# Cars to go with USA 0-6-0T Dockside Engine



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

Hello all,

Some time ago I purchased a USA Trains 0-6-0T Dockside engine. I have really come to enjoy this little engine but I have nothing behind it. As it is a steam type engine I think many of the more modern type cars that USA Trains makes would look a bit out of place behind it. I have considered getting a couple of the short tanker cars but again I think this is a modern era type of car.

Any thoughts, suggestions as to what would look correct or reasonably so behind this little engine? I'm not really into historically accurate but something plausible would be great.


Thanks,


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Any box and reefer with a roof walkway, 2- bay hoppers and other 40' cars.

Chuck

It could also move Aristo heavyweights around.


----------



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

Thanks Chuck,

I thought them to be a bit modern for steam era engines. I do like the hopper cars though. Thank you.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

While not totally sure, they were modern 30, 40 and early 50s era engines. They serviced the docks where barges brought in freight cars that needed sorting. They were short haul switchers with water and coal in the engine, no tender.

40' metal or wood sides freight cars are OK.

The cars I suggested would be appropriate for that era.

Chuck

I think(?) that some docksiders ran on compressed air. Short runs between refills. Not to sure about that.


----------



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

Oh, I see so they didn't really do excursions through the mountains for mining operations I take it. 

Thanks Chuck!


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Punkin

Just remember it is your railroad and what you like rules. Nobody, is going to question it. We all, or most of us, run trains that didn't really exist, on occasion. Have fun, if it looks good to you, go for it!!

Keep asking questions.

Chuck

A little history. My first layout in Lakewood, Colorado had two loops. The upper loop was about two feet higher than the lower loop. The buildings and trains on the upper loop were European. The lower loop was confined, so there weren't many buildings. However, on that loop the few buildings were Colorado and for the most part I ran Colorado NG trains on it. The two loops were connected with a point to point cog (LGB) track. I called it the "TRANS ATLANTIC EXPRESS". If I can do that, you can run a docksider pulling anything on a short senic railroad.

That layout was on several local and national tours. No one ever said, why did you mix things? They just said thank you, we enjoyed the layout. 

A few people here on MLS saw that layout. It was built in the mid 1980s. I made all the mistakes that could be made. There was no MLS, or anything like it then. Now, you have to have a doozie of a mistake to be original.

Just do and run what you like. No one will say that is the dumbest thing I ever saw. If they do, they should find another hobby.

Over the years, I have seen a few layouts that didn't appeal to me. That is life. The owner was happy and that is what counts. I thanked him or her and went to the next layout.


----------



## Fred Mills (Nov 24, 2008)

Yes, by all means "Run what appeals to YOU" But as a member of this great hobby of MODEL RAILROADING, we should NEVER stand in the way of someone new to the hobby, learning about the RAILROAD Industry we are modelling. By learning about prototype practices, we can learn to enjoy our hobby more over the years. Too many people try the hobby, and over a short period of time, move away out of boredom, watching something go around in circles with no purpose other than a bit of animation in some setting, garden or otherwise.
We should all promote the whole RAILROAD rather than limiting it just to the TOY aspect.
All our "Model Train" stuff are just toys, but by adding a bit of realism to the mix, it can increase the interest, and make it into a lifetime hobby, rather than just a short term fad.
How deep a person gets into the hobby, is up to them, and the freedom to do what pleases them is never in question; but we should always promote looking beyond the fad aspect, and open the door to its true potential.
This new person to the hobby, should be given as much information about "RAILROADING" as he wants, never limiting it to just "HAVE FUN", although ENJOYMENT has to be part of the experience, or what's the point. 

Someone with the knowledge of posting pictures to this thread; please post some pictures of such equipment as Aristo, or USTrains 40 foot equipment, so this welcome person to the hobby, can understand a bit more of what has been suggested.

Fred Mills


----------



## on30gn15 (May 23, 2009)

Talking about what era of freight car might be in time with the engine, "Docksider" was a name used with some 0-4-0T locomotives B&O had built for use in Baltimore, in particular in the crowded dock areas,which is how the locos got their nickname.
The locos were built in 1912 and lasted until 1947-1950. They have been very popular with 'indoor scale' model railroaders since at least the 1940s.
But with having a lifetime from before World War 1 to after World War 2, the real ones lived through a couple generations of freight car styles.

Here's a photo of one of them http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/bo897sa.jpg
And earlier before they were renumbered by adding an 8 in front of original numbers http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/bo98s.jpg

If I had enough leftover laundromat quarters, USA Trains' 0-6-0T Docksider in V&T colors is pretty cool and there'd be one in my iron horse stable.

