[PRCo] Re: Air--Car__Designs_ -- WAS:_[Morning Sun Pa #4]

[Jim Holland]

Good Morning!


> Fred Schneider wrote:

> The 1200s continued the development from 100.  The 1400s
> and 1500s had those botched up door hinges (to widen the
> clear opening)


	Could you give a description of those hinges as they compared to
the other cars?    I thought the mechanical mechanism to operate
the doors remained the same  --  center post was just removed.


> and the later cars had a lot of ersatz fittings
> because of wartime shortages.


	True  --  but that was the result of a very unfortunate
situation  --  certainly not a design fault.

	I like the 16s for air-car design  --  rub rail at the floor is
a band instead of a bead, other molding improved and diminished
in quantity (also diminished on 14s and 15s,) a little skirting
below rub rail over trucks and front end which was not there on
100--1299, but what really makes the 16s stand out is the very
simple addition of dash-lights  --  adds tremendously to
character.


> I've heard complaints about the 1200s rebuilt with
> drum brakes but I never heard the same animosity
> from Washington DC.


	Weren't the original shoe brakes spring-applied //
air-released?    This is  *supposedly*  the reason the cars were
banned from the 40-line.    Think this is the culprit, not the
drums themselves  *if*  the drums were also spring applied.   
Would seem like a tremendous amount of work to change from 
*air--release*  to  *air--application.*    Comments in 
*The__Book*  indicate that the spring applied drums on the SLPS
all-electric cars could only hold cars on a 3-4% grade, and this
in the early to mid-1940s.    Fortunately there were
ikmprovements in this area.

	DCT may have had air-applied brakes  --  and they certainly 
*didn't--NOT*  have the hills and grades which would cause the
brakes to slip; 1200s would roll backward on braking upgrade!

	But a new 1200-series car was mighty handsome with its chrome
fittings  --  skirting needed some improvement, especially the
front end.


> The 1700s, from a personal view point,
> may have been the prettiest standee window cars.......


	Nothing maybe about it!!:)


> The Boston Picture Window cars were heading down the right
> patch but the small standee windows above the larger lower
> windows were a detriment.......


	It was another step in a more modern design  --  possible that
it would be a single window had PCC design in the U.S.A.
continued.

	I like the two separate functions  --  standee and  *sittee* 
windows.    And the  *Pullman*  Picture Window cars had somewhat
smoother lines so the distinction between  *St.Louis -- Pullman* 
was blurring!    Change doors to blinkers and it would look quite
sharp (and Get Rid of Those Left-Side Doors!)  --  stands almost
shoulder to shoulder with PRCo 1700s.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Waiting for a bus is as thrilling as fishing,
    with the similar tantalisation that something,
        sometime, somehow, will turn up. 
            George Courtauld

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

James B. Holland

• Holland  Electric  Railway  Operation....... 
  "O"--Scale St.-Petersburg Trams Company (SPTC)
	Trolleycars and "O"--Scale  Parts
		including Q-Car
	mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net

• Pennsylvania Trolley Museum
	http://www.pa-trolley.org/
• Pittsburgh  Railways  Company  (PRCo),
	1930  --  1950
• N.M.R.A.  Life member #2190;
	http://www.nmra.org

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>