[PRCo] Safety_--&--_Interurban Accidents (fwd)

[prcopcc at p-r-co.com]

> DF Cramer writes:  
> 
> The railways companies did promote safety and presented awards to
> their crew members on a regular basis.  Many power companies still
> carry on the tradition.  
> 
> 
> DF Cramer   Teacher-Trombonist-Historian-Conductor  
> 
> www.geocities.com/armconband
.
.
.
.
Disclaimer: - Imperfect world whether we talk about individuals or groups of 
same - i.e., comnpanies.       When ethics are sacrificed safety might be 
one area that suffers.
.
.
However  --  from discussions here on this list and regardless of other 
alleged faults, PRCo Most Definitely seemed Committed To Safety.       For 
some time I have wanted to go through the email Notes to make a list of 
safety items but haven't.       Here are some from memory  (not at home so 
don't have access to my emails:::)
.
.
Outer edge of prw trestles had 18" high barrier to prevent derailed cars 
from going over the side - believe that double track prw trestles had one 
down the center as well to prevent a derailed car from fouling the other 
direction.       Look at photos from WP or Most Other systems and little 
more than a 2X4 is strung along the outer edge of the ties on trestles.      
True, donut know of any cars derailing and going over the side of a bridge 
but  DO  know  (from PRMA calendar photo)  about a broken axle on a 
low-floor that happened on North Side Streets - And Was Repaired On 
Location.       What if that broken axle happened on a trestle?
.
.
PRCo had a plethora of derail switches on the whole system that mostly 
disappeared with PCCs - the ones that remained until Near The End are the 
two at South Hills Jct and the one on Iten Street.
Fineview had derails - but that is an Uphill route!!       True, but the 
sprung derails prevented a car from rolling backwards into disaster!
The derails are shown on an ERA map of 1946-1949.
The 49 line had at least three derails but these could not be sprung since 
the single track was bidirectional.       They would prevent runaways in 
both directions!
Now someone will tell about the runaway in the tunnel after  ({[pat]})  
removed the derail at SHJ!!!
.
.
PRCo used raised guardrails on both rails of a sharp turn.       What many 
people don't realize is that each truck on rail equipment acts like a two 
axle vehicle where the back axle does not want to follow in the same path as 
the front axle on a turn - evidence of this is in how shiny the guards are 
on both rails of a turn and where wear is heavy the surface of the rail will 
have two wear marks, one for the front and the other for the real wheel on a 
truck.
PRCo, Boston and a few others used raised guards on both turns.       It  
MUST  be noted, however, that Not A Few systems used raised guards Only on 
the inside rail of a turn, Not Both Rails - double raised guards increases 
friction.
So double raised guards on turns is Not Really The Issue but something that 
I have noted is that PRCo extended the raised guards  *-About One Truck 
Length Into The Tangent-*  apparently to allow the truck to stabilize before 
removing the guards.       Minor detail, but apparently founded for safety 
reasons.
.
.
Safety Stops require a full stop at very oddball locations to the casual 
observer that seem a hindrance to efficient operation schedule wise.
.
Trestles:::::::
Full Stop before entering McKinley Park trestle on Overbrook in both 
directions.       Remember a full stop requirement northbound at 
Reflectorville but not southbound.
No such requirement at Warrington, but double track trestles are not always 
exempt from such requirements:::::::
Inbound at the Cape May curved trestle  (is that the right name?)  on the 
42-Dormont was required stop - double track but that was a downgrade - Not A 
Required stop outbound.
Can't list all trestles.
Some RR crossings require full stop  AND  open front doors while crossing 
same.
Required stops where TrolleyCar lines cross that are otherwise free from 
traffic markers/signals.
.
.
Sand usage - found to break contact for signal circuits so using sand on 
interurbans was prohibited unless a dire emergency.       Interesting that 
the prototype suffers from this not unlike model trolleycars and 
railroads!!!       Signal circuits are low voltage  (36-50-volts)  in rails.
The Head-On Interurban accident is reportedly because of sand being dumped 
which broke ground  (some claime that 600-ground was broken as well.)       
Several of the PRCo 1700-series PCC Interurbans had brushes mounted in the 
track brake to sweep the rails clean to prevent such problems.       A 
mellow yellow light was located outside the front window up high near the 
front doors which, when lit, indicated the brushes were down for sweeping.   
A typical Switch Junction Box used in homes was mounted on the dash of the 
car to activate the brushes - use not needed in the tunnel and loop 
downtown.
*-Some-*  have claimed that Only the PCCs suffered from this sand problem 
because they were so light and because they did not have wheel tread brake 
shoes.       The brake shoes helped to keep the wheels clean.       But the 
two interurbans that collided were pre-PCC And Had Brake Shoes!
.
.
Thre are Not A Few other examples of PRCo attention to safety.       PRCo 
went well beyond what other systems did for safety reasons, maybe even to an 
extreme, but it is always said it is Better To Err on The Side Of Safety.    
PRCo was a Top Notch Company where Safety Is Concerned.
.
.
.
.
Jim__Holland
.
I....Like....IKE__---__And....PCCs!
.
down...with...pantographs.......
.
UP___WITH___TROLLEYPOLES!!!