[PRCo] Re: Government Corruption (was Wheels__&__Shoes)

[John Swindler]

Ken mentioned:

>
>So true. Many of us (public employees) know of some awful situations and 
>incidents going on where we work. We also know if we revealed them, we 
>would not only get framed and fired, but we would forced to leave town, 
>looking over our shoulders. I am serious. The "whistle blower" laws are a 
>big joke.
>


Maybe the 'whistle blower' laws are to identify them so that the 'whistle 
blowers' can be eliminated.


>
>It's funny how local politicians and their cronies in the press hammered 
>PRCo for years when it was an "evil" (read PRIVATE) profit-seeking company. 
>I wonder if today's politicians keep some of PAT's affairs (read total 
>screw-ups with TAXPAYERS' money) from the media. That is, unless they have 
>an axe to grind with an appointed transit offical and want to pressure or 
>embarrass him/her enough to leave.
>


Who appoints the PAT Board members?


>As I understand it, transit buses currently purchased with federal funds 
>(formerly local money that has been hijacked to D.C. for the "general 
>welfare" of the masses) have to be retained for about twelve years. 
>Therefore, instead of the dependable beasts of burden from a generation ago 
>(and before), we wind up with buses that are worn out and not worth 
>rebuilding after just over a decade of use. Love 'em or hate 'em, most of 
>those old Macks, GMCs, Brills, Flxibles, etc. could last long after they 
>were fully depriciated. And of course, struggling transit companies would 
>give them the necessary TLC to keep them useable for many years.
>


About 20 years ago the 'boys from PennDOT' decreed a state-wide bus purchase 
that resulted in about 1,000 Neoplan buses for the Pennsylvania's public 
transit agencies, plus an assembly plant on rt. 322 in Chester County.  (the 
latter comment added for the benefit of the less gullible)  (:>)

All agencies participated except Harrisburg.  General Manager was Bud Weeks 
from ATE management, who said thanks, but no thanks.  Instead CAT used local 
money to overhaul ten year old T6H 4523 'new look' buses.   As for the 
state-purchased Neoplan buses, besides rust problems with the engine cradle, 
most were gone by early 1990s.  CAT retired the last of these overhauled 
'new look' buses about 2-3 years ago after 28 years of service and a million 
plus miles.   Those CAT 'new look' buses from 1975 lasted longer then the 
'old look' TDH 4512's built during 1950s.


>I don't know how long today's rail cars are designed to last, but I wonder
>if they will be able to haul loads as long and as reliably as Chicago's 
>"Old
>Pullmans" (1907-1954) or as most PCCs did. Fred will point out that
>Pittsburgh had to make their remaining PCCs last as long as they did since
>they had nothing else to put on the rails prior to the Steel City's "light
>rail" era. But PAT did have knowlegeable and skilled shop crews that did
>their jobs well. And many of them stuck around long after the former PRCo
>engineering staff was given the boot.
>
>K.
>


The initial PATCO fleet dates to 1967, but you had professionals involved 
with the car design.

How about the BARTD fleet?  Any cars still in use dating from the early 
1970s opening???

Suspect the Duewag U-2 cars will be long lived.  Edmonton's were delivered 
around 1978, and the initial San Diego cars date to early 1980s.

Likewise suspect the SEPTA Kawasaki cars, both LRV and Broad St., will 
survive despite failure to follow recommended maintenance schedules.

Then there is the MBTA who have already scrapped some Orange Line cars from 
1980s.  But why bother with maintenance when free money is available from 
Washington.

Fred has also commented that the PCC was designed with a 20 year life 
expectancy.  This is supported by the annual updates provided by Conway and 
Hirsfield at the AERA annual conventions in 1930s.

In retrospect, really have to question the wisdom of the PCC rebuilding 
programs.  It's not only the politicians and transit agencies, but also the 
public that can't make a connection between costs and achieving something 
they want.  Was the PCC rebuilding programs at PAT, SEPTA, MBTA, etc really 
cost effective?  When it's 'free money', anything is a worth while project.  
   In this case, suspect most on this list would support the PCC rebuilding 
without regard to cost.  (yes, I'm aware that Harold and John Mauro 
inherited an impossible situation in early 1970s)

And to change the subject - somewhat -

By the way, have you noticed that one of the first contracts awarded for 
light rail projects usually involves the relocation of utilities?  Anyone 
want to try and defend the use of transit funds to relocate utilities?  
First check recent US Court of Appeals decision for Minnesota.  XCEL vs. 
Minnesota DOT, et al.  Check it out

John

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/