[PRCo] Re: Pgh__--__San--Fran__Connection
Holland Electric Rwy. Op. H.E.R.O. -- Import SPTC 1.48 Models // James B. Holland
PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com
Sun Apr 23 23:11:02 EDT 2006
Fred Schneider wrote:
..
>I would really like to see evidence that, in 1920, for example, that the stop spacing was a whole lot different, and that the hills we/re a materially different. Pittsburgh had its share of relatively level routes in the river but many of them also climbed out of the valleys. San Francisco may have had more undulations, but whatever went up, also tended to go down. In both cases, the heaviest loads were up hill, out of town, in the evening rush.
>
>Having spent a lot of time in both places, I'm not really convinced.
>
.
Twenty (20) years in Pittsburgh.......
..
Thirty (30) years in San Francisco.......
..
I Am More Firmly Convinced that the topography // stop distances
comparison between SF and Pgh. are valid in playing a very large part in
non success of Pgh low-floor trucks in SF. Please Consider
Below:::::::
..
..
SAN FRANCISCO Both City and County Same Size and more
densely populated than Pittsburgh -- Very FEW places with spaces
between homes in SF -- otherwise, homes here actually touch Side To
Side. Lots basically 25-feet wide and House Is That Wide as
well. Very Dense City Right from the Beginning!
..
Until advent of lrv service, Judah Street had stops Each And
Every Block from Sunset (36th) to end at La Playa, about 49th or
50th. These Are Short Blocks -- 215 feet between intersections
-- 3-car train Boeing lrvs (which were used when pulling out from
barn, Boeing car 71-feets long) FILLED the space between
intersections. Otherwise -- Stops spaced Every Two (02)
Blocks or every 430-feet plus two cross streets O-R Average City
Block In Length (if stops were on even streets inbound, then they were
on odd numbers outbound to equalize the walk for patrons!) Judah
is Uphill 6% to 9% from Ocean Beach to 33rd and then undulates up and
down to 9th, similar grades, a few relatively flat spots.
Downgrade to Irving, Upgrade to Carl, down through tunnel, Down
Market! The L--TARAVAL is Not Dissimilar -- essentially flat
on 46th and loop to Zoo but then ALL Upgrade Inbound to 15th, 6% to
9% grades, Stops Spaced As On Judah!!!!!!!
..
J-Church has strong grades between 17th and 26th - undulating modest
hills elsewhere.
..
K-Ingleside and M-Ocean View have undulating hills.
..
This type of operation would be extremely taxing on the low-floor trucks
from Pgh. ---- we need to remember that this is the First
Development of such motors and the first are the weakest -- as
technology is advanced, power in such small motors is increased.
But they were weak to start with and would be very difficult to get
moving in San Francisco on these hills.
..
..
PITTSBURGH ---- North Side -- 05 08 09 21 lines had steepest
'Grades.' Other lines had 'Hills' of more modest grade
---- East street basically Upgrade Outbound, but modestly so --
connection to Perrysville was steepest. Near North Side and East
Ohio (02, 03, 16, 17, 18, 19) essentially Flat as well as
Downtown! Stops much further spaced outbound of Near North Side
than in San Francisco.
.
---- West End -- Downtown Flat -- hill to Point Bridge -- any
Hills on 23 or 25 don't begin to compare with Grades in SF. Some of
the other lines did have some Hills and Grades but still nothing that
compares to the Consistent Grades in San Francisco.
.
---- South Hills -- Wood and Smithfield almost Flat - Grant has
undulating hills, Not Grades. 6% (actually, 5+++%) TrolleyCar
Tunnel -- Interurbans to Castle Shannon Super Modestly Upgrade --
can be listed as essentially FLAT! 38/39 Very Modestly Upgrade to
Brookline Jct. - decent grade uphill to Brookline, Flat and nice
downhill on prw to loop, but Not Grade! 38 line up and down hill
borderline grades in Dormont and more modestly so in Mt. Lebanon.
