[PRCo] Re: Routes that Could Have Been Retained

[Boris Cefer]

I can speak only about Czech Republic and its capital Praha.
Praha abandoned its trolley bus system in the early 70s and even thought
there were several projects suggesting a return of the trolley buses, it did
not happen.
As for the streetcars, we all know the results of the low prices of oil
products, particularly in the late 50s and 60s. This was a period of
bustitution, but it was not so prominent in Praha. It took place rather in
several small cities. There was no considerable reduction of the lines or
the streetcar fleet in Praha, but rather the old equipment was beeing
replaced with new Tatra T3 streetcars. Construction of subway and its
opening (the first, C route) in 1974 pushed all the remaining two axle
streetcars to retirement and also some portion of streetcar lines in the
downtown (in some cases only short downtown sections) and on suburbs was
abandoned approximately in this period.
Even thought there are 3 subway routes that gradually grow, several new
streetcar lines have been built since the subway opening. Today the fleet of
streetcars in Praha counts roughly 300 vehicles, practically all being of
the PCC type. The old Tatra T3 cars built in the late 60s or early 70s have
been undergoing an extensive modernization program including substitution of
a new chopper control (the original 55 hp DC motors are retained) for the
original accelerator propulsion.

Boris

----- Original Message -----
From: <mtoytrain at bellsouth.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:56 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Routes that Could Have Been Retained


> Boris, Fred and Ed
>
> You European travelers, it has been a number of years since traveling all
around Euroope, both East and West, what is the current status of streetcar
or trolley lines in the various European capitals?
> that was a thrill for me, no matter where I went and that was to ride a
street car!
>
> Jerry Matsick
> >
> > From: Matt Barry <mrb190+ at pitt.edu>
> > Date: 2005/10/07 Fri PM 03:52:47 EDT
> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Routes that Could Have Been Retained
> >
> > Yes!
> > Boris Cefer wrote:
> >
> > >Everything should have been retained!
> > >
> > >Boris
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Matt Barry" <mrb190+ at pitt.edu>
> > >To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> > >Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 8:21 PM
> > >Subject: [PRCo] Routes that Could Have Been Retained
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Looking at this photograph,
> > >>http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/pitt245.htm  I recalled what a
> > >>pleasant ride it was heading out to the Highland Park Zoo from East
> > >>Liberty, after a transfer from an outbound 88 car.
> > >>
> > >>I realize that the Oakland portions of the line, Fifth and Forbes are
> > >>now mostly one-way from Downtown to Oakland, but a solution would have
> > >>been using 88 Frankstown trackage to East Liberty, then to Negley Ave,
> > >>and on to the Highland Park terminus.   Penn Avenue is still
relatively
> > >>Penn Avenue, as it was before the conversions in 1967.  OK, for awhile
> > >>there was a huge building parked on top of Penn in East Liberty, but
it
> > >>had an underpass for buses, then ultimately all transportation once
the
> > >>idea of a pedestrian mall failed.  And Negley and the Highland Park
area
> > >>still has the same two-way streets and one-way streets the trolleys
used.
> > >>
> > >>Why am I thinking about this at all?     Tourists.     While I was in
> > >>New Orleans this past May, I realized that a lot of the folks riding
the
> > >>St. Charles (in particular) and the newer Canal Street lines, were
> > >>
> > >>
> > >tourists.
> > >
> > >
> > >>Another line I thought would have made a decent tourist one was 39
> > >>Brookline.   And, of course, the grand tourist line of all, the
Fineview.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>