[PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???

[James B. Holland]

What is a Slip Relay, Please?

Jim



Boris Cefer wrote:

> That's a good idea! Ed, can you hear us? Put on your overalls :-)
>
> At this point we don't know what field shunting equipment the GE  16s 
> and 17s had (unfortunately there is no GE car to look at :-( ), but 
> there is at least evidence that GE 16 had overspeed protection. Now I 
> see in the GE parts catalog that also GE 17s had overspeed relays! 
> This "may" suggest that also GE cars were capable of higher speed.
>
> Several PCC series had also slip relays (both W and GE 14s, 15s and 
> 16s), but it appears that they were removed or at least deactivated.
>
> B
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James B. Holland" <PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com>
> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 9:05 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???
>
>
>> Another clarification. As we are talking about only the 1700--1774 WH 
>> cars, the same holds for the 1600 and 1601--1674 cars -- we do not 
>> know about GE in either series -- correct?
>>
>> Yes, PRCo trackage was rough relative to other properties, but it was 
>> in the early 1960s when I experienced the governor cut-out of power 
>> on both the 17s and 16s -- you could still get those cars rolling 
>> very nicely!
>>
>> Maybe Ed could check those jumpers on 1711 as Hands-On Training for 
>> his Electrical Engineering Degree!!!
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>> Boris Cefer wrote:
>>
>>> But the earlier books appear more detailed.
>>> There are possibly some data in GE wiring diagrams, but I haven't 
>>> seen any except for the early air cars (1000-1200 series), but they 
>>> don't make me happy because the early GE design was terribly 
>>> complicated. GE  parts catalogs do not contain any useful data, 
>>> these are endless lists of parts with some pictures only.
>>>
>>> And an another question is still the Westinghouse 1700s. Their 
>>> equipment allowed to change the balancing speed by means of higher 
>>> field shunting. Only four small jumpers joined to the field shunting 
>>> resistors increased the balancing speed several mph, but we don't 
>>> have any evidence whether PRCo or later PAAC did not dismantle them 
>>> to avoid eventual accidents due extremely high speed over irregular 
>>> track. Memory is sometimes very delusive and some few can tell us 
>>> what the top speed was 50 years back. Our friends at PTM would have 
>>> to check whether the jumpers on 1711 are in place...
>>>
>>> B
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "James B. Holland" <PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com>
>>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>>> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 10:17 PM
>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???
>>>
>>>> Time to speculate why GE was so Resistant to include specific 
>>>> information!! :-)
>>>>
>>>> Various PCCs had been *tested* for interurban service according to 
>>>> that 1952 ERA type dissertation on the PRCo Interurbans as well as 
>>>> the Ira Swett article on Charleroi -- but they weren't specific 
>>>> about the tests and whether or not the PCCs were run beyond Library 
>>>> -- we know that they were used as trippers this far and even the 
>>>> PTM calendar shows an 1100 used for Fair Grounds tripper about 1949 
>>>> or 1950.
>>>
>>>> With 1613 and 1614 converted for interurban Test service within 
>>>> 6-months of delivery (at least for 1613) PRCo was *probably* 
>>>> considering PCCs for interurban service even as the 1601s were 
>>>> ordered. Guess we shall never know For Sure without something 
>>>> turning up in the archives.
>>>