[PRCo] Re: Crew Assignments

[Edward H. Lybarger]

I've already forwarded this question to Art.  But in case he doesn't read
his email regularly, Fred and I will see him Friday at the museum.  Now all
we have to do is remember to ask him!

-----Original Message-----
From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
[mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org]On Behalf Of John
Swindler
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 3:43 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Crew Assignments






>Fred W. Schneider III suggested:
>
>  John, I think we found a job for you.  Move to Pittsburgh and interview
>all the surviving motormen about how trainmen were assigned to routes.
>There might be some real surprises.  And I'll bet they varied considerably
>from year to year as the passenger counts dwindled, the headways
>lengthened, and the company sought to get more productivity out of its
>trainmen.  I think we can be certain that certain routes never did share
>trainmen with others: 12, 21, 36, 51, 81, 63, 38A, W1, W2, Wf, D, 28 (as a
>shuttle), 29
>



No need to interview the trainmen.  Check with Art Ellis Sr. who wrote the
schedules.

As for 35 and 36, they were interlined on Sundays only to create a 180 min.
total cycle time that would only require three cars to maintain a 60 min.
headway on each 'branch'.  Not needed on Saturday's with a 30 min. headway,
each branch.

(round trip on Library was 82 min. or 90 min. with layover.  Divide the
headway into the round-trip cycle time.  A 60 min. headway would require 1.5
or two cars; a 30 min. headway would require 3 cars.  For Sundays, by
interlining with Drake, a longer 'line' is created that makes the math
work.)

Other possibilities that might have used this 'game' were 64/67.  Also maybe
71/73.

PRC was into productivity.

John (the other one)



>John F Bromley wrote:
> >
> > Finally, from me, a pure Pittsburgh question.  I'm looking at two
>borrowed negatives from a very nice man in New Jersey (who shall not be
>named) taken on the same day but on different trips.  One is at the SH Jctn
>Traffic Office, the other on the r/w at the 35/36/37 junction.  The first
>is on Route 39, the second on Route 38.  Both about the same part of the
>day (i.e. one isn't morning rush and evening rush).  There is no question
>of them being on different days, both on August 2 1946..  Both Car 1240.
> >
> > The Q - did 38 and 39 interline in the same fashion as 35 and 36 in
>later years??
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp