[PRCo] Re: Interurban PCCs ???

[James B. Holland]

Wonder about other PCC cities using shunting for greater speed.       
Shaker, Boston, IT, PE, could definitely benefit from this.       Gotta 
collect more schematics, Boris!!


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.
>


Jim__Holland


I__Like__Ike.......And__PCCs!!

down with pantographs ---- UP___WITH___TROLLEYPOLES!!!!!!!