This One is Getting Good!

[John F Bromley]

Re M-454 I was one of the victims, er, enthusiasts, on several occasions.  I
always suggested that had Chuck Haley & the Comets not brought the term
"Rock 'n' Roll to the fore in the early 1950s that M-454 would have done the
job.  The Toronto Witts were never as bad as suggested, I rode them to and
from work for 5 years twice a day (Kingston Rd Tripper) and when well
maintained (and they were) it was like riding on rubber (if a tad noisier).
TTC in the 1970s hadn't a clue how to properly service the Witts they
reintroduced for tour service and the Small Witts (2766, 2894) were not the
same as they were in regular service.  2424 was better, but it was bigger
and weighed a few more tons.  Now, TTC wants to spend C$100,000 Canadian and
make 2766 operational again.  On that budget they're dreaming, as Corley
surveyed the car for the TTC under contract and recommended C$250,000+ in
work to make it reasonably habitable.  If they do the mini-job, forget any
charter use, it'll just be for show.

JFB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Josephson" <kjosephson at sprintmail.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 1:10 PM
Subject: This One is Getting Good!


>
>
> "Fred W. Schneider III" wrote:
>
> > Let me jump in.  I'm not an airline weirdo like my friend Ed.  I have no
> > fondness for squeezing my large frame into an airliner seat, liking
> > trying to squeeze a balloon into a milk bottle, until the top of me
> > spreads over the adjacent seat and molds itself into the window recess.
>
> This is an interesting point, Fred. I wonder how many fans are willing to
admit
> that riding in a pre-PCC streetcar all day eventually becomes tiring? When
we
> were in San Francisco, the novelty of the Milan Peter Witt wore off more
rapidly
> than comfortable ride in the PCC they were running that day. (This was
during
> 1991, pre F-Line days.)
>
> Same thing in Toronto. We rode a Peter Witt on a "trolley tour." The car
was
> beautiful and fun. But I could understand how the growl of the gearing,
the
> vibration of the windows, the jarring bang as the car ran through special
work
> and irregularities in the track would turn off "Joe Commuter" after a
while.
>
> I would like to hear from people who rode M-454 in fan trip service during
the
> 1960s. There was (is?) nothing in the design of that beautiful brute to
shield
> riders from the infamously poor Pittsburgh trackage. BTW, has M-454 been
> scrapped  for parts yet? Or is it still intact?
>
> > But what I've enjoyed about this group is that, over time, we seem to
> > have developed a fondness for one another.  We're small.  Some object to
> > off course subjects but most either jump in or quietly push the delete
> > key.  I feel we've become friends.  Or at least some of us.  I've
> > personally broken bread with probably three-fourths of the people on the
> > list and I look forward to meeting the rest.  And while I've dropped one
> > of the other railfan lists, I've stayed with this one because I enjoy
> > the discussions.
>
> The internet allows use to get to know each other on a relatively level
playing
> field. It minimizes the impact of our personal prejudices that face to
face or
> voice to ear contact can stimulate.
>
> Derrick has been patient with us. On the other lists I belong to, poor Dr.
> DeArmond has given up trying to police the lists. Too many personal
conflicts and
> long standing disagreements boil over into discussions. Too many grown men
> whining about being picked on.
>
> > And if someone wants to discuss planes or trains, even trolleys outside
> > of western Pennsylvania, or even how to fertilize flowers, I'm all for
> > it.  I might just learn something!  And I don't mean that with sarcasm.
>
> I think we agree GMC could build a decent transit bus. :-)
>
> > I would probably only want to rule out religion and porn because I have
> > no belief that First Amendment rights extend to making others totally
> > uncomfortable.
>
> Amen. I believe people can believe whatever they want to. But they should
use
> common sense when expressing it and sharing it. You have a right to your
beliefs.
> I have a right to not have to hear you express them! :-)
>
> > And I would also fight to have a bus, a covered wagon, and a 55 Chevy in
> > my trolley museum. I think this might be what Ed meant when he said
> > Multi-Focused.
>
> Did you ever notice the focus on Western Pennsylvania doesn't apply to
NOPSI car
> 832? It has become an honorary Pittsburgh Railways car, wouldn't you say?
>
> > Hey, Ed, what do you think of adding a movie marquee over the exit door
> > of the museum.  We could change the play bill each month (or each year)
> > ... would it not be nice to pose 4398 under a flashing sign advertising
> > "Birth of a Nation?"  Then after the show they can go to the imaginary
> > Isaly's for a snack?
>
> Indeed, sanity is overated. Here we are, discussing not just an entire
lost
> industry and transit company, but individual cars scrapped long ago. I
believe
> ***all*** traction fans are a bit crazy, or at least somewhat
> obsessive-compulsive. We have all made peace with our insanity and
hangups.
> That's why we are here, discussing West Penn (the country trolley that did
it
> well) and Pittsburgh Railways (the sole reason for the developement of the
PCC.)
> Okay, everybody needed PCCs, but heck, Pittsburgh used them to their full
> potential and beyond. :-)
>
> Ken J.
>