[PRCo] Re: comparison with Cleveland
James B. Holland
PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com
Mon Mar 28 16:49:02 EST 2005
John Swindler wrote:
> Wasn't there a reorganization around 1950? What underliners
> still existed within Pittsburgh Railways (II) corporate structure by
> late 1950s/early 1960s???
>
> Just wondering.
>
> John
First Off -- if we need a comparison to Cleveland, Detroit, Any other
property -- go to Dave's -- http://206.103.49.193/index.html -- we
don't need special emails here to see that.
From what I have already posted, here is what Ed had to say in 2002
(more below -- and PLEASE check the archives to verify that I didn't
alter anything:)
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward H. Lybarger" <twg at pulsenet.com <mailto:twg at pulsenet.com>>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
<mailto:pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>>
Sent: Friday, 29 March, 2002 8:44 AM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: PRC PCC scuffs
During WW II PRCo was still painting cars on about a 4-year cycle.
Maintenance was far better than we think...they had cash: near record
passenger loads and the protection of the Bankruptcy Court (no bond
interest to pay out) meant (relatively) good times. It was after the
final iteration of PRCo emerged in late 1950 that the real money crunch
started. But the worst trolley maintenance of all was John Dameron's.
Ed
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
NONE (underlier after 1950 reorganization) as far as I know -- but
what you are *apparently* hinting at is the decrepit condition of PRCo
by 1960 Which Is Not True if you look at the photos -- we have
been through this before! There were basket cases of bad
*cosmetic* equipment, but it was not the rule. It is a Given that
PRCo body *appearance* left much to be desired; It is also a Given
that PRCo Safety Standards were considerably higher than on other
properties -- And This Has Been Discussed Here Before (And *I*
personally am on record here in San Francisco and now on this email list
claiming that San Francisco Municipal Railway PCC maintenance in the
latter 1970s to end was *Criminal__Neglect.) Now which do you
consider more important? The public at large goes for cosmetics
-- The__Hollywood__Approach if you will -- is this the camp into
which we fall???????
Lettuce look at 1950s:
01.>-- PRCo absolutely hated by politicians and this was personified
in the person of Anne_X._Alpern
02.>-- Had been many attempts by city politicians to undermine PRCo
and do it in.
03.>-- It was 1955 when the formation of PAAC was approved by public vote.
04.>-- For the vote for PAAC to take place, much discussion went on
for Years before this.
05.>-- Thus the handwriting was on the wall that the end was near.
06.>-- How Would You Spend PRCo Money Knowing That PRCo Demise Was
Just__Around__The__Corner???
07.>-- Answer to #06: Sparingly.
08.>-- Others have pointed out that PRCo did track renewal along
5th(?) Forbes(?) in the very late 1950s, maybe even early 1960s, so
this is *evidence* that PRCo did not shirk responsibilities.
09.>-- It was THE Very late 1950s, early 1960s when I did the most
active railfanning and it was STILL POSSIBLE to get the PCCs up To
TOP SPEED and I personally experienced this on Not A Few Occasions in
the early 1960s -- can't do that with unsafe equipment.
10.>-- Over and Over and Over and Over when museums go to refurbish
equipment, Coast To Coast, the complaint is that so much bondo was
used that it is a wonder the car didn't just collapse. So what
*appears* nice on other properties is just what we have already
mentioned -- pure *cosmetics* and little to nothing of substance.
11.>-- PRCo had to go to court to get fair value for what was taken
over by ({[paac.]})
As I have already mentioned, I wrote a treatise like this before but
cannot find it -- when I find it, I'll resend it. PRCo cosmetics
left much to be desired, but it Was NOT gross negligence which seems
to be claimed here. Rail maintenance by ({[pat]}) on the other
hand was considerably worse than that of PRCo in ALL categories --
INTENTIONALLY worse.
John Swindler wrote:
> But Ed Tennyson also had some caustic comments about Charlie Palmer.
>
> John
And????????????? Get 100 different people together and we can have
1,000 different comments about Mr.Palmer. Where is the substance
to support these claims (see more below???????)
GIVEN:
IMPERFECT___WORLD -- ALL VERY FAR FROM PERFECT.
ALL VERY FAR FROM PERFECT.
PRCo cosmetic body appearance fell far short of what it could have been,
but it was not utterly gross as has been claimed here. Think about
this: everyone at PRCo in the 1950s was from the Greater Pittsburgh
Area ---- A Very Visible and Public representation of the
area ---- and as such, PRCo was just a cross section of ALL the
people of the Greater Pittsburgh Area AND representative of the
character of the People of the Greater Pittsburgh Area -- doesn't
speak so highly of the people in this regard, does it? PRCo is
just a cross section of ALL the people of the Greater Pittsburgh
Area. Scruffy place, it was!
Harold:
01.>-- You have been bitterly caustic toward Mr.Palmer on several
occasions.
02.>-- Your language most recently leaves much to be desired.
03.>-- You Yourself say your comments are Emotional when they should
be Objective.
04.>-- Your style in begging not to be disliked indicates that You
Yourself have concerns about what you are writing.
05.>-- Much of your writing lacks substance to support your claims
-- NO Meat, NO Milk, NO Water ---- Just soda which tastes
sweet, goes down smoothly, but which ALL nutritians recognize is Very
Bad For Us.
I recognize that you, Harold, are disappointed and even frustrated with
what PRCo could have done better -- but in the overall scheme of
things, the cosmetics are hardly important when balanced against safety
and other concerns.
But I shall also say that because of the above points you discredit what
you say against PRCo and give me reason to doubt your other assessments
as well. Please note that I am not saying this behind your back as
some are prone to do.
The GOOD.......
The BAD.......
The UGLY:::::::
Scruffy__Pittsburgh__Railways__Company__(PRCo).......
Non--Exhaustive Listing Follows:::::::
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb005.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb006.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb008.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb009.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb010.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb011.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb012.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb013.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb017.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/ehpb018.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt106.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt113.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt114.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt115.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt116.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt117.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt127.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt128.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt130.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt135.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt137.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt138.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt139.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt140.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt141.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt142.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt143.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt144.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt147.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt148.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt155.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt156.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt157.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt041.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt046.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt047.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt048.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt614.htm -- just months after
({[pat]}) takeover and still in decent shape.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt621.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/pitt628.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp001.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp002.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp054.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp055.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp056.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp057.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp058.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp059.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp062.htm -- here's a bad one - PRCo
didn't keep equipment much over 20-years and this one ready for retirement.
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp063.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp064.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp065.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp069.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp070.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp073.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp074.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp075.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp076.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp077.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp079.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp080.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp082.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp083.htm -- in storage for repair!
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp084.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp085.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp087.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp092.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp093.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp094.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp095.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp096.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp099.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp100.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp102.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp103.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp106.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp111.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp112.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp114.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp115.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp118.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp120.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp121.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp124.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/jfp126.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp001.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp002.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp004.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp006.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp007.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp008.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp009.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp010.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp016.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp017.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp019.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp020.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp023.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp029.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp030.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp031.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp032.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp033.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp034.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp037.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp038.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp039.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp042.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp043.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp044.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp045.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp046.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp047.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp048.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp049.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp053.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp054.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp059.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp061.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp062.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp063.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp068.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp069.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp070.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp071.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp072.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp073.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp074.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp075.htm
http://206.103.49.193/pitts/htm/bvp076.htm
--
Jim__Holland
I__Like__Ike.......And__PCCs!!
down with pantographs ---- UP___WITH___TROLLEYPOLES!!!!!!!
More information about the Pittsburgh-railways
mailing list