[PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???

[Edward H. Lybarger]

Not for me easy to understand.

It's been years since I looked at the COs in any detail.  They got damp in
the flood and all I did on their return was make sure they were dry!
They're still upstairs in a carton somewhere.

-----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 3:59 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???


You don't say that, Ed :-) Neither I am an electrical engineer, but the
basic principles are easy to understand when you have spent some time in
books and beneath the cars.

Have you any clue how far are the COs detailed?

B

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward H. Lybarger" <trams at adelphia.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 9:52 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???


> 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>