History and Design

[Greg King]

S, Okay Ken,

Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth Josephson <kjosephson at sprintmail.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 4:34 AM
Subject: History and Design


>
>
> "Fred W. Schneider III" wrote:
>
> > I think my wife wonders what I was laughing about.  Do Barber cars
> > attract tornados?  What a scream.  Do tornados scream?
>
> Well, it seems mobile homes attract tornados. I suppose its a natural form
of retroactive birth control. And
> Barber cars looked like mobile homes.
>
> > Boeing Vertol cars ... there have been so many good designs out there,
> > why would anyone want to save a disaster built by an aerospace
> > engineer.
>
> You have to admit, they do build great jetliners (oh-oh, here comes Bob
and Ed again!)
>
> >  Americans will all want to go back to something domestic ...
> > Milwaukee, OK, Cleveland's 5000s, maybe.  But I would have to credit the
> > Hannover cars as the first of the new generation.
>
> I certainly will buy that one. I do believe most Americans grudgingly
admit the Germans produce some really great
> engineering designs. Of course, few say so publicly. The guy who designed
Milwaukee's artics was probably of
> German descent. :-)
>
> >  If we want something
> > more modern, I truly love those ADtranz Eurotrams that came from the
> > Derby, England plant to Strasbourg, France ... great riding, smooth,
> > fully low floor ... they may look like a beaver running backward but
> > they sure are great trainsets.  And they're being run by an agency that
> > understands what they are doing!
>
> It would be grand if one of those with an extra set of trucks (to swap
from broad gauge to standard gauge for use
> on various systems) could travel the country like the SOAC train did
during the 1970s.
>
> > The greatest problem with all trolley museums is they are created by
> > railfans because true historians don't understand the industry.
>
> True. When you, Ed and Jim write the definitive volumes on Pittsburgh
Railways, I know some of us will read and
> reread the corporate history and political interaction chapters with great
interest. Others will skip that section
> (or volume) and go right to the car routes, maps, photos and fleet
rosters.
>
> Since many published historians have left leanings, it is sometimes
humorous to see them squirm through how great
> they thought it was when the government went after all those "evil"
holding companies and utilities and broke them
> up, causing the transit divisions to be cast aside to die. Like Ed, I now
believe some power companies welcomed
> this privately, though publicly they screamed bloody murder. The "good
government" built roads for the people.
> Henry Ford, Billy Durant and Walter Chrysler built cars for the masses so
the common man had "freedom" from the
> "evil" railroads and transit systems. Now driving to work is evil and
taking the (Federally subsidized, but often
> slower and less efficiently operated) transit system is "good."
>
> >  There
> > will always be a need to save something because we rode on it.
> > Personal experiences will always carry the ace of trump over legitimate
> > historial design considerations.
>
> How true. But in the case of the PCC, you can have both worlds. As I
mentioned before, our 1991 trip to San
> Francisco was all telling to me. My wife found the Milan, Blackpool and
Melbourne (sorry, Greg) cars tiresome to
> ride for long periods after the novelty wore off. She absolutely
***hated*** the Boeing-Vertol cars and their
> constantly buzzing power invertors (convertors.) She found the PCC car
running that weekend an absolute delight to
> ride and even though the  she thought the interior colors were drab, she
stated the car was very comfortable and
> cozy inside. I think she said, "This car seems to welcome you aboard."
Ken J.
>
>