Car Life

[John F Bromley]

No offense intended, Fred.

TTC - YONGE not YOUNG.  How many times does this name have to be
corrected?!!  Seriously, there's enough photos and documentation showing the
name.  Us Torontonians easily tire of seeing our names misspelled over and
over, such as above, and others such as  EGLINGTON rather than the proper
EGLINTON (never a second G, folks).  What's next - KWEEN?  BLUER?  QUEEN'S
KWAY (QUAY is pronounced KEY).  I suppose I'm cranky this morning after
having spent the last hour correcting some idiot's ideas of what the Toronto
horsecar names were and when they started.  People these days don't do
proper research, just spew there ideas and then we have to clean up the
messes after they are published as fact.

JFB


----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred W. Schneider III" <fschnei at supernet.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: Car Life


> I LIKE THIS NOTE BECAUSE IT SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE PRACTICES AND
> EQUIPMENT PURCHASES MAY NOT ALWAYS BE RELATED TO EQUIPMENT DESIGN
> LONGEVITY.  JOHN SWINDLER SAID THE SAME THING WHEN HE BROUGHT UP THE TTC
> SUBWAY CONVERSION IN 1966 AND HE COULD HAVE ADDED THE YOUNG STREET
> SUBWAY IN 1954. IF WE LOOKED AT BROOKLYN, I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT MY
> ORIGINAL GUESS THAT THE CONVERSION IN 1956 WAS BASED ON A 20 YEAR
> DEPRECIATION CYCLE WAS CORRECT (I GUESS AT ONE TIME EVEN GOVERNMENT
> CONSIDERED DEPRECIATION). AND SOMEONE MENTIONED WEEKEND DIESEL BUS
> SERVICE ON SOME PHILLY ROUTES BECAUSE OF PASSENGER SAFETY.  PITTSBURGH
> ALSO RAN DIESEL BUSES IN THE EAST END ON WEEKENDS IN 1966-67, FOR
> WHATEVER REASON.  A LOT OF SYSTEMS DID THAT TO GET RID OF WEEKEND
> SUBSTATION OPERATORS.  WE WILL ALSO HAVE SITUATIONS OF INADEQUATE SHOP
> FACILITIES (REMEMBER PTC CLOSED KENSINGTON IN 1955 BECAUSE THE CARS WERE
> IN DECENT ENOUGH SHAPE TO LAST UNTIL ABANDONMENT AND AFTER THE FOUND
> THEY WERE UNABLE TO CONVERT AS FAST AS POSSIBLE, THEY FOUND WYOMING WAS
> TOO CRAMPED, AND 30 YEARS LATER IT WAS SOLVED WITH A NEW ELMWOOD
> FACILITY).
>
> WHAT IS IT WE STARTED OUT TO PROVE?  MAYBE THIS IS IT?
>
> Kenneth Josephson wrote:
> >
> > "Fred W. Schneider III" wrote:
> >
> > > Again, the issue isn't how long they will last but for how long the
> > > agency wishes to maintain them.
> > > Johnstown Traction was a private company that counted pennies.
> > >
> > > I think we often, as enthusiasts, spend too much time looking at one
> > > aspect of our quarry (in this case longevity) without looking at all
of
> > > those factors which the transit manager had to consider.  And if he
> > > failed to consider them, there was always the unemployment line.
> >
> > I have read that some private systems decided to go with trolley coaches
as an
> > interim solution to rail car replacement due to:
> >
> > A.) Heavy investment in DC power distribution systems that still had
plenty of life
> > left.
> >
> > B.) Shop forces that were well versed in traction maintenance.
> >
> > C.) Making the system more attractive to a potential municipal
purchaser.
> >
> > D.) To appease unions that believed a switch to motor coaches would
reduce
> > employement within the rank and file.
> >
> > E.) Despite seeing the decline in patronage, a unique arrangement
resulted in power
> > so cheap as to completely offset the high cost of fixed plant
investments ( i.e., San
> > Francisco and Vancouver for example.)
> >
> > To get back on topic, I sometimes wonder if trolley coaches woould have
been well
> > suited to the Pittsburgh Hilltop lines such as the 40, 44, 47, 48 and
49. But again,
> > there's that issue of the potholes and paving blocks shaking the
coachwork to
> > pieces.  Ken J.