1800 series

[Jim Holland]

Greetings!

> Bob Rathke wrote:

> Why didn't PAT renumber the latest PCC rebuilds in the 1800, rather than
> the 4000, series?

	Was there an 1800 series motor coach?

> Better yet: back in the 70's, instead of the confusing renumbering of
> 1600s to the 1700 series, why didn't PAT simply renumber those rebuilds
> in the 1800 series?

	This  *fits*  the  *rumor*  that I heard, although that rumor was
debunked by JC Swindler.
	The  *rumor*  stated that the Feds threatened to cut off all money if
they didn't overhaul 100-cars of the 1700-series so 16s were overhauled
and renumbered as 17s.

	This was told to me by a ({[pat]}) operator almost 30-years ago.  I
usually accept comments like this at face value and place a white-flag
by it indicating that it should be confirmed or verified by other
sources.  Welllll, I never got that confirmation  --  and I never got
anything to contradict it.  So as time wore on, I just accepted it.
	While your question specifically wasn't asked before, this topic was
discussed before and John indicates that this rumor is unfounded.

	But then we could also ask - why didn't they just overhaul the 16s and
renumber them as is?  There would have been gaps in the numbering is all
I can think of!

> Could it be that they just didn't think of this alternative?

	YES!! :->)

James B. Holland

        Pittsburgh  Railways  Company  (PRCo),   1930  --  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/