Gen. Elec. versus Westinghouse PCC control

[Vigrass, Bill]

Very interesting. I like information like that!
Bill Vigrass (Supt.,ret.)

-----Original Message-----
From: JacksoRE at STVINC.COM [mailto:JacksoRE at STVINC.COM]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 3:10 PM
To: fschnei at supernet.com; pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Cc: billvigrass at hillintl.com; waltkeevil at surfree.com;
wdmiddleton at earthlink.net; pghpcc at pacbell.net
Subject: Fwd:Gen. Elec. versus Westinghouse PCC control
Importance: Low



--------------- cc:Mail Forwarded ---------------
From:     fschnei at supernet.com AT STVINC.COM
Date:     06/15/2000 11:26 AM
To:       pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org AT STVINC.COM
To:       ANDY MAGINNIS <Andyslvt at cs.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       BILL MIDDLETON <wdmiddleton at earthlink.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       bill vigrass <billvigrass at hillintl.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       bob jordan <jordan at evs.cbs.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       bruce wells <bwells at nauticom.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Chick Siebert <csiebert at paonline.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       "Chr. Grimm" <Chr.Grimm at t-online.de> AT STVINC.COM
To:       "CRVLKOTULA at aol.com" <CRVLKOTULA at aol.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       dan bower <djbower at intelitran.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       dave carpenter <dcarpenter at solonmfg.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       David Hamley <david.h.hamley at us.adtranz.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       DF Cramer <dfc1 at alltel.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Don Duke <trainbook at earthlink.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Elmer Fry <elmerfry at desupernet.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Harold Geissenheimer <transitmgr at worldnet.att.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Herbert Harwood <herbhar at yahoo.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       "J_Swindler at hotmail.com" <J_Swindler at hotmail.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       John LaCosta <Samsmeatm at aol.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Larry Lovejoy <LOVEJOY at pbworld.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       RICHARD ALLMAN <allmanr at aehn2.einstein.edu> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Russell E Jackson <JacksoRE at STVINC.COM> AT STVINC.COM
To:       scott becker <sbecker at pa-trolley.org> AT STVINC.COM
To:       tim dailey <tim at tdailey.com> AT STVINC.COM
To:       tsquare <tsquare at toad.net> AT STVINC.COM
To:       Walter Keevil <waltkeevil at surfree.com> AT STVINC.COM
Subject:  Gen. Elec. versus Westinghouse PCC control

Fred - I've never been happy with the idea of a continuous-running air
compressor, although that is what is typical on buses and trucks. An
interchange of correspondence concerning that would be a very interesting
find.  (WABCO's files are ?) The situation may have been aggravated on some
properties (Brooklyn comes to mind) where the M-Gs were never shut down and
the compressors ran almost night and day. I'm not intimately familiar with
the PC compressors, but I suspect one change from PC1 to PC2 was a larger
oil sump, so that failures due to running out of oil between inspections
would be reduced (or compressor inspections could be spaced farther).  It
would be interesting to know if they ever considered applying a clutch and
then cycling the compressor in a more normal fashion. Space was definitely
limited, and the cost/benefit ratio may have been felt to not be very good
as well.  Incidentally, Gardner-Denver also supplied some PCC compressors
on some of the Brooklyn cars, and perhaps some others, presumably
interchangeable with the PCs.  As to the control, anyone who got the
original GE design (pre-pilot motor) could not have been a happy camper.
Jeff Hakner has been working on 1001 (we've had some lengthy conversations)
and he is amazed at what a strange and arcane design that is. regards,
Russ J.


       There has been considerable discussion on the
       Pittsburgh-Railways web site about order General Electric or
       Westinghouse hardware.  Yesterday, while working in the library
       at the Baltimore Streetcar Museum, I came across three volumes
       of documentary material on Baltimore cars including drawings,
       photos, and shop department commentary.  Some of this is worth
       sharing with the group.

       It is also being shared with a wider audience in the hope that
       it might eventually, by being copied from piller to post, reach
       a fair proportion of the people who bought the Carlson -
       Schneider book PCC - The Car That Fought Back  in order to
       correct an error in the book.

       The book, by the way, was reprinted and the second printing,
       perhaps as an economy move, lacked a major data fold out.  The
       4,000 people who have the first printing have, in the back of
       the book, a data tabulation that includes motors, control,
       weight ... all sorts of relevant data on PCCs as they were
       built.  That same chart was not included in the reprint which
       numbered 2,000 copies.  There was a major error in the
       Baltimore section of the chart, for which I take full blame.

       Now, onward to what I found yesterday.  Apparently quite early
       in the game, Baltimore Transit found something that they
       disliked in the General Electric equipped Saint Louis cars.
       There was no description of the problem, just a cursory note
       that GE and BTC split the cost of correcting the problem.  One
       might expect that it also afflicted the Brooklyn cars but may
       not have been deemed serious in Brooklyn.  The BTC must have
       been satisfied, overall, with the General Electric package and
       its manufacturers service, because every subsequent order was
       split between GE and Westinghouse.

       Now, the mistake in the chart.  The text in PCC - The Car That
       Fought Back notes the lubrication problem with the PC-1
       compressor.  As a brief explanation, the PCC cars did not have
       a compressor governor which turned the pump on and off in
       response to air demand.  Rather, like a bus or truck
       compressor, it continually operated and the valves were loaded
       and unloaded according to air demand.   Baltimore did buy PC-1
       compressors on the 1936 St. Louis cars as shown in the chart.
       They later replaced them with PC-2 compressors, which
       Westinghouse Air Brake claimed had improved lubrication.  The
       PC-2 compressors were almost universally used on air-PCC cars
       built in late 1937 and thereafter.  The shop document to which
       I referred earlier disclosed that BTC didn't like the PC-2 any
       more than they liked the PC-1 and installed intermittent
       operation CP-27 compressors on all the Saint Louis-built cars.
       All of the Pullman-Standard cars had CP-27 cars from the
       outset.  This gave the Baltimore cars, like the Atlantic City
       Brilliners, the characteristic ticka-ticka-ticka sound of a
       compressor on the older cars they replaced.  The mistake in the
       chart was not recognizing that Baltimore did not have PC-2
       compressors and in not looking hard enough to find the
       evidence.