Car Life

[Kenneth Josephson]

Derrick J Brashear wrote:


> But, just because it had longevity, don't assume it was necessarily "better" than
> today.

True. You may have noticed several prominent coach manufacturers were left out of
my little rant. A Boeing 757 is certainly "better" than a DC-3 though the latter is
well known for its longevity. (This last statement is guaranteed to get a reaction
from Bob Rathke or Ed Lybarger.) Anything can be made to last for decades if one
throws enough money at it. But Marmon, Brill and postwar Pullman trolley coaches
were noted for their longevity as well as providing generally trouble free service
for over three decades when given the chance. While our favorite traction system is
well known for being a predominently Westinghouse equipped system, most long term
trolley coach operators seemed to prefer GE equipped trolley coaches over
Westinghouse equipped units when all other things were equal. There were several
notable cases where the Westinghouse equipped half of a GE/Westinghouse split order
of identical trolley coaches were retired or sold off  before the GE units.

My point is that a guaranteed subsidy to a fat and sassy public agency will not
inspire the same call for longevity and serviceability that the private transit
industry and its suppliers needed when the PCC concept was born.

I heard a rumor that people living between Mattapan and Ashmont were more worried
about the possibility of receiving hand-me-down Boeings from the Green line than
losing their PCCs to bustitution or a Red Line heavy rail extension. Ken J.