42 has uphill bias from Dawn outbound, much flat in Beechview and only
Hill at end of line to wye! 40 line Has Grades! 44 48 49 has
hills and grades intermixed -- even 49 up New Arlington between Carson
and Warrington has stops much further apart than SF -- Much
Further. ALL stops in South Hills Much Further apart than SF.
.
---- East End -- Second Ave. Lines -- Very Modest Grades
downtown, even more modest to Glenwood. 53 line has steep grades
on 18th but further spaced stops. 55 is essentially Flat Line
except for loop in E. Pgh! 56 climbs upgrade to Lincoln Place,
then large roller coaster hill, Stops Very Far Apart, Good downhill run
to McKeesport, essentially flat there. 57 essentially Flat.
58 has good grades at outer end. 65 line has strong grades
climbing out of Homestead but undulates on hills otherwise. --
Forbes -- Modest hills downtown and Very Modest Hills into
Oakland. Good Hill up past Duke -- outer ends of 64 might be
considered Grades. Fifth Avenue Lines not unlike Forbes into
Oakland -- Modest hills. 71, 73, 75, 76 have nothing in the way
of hills // grades as compared to San Francisco -- very similar on
lines in 80s in Pgh. except for 85 which has some good grades. 95
and 96 lines essentially FLAT!
..
..
You And I Only Know SF-Muni TrolleyCars ---- Market Street
Railway (MSR,) which tested the PRCo low-floor trucks, had all been
Trolley Coached or diseasealed by the time you and I saw them. The
article I scanned and posted indicated that the PRCo Low-Floor Trucks
were tested:::
"""on the very hilly Fillmore St. line....... What operated well
on Pittsburgh's HILLS [emphasis added] did not do nearly as well on
San Francisco's GRADES [emphasis Added Again!]""" GRADES are
steeper than HILLS. Another problem was that The Original
Body (1367) used on the PRCo Low-Floor Trucks was Too Heavy.
Continuing the quote (from the scan posted at the website, second
URL below:::) """HOWEVER, THE COMPANY WAS RELUCTANT TO
ABANDON THE LOW FLOOR EXPERIMENT ENTIRELY [emphasis added,] so
later in 1914 it was decided to construct an entirely new car
body... car 301 weighed a mere 17-tons... In 1914 this
weight was considered extremely light for a 47-foot car with 50 seats."""
.
"""AMID NATIONAL FANFARE [emphasis added,] new car 301 entered
service on January 4, 1915 on the company's showpiece line, the
#8-Market route... After a short time it became obvious that the
car with its four small motors was considerably underpowered when
carrying a capacity load (about 150 passengers)"""
..
Think the above greatly dispels any Wasn't Made Here So Can't Be
Good theory!! <VBG!!>
..
Fillmore line on Potrero Hill Very Hilly with combination of short and
long blocks but Very Closely spaced Stops. Fillmore Street itself
is on Grades paralleling Judah and Taraval between Church and Fulton,
then on hills to Broadway, ALL short blocks! A counter Balance
Cable was used between Broadway and Union on Steiner because Fillmore
itself Way Too Steep -- Steiner obviously Very Steep Grade because
counter balance cable used -- one uphill and one downhill trolleycar
attached to help each other out up and down! Trolley Coaches Today
make Passenger Stops IN the Flat intersections on Steiner because
grades too steep for boarding alighting passengers!
..
Loco Yokos claim that some SF lines had regular TrolleyCar grades
steeper than 21-Fineview On Regular Basis! More Than One Line,
and ALL on Market Street Railway Lines, Not Muni.
..
..
SUMMATION: SF TrolleyCars Consistently on Grades -- Pittsburgh
TrolleyCars have Much Flat Area, Many Hills, Few Grades! New
Motors and Low-Floor Trucks apt to be more successful in Pgh. than SF
because of topography and stop spacing distances Differences!
