[PRCo] Re: Arden Progress

[Fred Schneider]

I'm a little confused.  I know.  I confuse the others too so it is my turn now.

Boris Cefer wrote:

> Remember PRCo M11. She had the large plexiglass covered box in her interior
> and also one smaller plexiglass covered box in front of it. Do you remember
> my request regarding that handrail in M11? It was just around that small box
> which seemed to show power, brake and field weakening contactors under the
> floor. And if you have a question how the accelerator was cooled in such a
> small box which would not allow an adequate air flow, then I think I can
> answer also this question. Do you want to know my theory? You can't guess!!!
>
> Would be interesting to have a glass floor, but it would scratch, yes. And
> what about a narrow bridge structure (with grids) along car side above the
> glass floor for visitors? They would have to go thru the car on all fours.
>
> B
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fred Schneider" <fschnei at supernet.com>
> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 4:38 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Arden Progress
>
> > You didn't hear me argue with you.  I'm smiling.
> >
> > The engineer in me says grrrrreat.  The museum manager in me says no,
> because
> > the public would not understand.  They can recognize complexity, but not
> > differences between a B2 and a B3.
> >
> > Really, the purpose of a museum is to educate and demonstrate, and if it
> works,
> > good.  The only trolley museum I know of that cut open a car to show how
> it was
> > made was not run by railfans ... it is the city owned operation in
> Scranton
> > which took a Birney and carved it up to show the public the different
> parts.
> > Someone there must have looked across the street at the steam engine that
> was
> > carved up by the National Park Service to show the same thing.  And guess
> what?
> > The public looks at it and relates to it.  While I'm not supporting taking
> a
> > torch to something really significant like the Derby, Connecticut freight
> > locomotive at Branford, I'm certainly not going to take offense at
> butchering
> > one of the many New Orleans 800s or Boston Type 5s or PCCs to show how
> they were
> > put together.  How about a PCC laying on its side to show its belly?  Or
> with a
> > glass floor?  (Would scratch, wouldn't it?)
> >
> > I liked the response.  It gives me entertainment.
> >
> > Boris Cefer wrote:
> >
> > > And what about to make 1613 (its repair isn't sheduled yet) with one
> half in
> > > PRCo paint and second half in ugly PAT gray. And front truck B-3 and
> rear
> > > B-2. Did I say I'm an engineer? Cheeze whiz!
> > >
> > > B
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Fred Schneider" <fschnei at supernet.com>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 3.  And what about Pittsburgh Railways 4398?  Justin told me has to
> > > > start on it on May 13th.   That will be the car that cannot ever be
> > > > restored to one time frame without a great deal of effort and our own
> > > > gold mine.  Pittsburgh changed them so much over time that there may
> not
> > > > have been a handful of identical cars by the time they were scrapped.
> > > > Some had level floors, some drop center.  Some had center doors that
> > > > worked; some had blocked center doors with seats added.  Some had  25
> hp
> > > > motors, some 37 hp.  Some went to the scrap yard with Jones control,
> > > > some had the Westinghouse copy of GE type M, and others had K-35
> > > > control.  I would not surprise me if at least one got a K43 out of a
> > > > 4100 at some point.  Bells were on the roof, some were under the
> floor.
> > > > Some were scrapped as two man cars, some as one man cars.  Brake
> ratios
> > > > were changed on some cars.    What a wonderful chance to make a Jones
> > > > car on one side and a one-man K car on the other!
> > > >
> > > > That out to stir up a little hate mail?
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >