[PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???

[Edward H. Lybarger]

I'll have to take a look at that CO when I can dig it out.  Will be away all
next week, though.

I'm the wrong guy to ask about technicalities!  I'm the business person, not
the engineer!

-----Original Message-----
From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
[mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org]On Behalf Of Boris
Cefer
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 2:32 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???


It would be interesting to know what electric equipment manufacturer was
intended for 1775-1799 as interurbans. GE??????

If the 1600s were not intended for interurban purposes, why were they (and
Westinghouse 1700s) equipped for higher speeds?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward H. Lybarger" <trams at adelphia.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 6:55 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???


> No.  There had been experimental trucks on the property for several years,
> but no cars were actually ordered for interurban service until the 1700s.
> 1775-1799 were originally to have been the interurbans; this was changed
at
> some point to the lower numbers.  The 1600s, except for 1613-14, were
> retrofitted about the time the 1700s came.  We have that construction
order
> somewhere, along with those for the car orders.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org]On Behalf Of Boris
> Cefer
> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 11:03 AM
> To: PRCo
> Subject: [PRCo] Interurban PCCs ???
>
>
> Several wiring diagrams say that PCCs 1601 to 1617 (and possibly also the
> Queen Mary) were capable of higher balancing speed than all previous
series.
> Cars 1618 to 1674 arrived with standard field shunting and were rewired
> later, in 1947.
> Does exist any evidence that PRCo ordered the first 17 1600 series cars
for
> interurban service?
> B
>
>
>
>