Car stops -- 1630 -- 1614 & 1613

[Jim Holland]

Greetings!

Dietrich, Robert J. wrote:

> Hello all:
> So this is what it is like getting old!

	It's nice to have some company!!!!

> I apologize for trying to bring you into the
> realm of the misinformed.  Maybe I was looking at the NC sign at the top of
> Federal St. on the top of page 74.

	NO apology necessary - and no such attempt intended.  It was an honest
question looking for an explanation!
	Trouble is, my book must be numbered differently from yours!  If I
understand this correctly, the *red* number in the fare receipt ticket
is the page number and on page 74 of my book is 4355 on East Beau (not
Federal!) with the street newly paved behind the car up to the track.  I
did find Federal St on page 107 and 108 but can't see the little sign!

> I went back through the Volkner book and the Ed Miller book looking
> for that picture of the little yellowish signs hanging from the overhead.

	AHA - I was in the wrong book!  The above refers to Volkmers book - I
now see page 74 in Millers book.  Yes, that is an NC for when a 21 turns
into Henderson its back end would foul inbound cars  --  but what is
that Third sign to the right?

> It was not page 83, isn't that a
> "power-off" sign?

	Not on page 83 of Volkmer's book - that *might* be an NC sign - note
how close the tracks are on the turn for the 49-line while the devil
strip on the 44-line turn is much wider.  And if it is an NC sign, the
lettering is only readable to the car facing it, not the photographer! 
No Power Off here.
	On page 76, center photo of interurban 1716 (which has its logo) making
the turn from Grant to Liberty is a *Power Off and Sign* in the upper
right of the photo.  There is another Power Off but no sign at Craft Ave
yard immediately above car 1502 the top of page 116.  These are both in
Volkmer's book.

BTW the ESSO station on page 82 belonged to my father.

	That's Volkmer's book - and Ken was one of your regular customers for
his souped up *8* 1957 Chevy!

> I did notice, though, that the PRCo Wing logo hung around on car 1537 until
> 7/60 (P 92) and on 1630 until 4/61 (P93).  Admittedly these are fan trip
> photos and someone may have brought along a stick-on.  There are other
> photos showing the logo in later years:
>         P97    4/60 car 1161
>         P111  5/58 car M11
>         P116  9/59 car 1502
>         P118  6/58 cat 1799

	Ed had indicated that the Logo was apparently new with the bankruptcy
reorganization that was completed in the early 1950s.  From photos I had
indicated that 1614 *seemed* to be the first with the logo and this in
1952--1953 when still operating to Washington.  And it seems that PRCo
was very slow in applying the logo to the equipment - in checking my
photo collection, it seems that very few cars had the logo by the
mid--1950s but there were more toward the late 1950s.
	And if you look at 1630 on page 121, it does NOT have the logo.  This
car was overhauled in 1960, the roof monitor and fans were removed, and
that is apparently the first time that this car got the logo!!!!!  So
the logo was still quite common in 1960 and still being applied for the
first time!  An 1000--1100 style trolley cowl was used on 1630 since
extras from these cars, some heading to scrap, would be available.  Car
1630 was overhauled electrically and mechanically and was a stellar
performer - very fast and powerful.  But it was *apparently* rejected by
PAT because the roof looked different than the rest of the 16s in spite
of the fact that the car was in great condition otherwise!  That was a
bum and downright stupid decision.
	Car 1630 was originally assigned to Highland Car House.  Cars
1613--1619 as interurbans were at South Hills (as City Cars they were at
Craft and Plummer - I have photos of 1619 on the 94--line as a city
car.)  And according to information from Pat Healy, a retired PRCo--PAT
employee and trusted historian by PTM, 1620--1629 were originally
assigned to South Hills and that may be the reason 1630 ended up at
South Hills after Highland closed.
	A note on the fold-out in the back of *PCC The Car That Fought Back*
indicates that 1630 received B-3 trucks when extras became available
after 1648 was lost in the Homewood fire.  Dave Hamley duly notes this
in his series in *Trolley Fare* but also states that corroboration is
lacking and photos do not so indicate  --  so far!!
	I do have a photo of 1630 on Library apparently just after receiving
her sealed beam headlight ( very fresh square of red paint around the
headlight is a give--away!) but the trucks can't be seen and the date of
the photo is not known.  With 1630 looking *somewhat* like a 17 with the
roof monitor, maybe the thought was to convert her to an interurban -
yes, it is far--fetched, but a possibility.
	But the possibility of 1630 receiving B-3 trucks isn't logical,
especially for PRCo which seemed to follow very logical and definite
patterns in many other ways - a very predictable company!  Cars 1613 and
1614 had the experimental B-3 trucks, each a little different, and
because they were one-of-a-kind, it is easy to understand the
maintenance and mechanical difficulties and the desire to side-line
these trucks.  Car 1613 apparently got her original B-2s back and
according to the July 1952 issue of *Headlights* these B-2s had extra
weight added for interurban service which 1613 started in January of
1946.  Operators did not like this car because it rode extremely hard
with these B-2s.  And the Earll interurban retriever on 1613 was removed
and replaced with a standard catcher in the standard position which was
centered above the rear windows.
	All photos of 1614 post-1955 show the car with B-2 trucks as well
(although I *think* I remember seeing her with B-3s when I lived there
but photos do not confirm  --  so far.)  So why weren't the extra set of
B-3s from the burned 1648 placed under either 1613 or 1614 as opposed to
1630?  B-3 trucks going to 1630 is not logical for PRCo!

>  -----Original Message-----
> From:   Jim Holland [mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net]
> Sent:   Friday, May 19, 2000 6:33 PM
> To:     pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Subject:        Re: Car stops  &  Interesting  Observation

> Greetings!

> > Dietrich, Robert J. wrote:
> 
> > . . . I also noticed on a couple pictures a
> > small orangeish sign that appeared to have only one letter.  Does anyone
> > know what they were for?

>         Are you referring to one on the bottom of page 83 (Volkmer's book?)
> Can't see anything on the sign - would guess it might be *NC* for *No
> Clearance* for 49 IB & OB cars to pass on that curve and this particular
> sign would be facing the 49-IB car.  Can't find any others - can you
> identify page numbers please?

>         In the photo on the top of page 115 - Volkmers book - is a photo of
> 1406 on the 10th St. Bridge.  The only evidence of trolley wire for 1406
> is right near the trolley pole.  The trolley wire does not appear to be
> attached to the span in the foreground - there is no evidence of a
> hanger, either!  Note the heavy black section of the span between the
> two strain insulators and immediately over the trolley wire - allows for
> current flow between the two trolley wires.  Not a feeder as such since
> it does not run to the side.  Otherwise, spans never carried current.

> James B. Holland

>         Pittsburgh  Railways  Company  (PRCo),   1940  --  1950
>     To e-mail privately, please click here: mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net
> N.M.R.A.  Life member #2190; http://www.mcs.net:80/~weyand/nmra/

James B. Holland

        Pittsburgh  Railways  Company  (PRCo),   1940  --  1950
    To e-mail privately, please click here: mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net
N.M.R.A.  Life member #2190; http://www.mcs.net:80/~weyand/nmra/