PAT Snow Removal, PCC Work Cars and M-134

[John F Bromley]

It was M-1276.

And now, since you've played a hornets' nest for a piñata, who said TTC's
Pullman PCC Rail Grinding Train was a poor performer?  They were so bad that
they ONLY lasted 25 years, and that after 28 years of service to passengers.
Gimme a break, Ken!!!  Toronto's rails were as smooth as a baby's butt after
a few days operation by ole Mutt 'n' Jeff.  They were only retired because
they needed a major overhaul after 53 years of continuous service and  TTC
was no longer interested in maintaining PCCs that didn't collect fares.  The
last roadsalt they ever saw was in the early 1970s as they didn't operate in
winter.  Only VERRRRRRRY reluctantly did we even manage to save 4500 and
4549, and TTC is going kicking and screaming, even now, toward providing
them with their overhauls and shelter.  Normally they sit out on Track 29 at
Russell CH braving both the elements and passersby (at least 4549 does -
4500 will soon join it if they ever get off their duffs at Hillcrest and
finish the job.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Josephson" <kjosephson at sprintmail.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 12:05 PM
Subject: PAT Snow Removal, PCC Work Cars and M-134


>
>
> "Edward H. Lybarger" wrote:
>
> > I was being facetious.  Actually, there are some blades attached under a
> > handful of 4100s.  I'm not sure how well they work, but suppose they'd
be OK
> > under constant service in a storm.
>
> I hope it works better than M-1276 did. :-) Or was it M-1267? It seems
Boston is
> the only operator to successfully use PCCs as work cars. I keep hearing
horror
> stories about how poorly the TTC ex-Cleveland cars performed as rail
grinders. I
> believe CTA has some PCC (6000 series) cars converted to work duty.
>
> And speaking of work cars, what was M-134's assigned duties besides
sitting next
> to the carbarn with its drooping front platform giving it the
appeareanceof
> shameful puppy dog?  Ken J.
>