Quotes above give evidence that MSR honestly tried to make the trucks
successful.
..
..
..
ADDED::::::: NEW URLs at end of email:
01.>-- J OB at 20th.
02.>-- 5022 on 22 line Potrero Hill where PRCo Low Floor Trucks were
tried out.
03.>-- 7103 at udder end of 22 line.
04.>-- `7125 outbound on Union at Jones -- former TrolleyCar Line!!!
..
..
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sf045.htm -- Judah @ 17th Inbound --
lrv testing -- John Nevin at controls -- gives an idea of shortness
of blocks and grades Typical Of San Francisco -- stops every one
or two blocks BEFORE lrvs.
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv064.htm
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv062.htm -- 16th and Judah heading
outbound -- typical of Much Of The Line and also Taraval!
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv091.htm
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sf054.htm -- seems to be slightly wide
angle -- strong grades here!
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sf061.htm -- same location as above,
looking other direction -- 1032 herself heading inbound.
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sf072.htm -- two blocks uphill from
previous photos.
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv098.htm -- between 19th and 20th, lrv
heading outbound.
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sf145.htm -- approaching 20th Inbound on
J Church line.
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv006.htm -- grades can be deduced from
fence at house to left!!!!!!!
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv008.htm
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv012.htm -- look down the Grade the car
just climbed!
..
http://206.103.49.193/sf/htm/sfv127.htm
..
..
..
..
>>Fred Schneider wrote:
>>.
>>
>>
>>>One might be lead to suggest that the satisfaction in Pittsburgh and dissatisfaction in San Francisco were subjective in both cases. The answer might lie somewhere between the two following statements:
>>>He designed it here, therefore it is good. They designed it, therefore it is not good.
>>>
>>>James B. Holland wrote:
>>>
>>.
>>That would be a 'Possible' explanation but personally (at this point in time and without further info) feel it is not 'Probable' ---- United RR connection with both properties would tend to make for a favorable application. Attitudes then were to get something as cheaply as possible and Ready To Run and this would fit that bill. Seems the topography // system features of more open running in Pgh. with more gentle hills and extremely closely spaced stops and very steep grades in SF are what limited or negated success here.
>>
>>Through the Untied Railroads (Ed, John, Bill, Don may be able to give us more historical information) there was a connection between these two cities. This was borne out in home built #0301 aka #0401 of the Market Street Railway, predecessor of the Muni, in that it is a Low-Floor design of 1915 that used the same trucks as PRCo Low-Floor cars. Text from White Front Cars of San Francisco indicates that GE motors were used -- PRCo contracted with Westinghouse for the small motors. #0301 was not successful in San Francisco and I think the difference is that SF has Grades and is Very Short Haul with Very Closely spaced stops while PRCo has Hills and some grades but less frequent and less closely spaced stops. Text indicates that the cars were very successful in Pgh.
>>
>>Five URLs below showing photos and text. You may need to adjust the size of the scan to make the text legible -- experimented with this before sending and it is quite satisfactory.
>>
>>
>>Jim__Holland
>>
>>-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/0301%2008%201of5%2019150104.jpg
>>
>>-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/0301%2008%202of5%20MSR%20book.jpg
>>
>>-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/0301%2008%203of5%20MSR%20book.jpg
>>
>>-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/0301%2008%204of5%20MSR%20book.jpg
>>
>>-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/0301%2008%205of5%20MSR%20book.jpg
>>
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 190k (194627 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/0062%20J%20OB%2020th%20SN%20Birney%2019510121.jpg
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 192k (197261 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/5093%2022%20Connecticut%2018%2020040926%20PEhrlich.jpg
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 147k (150649 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/7103%20Train%20Coach%20Steiner%20Broadway%2020050925%20MLee.JPG
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 122k (125350 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/7125%2045%20OB%20Union%20Jones%2020050625%20MLee.JPG
More information about the Pittsburgh-railways
mailing list