While not exactly the same loco, here's a real 0-6-0T of similar configuration to the USA Trans Docksider http://www.pbase.com/image/136280311 
It is a smaller version of the breed than what USAT's loco represents.

Again, a bit different in detail from the USAT loco, but an 0-6-0T from the Reading, on the roster listing page the type appears to have been named "Docksider" by someone at some point http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/rdg1251s.jpg It is given as having been built in 1918.

And speaking of excursion locomotives, 
"Reading B4a-class 0-6-0 Saddle-Tank Switcher No. 1251, "Roundhouse Goat" (1918) Reading B4a 0-6-0 Saddle-Tank Switcher No. 1251 (1918) was a powerful and compact locomotive needing no tender, as the saddle tanks over the boiler held both fuel and water, plus the added weight put even more tractive force on the drivers. This one did not retire from active service with the Reading until 1963, after which it put in five more years as an excursion locomotive on the Maryland and Pennsylvania. "https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/9474339804


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

The dockside 0-6-0 represents a "modern" 0-6-0 steam switcher of the 1920's, 30's 40's and 50's era.

I can think of two cars that are a great fit for it:

1. The Aristocraft PS-1 40 foot boxcar:










These were made by the Pullman Standard company. here is the first one, made in 1947:










Pullman would build over a million of them through the 1940's, 50's and 60's..
Its fits the "later era" of the 0-6-0, but still fits..lots of steam was still operating in the late 40's and early 50's. So thats a classic freight car for the era.

yes, Aristocraft is out of business now, but these cars are still plentiful, and cheap, on ebay and dash marketplace..very easy to find.

2. The second car I would go with is the USA trains billboard reefer..I love these cars! and am collecting a bunch of them..I started a webpage that features a lot of them: 
https://sites.google.com/site/1991gggrs/projects/upstatenyrollingstock




















These cars are physically smaller than the Aristocraft 40-foot steel cars..

The USA docksider is 1/29 scale.
The Aristocraft 40-foot steel PS-1 cars are 1/29 scale.
The USA reefers are 1/24 scale.

But in this case, I wouldnt worry about scale at all..because the 0-6-0 docksider is *small* for 1/29 scale..the USA reefers might actually look better with it! even though they are the "wrong" scale..but, the fact that the USA reefers are smaller than the Aristo boxcar is basically irrelevant in this case, because prototype cars did, and do, come in lots of different physical sizes..so IMO its ok to mix and match them for a 1940's or 50's era train..

Whether or not the Aristo boxcar and the USA reefer look ok together or not is a matter of opinion..I will post some photos of them together later today..

The USA wood reefers represent cars from an earlier era..I would say 1920's, 30's and 40's..but the two car types would have intermingled in the 40's and 50's..
I would say:

USA wood reefers, prototype in use 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's.
Aristocraft 40-foot steel boxcar: 40's, 50's, 60's 70's.

Scot


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)




----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I don't like the look of the 1:24 next to the 1:29 at all.

I know you can find pictures of all kinds of things mixed together, but I would go with all 1:29 and have a bit earlier cars, maybe the earlier reefers from USAT ultimate series.

Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I agree Greg, if it is a string of box cars and reefers. However, if you break up the sight lines with other type cars, hopper, flat, gon., tank, etc., in between the 1:29 and 1:24 cars, it can work.

Chuck


----------



## on30gn15 (May 23, 2009)

A reference for people who are okay with having that look, some dramatically differing real boxcar sizes together,
"Photo of several box cars being loaded presumably with apples as there's a man with his team of oxen & wagon. The date & location is unknown, though based on the numbering of the box cars its between 1894 - 1920 with the two different styles of cars in use. "
http://www.dardpi.ca/wiki/index.php?title=File:DAR-Boxcars_-_loading_apples_onto_train.jpg


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

There are two things you need to look at when selecting cars for a particular era. One, the FRA regulations, and two, the road names.

First determine what approximate year you want to model. Or even decade. Railroads don't change that fast. Remember, the 30's will be vastly different than the War years of the 40's. The 50's would be even more different as railroads desperately tried to get rid of steam and dieselize.

Cars evolved from the late 1800's 20 and 30 ft cars and wooden coaches to the steel cars and heavyweight coaches of the 1920's. During WWI, the USRA cars, or "war emergency" cars became standard. Such as the Pullman-Standard boxcar mentioned above. Wooden cars quickly became extinct, and this persisted through the 1930's, since railroads, like everyone else, were broke. During the '40s there were "composite" cars, with steel frames and wooden siding, to save on the use of strategic materials. These cars disappeared quickly after the war. 

