO-4 sides will do the trick. From a single kit there will not be enough stock to make a longer

floor and roof (if LaBelle parts are to be used), but roof stock can be obtained from Northeastern Models

(though my personal preference for roofing material has changed over time, and with the availability of

alternatives). Northeastern can supply a modeler with floor stock, although in ordering or obtaining it make

certain that it is the product described as “Passenger Car” floor stock (that is slightly wider than freight car or

caboose stock which Northeastern mills as well).

All of the other kit parts in the original LaBelle HO-4 kit can be used to finish off a model of one of

these coaches, and the ends are particularly well presented in their stock and unaltered form. The original

prototype for the LaBelle kit was a coach from one of the Midwestern roads, but produced at about the same

time and era as the O&W cars, and from the same builders, so most of the appointments and other parts to

the car are indeed complementary. These parts include the somewhat crude soft cast metal fittings for the

underbody detail parts. Keep in mind, however, that these kits were designed and first produced about 1960,

so the detail and detail part techniques are that dated. I’ve come to substitute more currently made parts in

some cases, as I’ll mention later on. There are also some choices to be made, and additional detail parts to be

applied if one of the electrically lighted cars is modeled. I’ll note those changes and alterations in the more

detailed description of my modeling, later on in Part II of this text. The LaBelle cars are strictly from the

Pintsch gas era, and provide for no updating.

The convergence of diagram and the aforementioned survey report information confirms an

interesting insight into the uncharacteristic way the O&W classified their cars. While theses cars measure 71’ 5

½” over the buffers, they have an interior length, between the vestibule bulkheads of 63’ 3 ½” according to

the diagram dimensions. It was O&W practice to describe or “classify” their passenger equipment in terms of

the inside length as opposed to the outside, or overall length [which was a far more common descriptive

yardstick used by car builders, other railroads and the Official Railway Equipment Register]. How the O&W

came to use this rather unique description and classification of [passenger car] length is unknown, but in all

respects the O&W was manifestly consist and continuously used this method of description.

63’ PB Nos. 262 to 269 were rebuilt with steel center sills, and that is a significant feature of these cars

since a traffic department directive of June 11, 1940, specifying, among other things, the makeup of

“numbered” trains, contained a restriction that steel cars were not to be placed “… in a train to the rear of

occupied wooden coaches or parlor cars”. This has significance both for the understanding of how the O&W

operated all wooden passenger cars as well as for how properly models of such cars may, or should, be

operated on a model system following O&W practices.

Beginning with restrictive practices promulgated by the Railway Mail Service, made mandatory by the

year 1930, occupied postal cars not fitted with steel frames could not be [occupied and operated] in train

consists with steel cars to the rear. Historically, heavier steel cars would “telescope” wooden cars in an

accident (involving so little as a minor derailment) with potentially mcuh greater damage and most probably

loss of life than if cars of more robust construction were involved. Additionally, the greater stresses of heavier

cars, would work greater “ordinary” wear and tear upon wooden cars in the course of the regular slack run

out in train service. The O&W issued Directive # 351 applying to postal cars in 1930, and that order

essentially paralleled the RMS regulations. Accordingly, the O&W fitted a number of its Parlor Cars

(MCB/AAR Class PC), wood Baggage cars, and wood Postal-Baggage (MB) cars with steel frames. In addition

several PC cars were rebuilt with steel cladding over wood underframe members and a handful of the 63’ PB

cars were fitted with steel frames. The safety considerations and the several regulations and directives forever

changed the manner in which the O&W had to deal with the use and operations of its “Great Timber Fleet.”

So, when critically viewing period images and photographs, those trains made up with wood coaches at the

front of the train can either be identified as “all wood” consists, or those very wood cars are of the number

then outfitted with steel frames. As the operating procedures developed, wood cars were more and more

consigned to “Camp Specials” (as often photographed on the PJM&K Branch and at the yards and Depot at

MO), or in “Second” or succeeding sections of scheduled trains at times of heavy traffic and passenger

demand.

Here, on a summer mainline run is Class V No. 27 7doubleheaded up with a Class U camelback and a solid consist of wood 63’ PB cars. Likely a “Camp Train” since there are no head end cars as more commonly there would be in a general accommodation train to the “Borscht Belt” where the guests traveled “heavier” in order to bring along their finereries to show off; -- and guests at the other more modest hotels and bungalow colonies of the Sullivan County tended to book for longer stays and accordingly traveled with enough luggage and belongings to overflow into one of the many head end cars the O&W owned and operated. Due to the aforementioned practice regarding the mixing of steel and wooden cars, when images show [wood underframe] wood cars at the head end, it’s a pretty certain and intelligent guess that the balance of the consist is composed of wooden cars. While the Class V 2-6-0 Camelbacks rode up on 63” drivers and would ordinarily be assumed to be limited to freight service, but with the general and overall speed limit over the O&W of about 35 mph they were more than adequate for passenger service. They were, among camelbacks of the O&W, the most finely proportioned so far as the larger 69” drivers of the U and U-1 Class engines presented a somewhat ungainly image. Muscular enough for freight service with a more than adequate factor of adhesion, but then speedy enough for passenger service the fifteen Class V engines worked system wide. No. 277, above is equipped with both air and signal line as required by the ICC for passenger service. The Class V engines were the last designs of motive Power Superintendent George Washington West, before he was succeeded in that office by Burton P. Flory.

For modeling purposes, and in the “build” of a model roster of O&W passenger cars, it is a

worthwhile undertaking to model one or more of the 63’ PB cars as outfitted with a steel frame. The various

components of the Commonwealth Steel Castings Company monolithic needle beam-queenpost and stiffener

castings are readily available from Bethlehem Car Works and allow that particular version of the O&W 63’

PB cars to be quite handily fashioned.

One other interesting feature, for both spotting and modeling is the wheel base of the trucks on these

cars. The diagram shows that cars 207 to 252 had trucks with 36” wrought steel wheels running a wheelbase

of 8’-10”, while 253 to 269 had 8’-0” wheelbase trucks. The NPP cars of the ‘80s had the longer wheelbase

trucks, so the fastidious modelers may want to try to locate these, but I don’t think they were ever offered as a

separate item by NPP. Some parts were indeed offered by NPP for sale in small poly-packs, most notably the

Wolfe trucks used on some of the O&W cabooses and 1000 Series milk cars. The effort is not, in my opinion

worth it, since the NPP passenger trucks here, were of correct length and wheel base, but had gruesome

rolling and tracking qualities. Today I think it best to use the Bethlehem Car Works cast pewter trucks for the

long wheelbase trucks, and another BCW cast pewter truck, which is a virtual copy of the old Central Valley

cast pot metal trucks, for the 8’ – 0” trucks. Four wheel Central Valley passenger trucks are easily found at

shows, and some judicious drilling and re-tapping of rivet holes allows these trucks to be re-fitted with either

Kadee wheels or the newer Proto-88 pattern wheels from ReBoxx or Northwest Short Line. These latter

described CV trucks have a nominal wheel base of 8’-0” and defy any but the closest of inspections to reveal

they may actually be slightly short.

So, now I’ll draw this column to a close; -- having run somewhat longer (as usual) than anticipated. I

consumed the abundant column inches to demonstrate the exercise of blending prototype data and the

observations gleaned from historic photo images into the modeling of specific pieces of equipment. In Part II

I’ll provide some additional images showing the process and methods described here.

More later…Mal Houck