Speaking of Air Brakes on 1600 B-2s and B-3s

[Fred W. Schneider III]

As soon as thou protested, Jim, I realized that it wasn't possible ...
that 30 degrees was a monumental fabrication.  And as I thought through
it, I came up with the same thoughts that I next read in your note.  

I was standing just rearward of the front door on Henderson St, watching
the shoes on the front truck twist upward in front.  There may have been
some obstruction ... perhaps a bad rail joint either on the left or
right side of the car ... I was too young to even think of observing it
at 18.  I will point out that PRC rail conditions were not absolutely
ideal in 1958, certainly no where near contemporary Swiss or German
standards.  It wasn't the Andrea Doria; there was no 30 degree list. 
But I probably could have wedged a roll of pennies under the front end
of the right shoe on the front truck of 1707 that day.  

The problem is remembering who might also have observed it.  Ralph
Chilcott, now in Kansas was there.  Joe Hamill of Pawtucket RI (I
haven't heard from him since 1961 and he would probably be about 63 to
65 today).  Bill Allen of Laureldale PA. 
Austin Hardy of Lancaster ... I think he is dead now. Austin's son was
about ten years old. Winston Gottschalk of Lancaster ... I would trust
his judgement because he was a mechanical engineer but he's been in a
coffin for at least a decade now.  Buddy Sheetz ... Bill Allen's cousin
from Philly. There were a total of eight of us on that fantrip. 

By the way, if anyone knows Joe Hamill, clue me please.  

Jim Holland wrote:

> Greetings!
>
> Fred Schneider wrote on Mon, 28 Feb 2000 16:23:46 -0500:
>
> > There was a 1940-ish study by Transit Research Corp. comparing air brakes on
> > a Pittsburgh 1200 with spring drums on a St. Louis 1500.  A conclusion was
> > made that the springs could never possibly hold a car on Pittsburgh's hills.
> > I can personally guarantee that the spring drums would not hold a Pittsburgh
> > 1700 on Henderson Street (21 FINEVIEW) because I staged such a fantrip in
> > 1958.  Track brakes were ineffective too.  The car coasted backward until
> > the track shoes were canted upward at a 30 degree angle.
>
>         This would be a physical impossibility!
>         The two track brakes on each truck are bolted together through two
> steel arms fore and aft located below the truck frame.  This can be seen
> in the top left drawing of the B-3 plans on page 134 of *PCC The Car
> That Fought Back.*  While this shows the configuration for B-3 trucks,
> the same method of joining the two track brakes is used on B-2s as well;
> otherwise, the track brakes would flop around in the breeze and be
> totally ineffective!  There are snubbers/guides fore and aft of the
> track brakes so the track brakes do not make contact with the wheels.
>         The braces holding the track brakes together would have to be broken on
> both sides for the track brakes to achieve any angle to the rail  --
> and this on both trucks to allow all track brakes to be canted at
> 30-degrees.  But on a B-3 truck the drum-shaft brake actuator is in the
> way preventing more than a couple degree rise!  And on a B-2B for the
> city 17s, compression springs are used for mouting the track brakes.
> The plate that the spring rested on would prevent much of a rise of the
> track brake as well.
>
>         Additionally, if the track brake is energized, the whole brake grabs
> the rail and slides along the rail as long as the car is moving--that is
> how the track brake works--uphill--downhill--on the level!!!  There is
> no reason for it to lift off the rail unless a considerable obstruction
> is present - and it would be strange for such an obstruction to be
> spaced exactly for the spacing of trucks on a PCC to make all track
> brakes rise at an angle!  And the design of such an electromagnet does
> not allow for one end to be de-energized, the only other possible
> explanation for such a problem as one end gripping while the other is in
> the air.
>
>         While the drums on a 17 may not have been as effective as desired on
> hills, I see no reason that a 17 could not be stopped on a Fineview hill
> with drums and track brakes  --  and without a display as mentioned
> above.  I rode a 17-interurban on a charter on Fineview and we made it.
> I don't remember any comments about brake problems.  And page 106 of
> Volkmer's all color book on PRCo--WP--JTC shows 1708 stopped on
> Henderson on 1959.04.26, a charter to cover the West End lines before
> abandonment.
>
> 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/