[PRCo] Re: More Thoughts on 1600s versus 1700s

[John Swindler]

Where were the cars stored and how old were they???

Wasn't there a considerable amount of covered storage prior to mid-1960s, 
while cars at Tunnel were mostly stored exposed to the elements??

Have also heard in the past that the PCC was designed for a 20 year life.  
And then replacement equipment needs to be ordered because the cars are 
life-expired.  After all - isn't this what you do with your automobiles????

As part of PAT's "Early Action Program" PAT applied for state money around 
1970 to rehab 70 cars in the 1700 series.  The 1700s were 20 years old at 
the time.  At the time, the 1600s were destined for an early scrapping.

When light rail was adopted in place of TERL, around 1972, it became 
necessary to get a few more years out of the remaining 1600s, then over 25 
years old or five years beyond life-expired.  That's why the 1600s were 
overhauled.  As a footnote, PAT was spending around $25-30,000 per car 
initially, while Boston was spending around $300,000 per overhaul.

I remember a fantrip, circa 1972, soon after the first 1600s were rehabbed.  
Trip started with overhauled cars - 1700s I believe, then switched to couple 
1600 'old clunkers'.  I have some slides of Harold Geissenheimer pointing 
out deteriorated condition of 1600s to Bob Korach and couple others.   The 
stairwells, area around the anticlimber, and area around the motorman's seat 
come to mind as exhibiting considerable deterioration.  Did a canvas roof 
get replaced with metal??  That may say a lot.

With an apology for not having a better recall of events.

John





>From: HRBran99 at aol.com
>Reply-To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>Subject: [PRCo] Re: More Thoughts on 1600s versus 1700s
>Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 15:16:31 EST
>
>In a message dated 3/9/03 1:30:21 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>kjosephson at sprintmail.com writes:
>
> > I am not doubting Herb's assessment. I am simply
> > wondering if three additional years of service would make that much
> > difference or if the 1600s simply didn't receive as much TLC during the 
>PAT
> > renovation period.
> >
>
>The 17s were almost all painted into the 'new' PAT gray and white with red
>trim after the PAT takeover. The 16s mostly remained in PRCo Red and Cream
>with rust trim. The rust was, in my opinion, the reason for the fast 
>decline
>of the 16s. Many of the 16s running in 1974 were in such condition that I
>sometimes felt embarrassed to operator one of them on the public streets. 
>The
>exteriors looked more like the oxidized beams in the US Steel building than
>the original red and cream colors. The interiors had large areas where 
>paint
>had peeled away leaving the bare wallboard. Rust had taken over the painted
>metal parts and seat frames. Lack of proper maintenance by PRCo had left 
>them
>in this condition. PAT started with the newest cars (17s) and worked their
>way down to other series with the repainting and upgrades. PAT did, of
>course, repair/repaint other fleet series (16s/15s/14s) ,at the beginning,
>but not in a wholesale lot as with the 17s.
>
>HrB
>
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus