[PRCo] Re: PCC Rehabilitation
James B. Holland
PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com
Wed May 26 17:13:05 EDT 2004
HI!
A sampling of PRCo photos -- biased toward better looking
equipment of which there is Not A Short Supply! You will find others
in not so good shape, but seems like there are Quite A Few in Good Shape.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt108.htm -- 1615 with rust centered
above anticlimber but otherwise does not look bad. After ({[pat]})
takeover
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt109.htm -- 1644 shows a thin line
of rust on the dash below belt rail, some marks on front roof but
otherwise not bad.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt127.htm -- 1706 with what looks
like scrape marks on cars left, but definitely not bad -- After
({[pat]}) takeover.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt128.htm -- 1705 looks quite
handsome in PRCo days.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt130.htm -- 1706 again looks very
reasonable. After ({[pat]}) takeover
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt146.htm -- 1729 latter 1960s looks
very reasonable. After ({[pat]}) takeover
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt041.htm -- 1663 looks dingy
--- car behind looks quite good.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt046.htm -- cars in South Hills
yards look very good, even 1200s!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt653.htm -- 1642 looks very good.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp146.htm -- one handsome little
puppy in 1962!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp148.htm -- other side of 1646 above
at same time!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp149.htm -- and 1646 again -- Does
Look Nice!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp151.htm -- 1663 right at
({[pat]}) takeover -- looks quite nice in New Paint Scheme!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp153.htm -- 1671 looks nice in
1959!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp155.htm -- 1694 may be mothballed
but looks quite nice in New Paint Scheme!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp160.htm -- 1721 looks nice in
1959!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp162.htm -- 1731 looks reasonable.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp166.htm -- 1790 has a few scrapes,
looks a little pink, but otherwise ok.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp167.htm -- 1791 in New Paint
Scheme!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp171.htm -- 1001 in 1958 doesn't
look too bad for a car that will soon be out of service -- In Fact,
She Looks Quite Decent.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp174.htm -- Right Handsome!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp186.htm -- 1630 faded.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp192.htm -- 1630 again.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp193.htm -- 1630 After Royalll
Royce Overhaul!!!!!!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp197.htm -- 1630, another after
overhaul.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp205.htm -- Handsome 1643!!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/wvp392.htm -- 1509 1752 in 1964 could
look better.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jtp62.htm -- 1449 looks handsome.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jtp72.htm -- 1792 in ({[pat]}) days.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jtp15.htm -- not bad this late in the
game.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jtp06.htm -- looking rather shappy in 1970
James B. Holland wrote:
>HI!
>
>
> A lot of what you mention is Far More Subjective than it is
>Objective And Very Vaguely Subjective. You agree that safety,
>electrical, mechanical, track and overhead were not sacrificed --
>certainly Not Perfect, but still very reasonable. That leaves Only
>Cosmetic Work. I Also was on the 42, 38, Library, Shannon Very
>Very Frequently myself -- made excuses to go downtown so I could ride
>-- and admit cars could be cleaner but still No Gaping Holes ala
>({[pat]}). Dings and dents and faded paint but also Not A Few
>cars with fresh paint -- witness the Half--N'--Half paint scheme of
>the very late 1950s, early 1960s that made it on Not A Few Cars.
>
> Never Ever hinted that PRCo was up (down??) there with
>Rolls Royce and your inference of such indicates that you didn't
>completely read my post or are ignoring what I wrote ---- I
>detailed the second and recent bankruptcy, the undies who were bleeding
>off money, the vote to make a public transit authority in 1954, etc. and
>asked If EVEN Us TrolleyCar Fans would pour money into such a
>company, knowing it was doomed. But In Spite of all this, PRCo
>still did the aforementioned paint scheme, renewed track Very Late In
>Its History, and kept the cars in quite reasonable condition.
>
> You want to see junky Totally Neglected PCCs then look
>to San Francisco in the late 1960s to 1982 when PCC service ended.
>*The__People's__Railway* pg.204 and I quote::::::: """Not until
>1980 was there even the beginning of an effort by Muni management to
>institute a rational, comprehensive preventive maintenance
>program.""" ALL that Muni ever did *In__Its__Entire__History*
>was apply Band-Aids when equipment malfunctioned -- NOthing
>More! But until late 1960s the equipment didn't look *too bad*
>-- but probably Very Little Paint until the 1970s when a variety of
>schemes were tried. It was Widely KNOWN and observed by operators
>that equipment turned in for bad brakes would have the passenger bell
>cords tested by shop crews, transfer stand was repositioned, and doors
>were cycled then the Red Not In Service sign was rolled to a service
>sign and the equipment was sent Right Back Out Without Ever Shifting the
>car to another track.
>
> Personally Had this problem with 1113 where I had a Total
>Dynamic Failure Multiples of times -- took it in and someone else took
>it right out. Tracked the car for months and got signed statements
>from other operators that the car constantly lost brakes, Had
>testimonies From Passengers seeing operators Literally Stand Up While
>Applying brakes on 1113 and Still Muni Sent It Out!!!!!!!
>CRIMINAL____NEGLECT ---- absolutely No Other Explanation.
>Once taken out of service it sat for many months before anything was
>done to it.
>
> The first Monday of the First Full Week after New Year in
>about 1979--1982, I had an early morning pull out on the J-Church --
>supposed to be 15-cars on the line -- Only 9-cars signed out. Car
>broken down at 30th when I arrived. Had a jam packed car, passed up
>many intending passengers and at 24th Inbound, the car completely died
>without warning and would not restart. That one out of service in
>addition to my follower who had to push me leaving 6-cars on the line
>for the AM Rush. This Was THE RULE on Muni in the latter 1970s
>to the end of PCCs ---- went thru this on a daily basis.
>
> And Filthy Inside ---- That Definitely Continues To
>This Day on Muni on most all equipment -- suspect the PCCs and
>hysterical cars might be in better shape however.
>
> Relative to SF-Muni, PRCo Was Definitely A Rolls Royce
>---- Thank You for bringing it up!!!!!!!
>
>
>JIM
>
>
>
>Harold Geissenheimer wrote:
>
>
>
>>Greetings
>>I competed with Pgh Railways from 1950 to 1964.
>>
>>Our buses ran on the same streets as the cars.
>>
>>With few exceptions, from an accident, etc, the PCC.'s were
>>not maintained very well.
>>
>>I viewed photos at the time of the takeover which confirmed
>>this and later what PAT found when they started rehab.
>>
>>True John Dameron wanted the end of the PCC's
>>But it was before Dameron that PRC stopped some maintenace.
>>
>>Agreed that safety and electrical was never a question. And there was
>>track work.
>>
>>Lets face it...after Tom Fitzgerald, PRC cars were not properly maintained..
>>
>>I used the 38 and 42 on a regular basis and the cars were not clean or
>>attractive.
>>
>>All of our best wishes cant make PRC into a Rolls Royce.
>>
>>Most bus lines had good maintance. Community, Bigi, Oriole, Shafer,
>>Ohio River, Harmony, Penn Transit, Noble Dick, were excellent.
>>The poor looking ran mill buses in the Mon Valley.
>>
>>Harold Geissenheimer
>>
>>James B. Holland wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Harold Geissenheimer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Boris
>>>>There were several stages of the PCC decline.
>>>>
>>>>First Pgh Rys painted few cars and made cheap repairs
>>>>if any.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Difficult to be specific since email is the Fast-Food of
>>>communications, and while some aspects of the above are true, I would
>>>still submit that the basic fleet received pretty decent care. Think
>>>we can chronicle that cars nearing the end of life expectancy received
>>>little to no cosmetic attention but to keep them operating up and down
>>>the hills, they needed electro-mechanical attention.
>>>
>>> The bulk of the PCCs were purchased during receivership
>>>-- known that the Trustees during this period paid good attention to
>>>infrastructure and did not a little track renewal. Overhead Not in
>>>the Los Angeles Perfect category, but Definitely Much Better than most
>>>systems I have seen.
>>>
>>> Not long after receivership / bankruptcy ended in the early
>>>1950s, talk of a public agency became common. On 1954.12.05 (A
>>>Cold Day in Pgh, if Not That Other Place!)::::::: ""The county
>>>commissioners made public proposed legislation, drafted by a
>>>seven-member citizens' committee, for creation of a county-wide public
>>>transportation authority to acquire and consolidate bus and trolley
>>>lines. The legislation required approval of voters in a referendum
>>>scheduled for primary election of 1956."""---[Pgh.,pg.502 - Stefan
>>>Lorant.] So the wheels of @#$%&*^ were in progress and it took
>>>another 10-years before such became reality.
>>>
>>> But even as of 1960, equipment was still in decent looking
>>>condition, overhead was good, track on prw was rough but even some
>>>street trackage was replaced in the very early 1960s by PRCo. It was
>>>still possible to open the cars up on prw and let them roll!
>>>
>>> The 1200s were nearing end of life as ({[pat]}) took over
>>>and may have looked shabby but Do Not Remember Holes to put my hands
>>>thru on any of the bodies. None of these cars were acquired by
>>>({[pat]}) OR were retired shortly thereafter if they were. So How
>>>Much Money would Any One Of Us have spent on a system about to be
>>>condemned if we sat in the President's seat???????
>>>
>>> THE Real DownHill Slide came after ({[pat]}) took
>>>over because, in spite of *Stated__Intentions* to keep trolleycars
>>>rolling, the authority was Hades--Bent on getting rid of trolleycars
>>>and modernizing the city Known For Operating the largest rolling Trolley
>>>Car Museum in the country -- Didn't Not Dameron say this himself --
>>>We Have Had this discussion right here before!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Second after 1964 under PAAC some cars painted grey
>>>>with very little else. PAAC was going to abandon every thing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> So the Leaders of PAAC were *Liars* ----
>>>*Please__Note* that it is the Individual (Authority in this case)
>>>himself that calls himself a Liar when actions do not coincide with
>>>statements ---- others just observe the label the individual /
>>>authority gives himself.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Third. Start of the Early Action program. First 1700's, then 1600's
>>>>New mod paint styles after 1970. Bi Centenial car 1776 was first
>>>>1600..
>>>>
>>>>Fourth. Continuation by PAT after Ken and I left.
>>>>Included the stupid steamboat car
>>>>
>>>>Five. 4000's, some new, some rebuilt.
>>>>
>>>>All of the work done under the Early Actionprogram was first
>>>>class. Included two 1600's with LRV fronts.. Much credit to Ken Hssong
>>>>and Phil Castelano.
>>>>
>>>>Harold Geissenheimer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Pittsburgh-railways
mailing list