Secondly, although the Burlington Northern did repaint some 40 and 50 foot PS boxcars, you wouldn't see a steam loco pulling a BN car. BN didn't exist. Same with Pennsylvania Railroad and NYC cars repainted into Penn Central. No steam by the early 60's except on tourist lines.

So, it's a three step process: When was your locomotive built, and how long was it used, and which era are you going to model?

Look at each car you're considering, such as the PS1 above, and determine when it was built and does it fit into you're era? The PS1 is more or less a slam-dunk, since it was ubiquitous on American Railroads and there were so many of them produced. Pullman Standard capitalized on assembly line techniques and made PS1 boxcars, PS2 covered hoppers, PS3 hopers, PS4 flats, PS5 gons. Other companies, like General Steel, also standardized and produced massive numbers of GSC flat cars. The PS Cars are perfect for the late 40's and the GSC cars are more appropriate for the Transition era. Before that, in the 1920's and 30's, other than the USRA cars, most railroads built their own or contracted them out and had them custom built.

Next is road name. As I mentioned before, see if the railroad even existed in your era. Model railroad manufactures are notorious for not paying any attention to era or anything else when painting cars. You wouldn't have seen a saddletanker shoving a CSXT car into a siding.

That about sums it up, and, of course, you're limited to what is available in the MR world, and, to put it quite indelicately, most modelers have gotten lazy and demand ready to run pre-painted models these days, so the old days of undecorated kits that you could modify and paint into specific models are gone.

Of course, there are exceptions to every rule. In the 1950's you could find locomotives built in the 1880's shoving around steel cars built in the 1940's using a wooden caboose that was 70 years old while a modern steam locomotive from the 1930's was preparing to pull a string of wooden coaches on the D&RGW narrow gauge.

And, as has been mentioned before, there are rivet counters like me that knows when every car on my railroad was built, and when it was scrapped, to guys that couldn't care less that a pink 4-4-0 is pulling around a BNSF steel caboose!

That's what makes the hobby great!

Robert


----------



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

on30gn15 said:


> Talking about what era of freight car might be in time with the engine, "Docksider" was a name used with some 0-4-0T locomotives B&O had built for use in Baltimore, in particular in the crowded dock areas,which is how the locos got their nickname.
> The locos were built in 1912 and lasted until 1947-1950. They have been very popular with 'indoor scale' model railroaders since at least the 1940s.
> But with having a lifetime from before World War 1 to after World War 2, the real ones lived through a couple generations of freight car styles.
> 
> ...


Wow, thanks for those photos. Those are absolutely amazing!


----------



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

Scottychaos said:


> https://youtu.be/PMadsjdDVto


Thanks very much for that. The scale thing is hard to visualize until you have the cars in hand. This video was very helpful.


----------



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

Thanks very much to everyone for their comments and perspectives. When I look at my little black engine it appears "industrial" to me. I think the look I would like for it would be some ore or hopper cars and maybe a couple of the small tankers.

It's off to the WWW shopping mall I go 

Again, thanks to you all.


----------



## on30gn15 (May 23, 2009)

Welcome! It is fun to be inspired to remember various things, references, seen through the years.
Here is a similar little restored real 0-6-0T who would very much enjoy the company of some coal hopper cars.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=522474


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

While they most likely weren't used in large open pit iron and copper mines. It wouldn't stretch the imagination to much to have it pulling or pushing some ore cars around.

Chuck


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

I don't have an "era" problem on my railroad. The K&E is a shortline railroad in the current time frame. The freight we haul is done with generation 2 diesels, GP40's, SD-40's etc. Our excursion passenger trains are pulled by steam engines, either the Mogul or the 0-6-0-switcher. So--- behind our switcher, we usually pull Aristo Sierra cars. The 0-6-0 switcher is unique in that it is a very low engine - as my understanding is that is the way the little dockside switchers were. But the Sierra cars don't look bad behind it for an excursion train.

Ed


----------



## punkin (Jun 13, 2015)

I should have done a bit more homework but I bought this engine because of the tough industrial look and the good USA Trains reviews. I didn't realize it's a small comparative engine and didnt yet know what a dock sider is but it makes no matter. It does look very small next to my 4-6-0 but it's easily 3 times as heavy and very sturdy. It's not fast but I prefer them slow. I have ordered 2 of the black beer can tankers and looking for a smaller hopper car to finish my little industrial train.

Thanks to you all...the history and photos of the real trains are especially fantastic.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I have one, and think they are a nice loco, although the sound system is a bit bogus and the puffing smoke could have been a bit better... but for $300 I was fine..

Greg


----------

