[PRCo] Re: Maintenance standard

[Holland Electric Rwy. Op. H.E.R.O. -- Import SPTC 1.48 Models // James B. Holland]

With the end of PRCo clearly in sight work ethic probably went downhill 
as well.      Little difficult to tell after the fact.
.
Will have to study the photo more closely.       Some wiring looks Very 
Recent.       Which vehicle?
.
Notice spring like clip on left seems to be missing - maybe isn't necessary.
.
.
.
Boris Cefer wrote:
.

>Exactly the aspect I had on mind. Of course, there is relation to financial situation, but there are also obligatory technical rules.     Or not?     PCC car is a complicated electric device, not a horse-team.
>The attachment shows something dangerous, but not a wiring.
>
>B
>
>From: "James B. Holland" <PRCoPCC at P-R-Co.com>
>  
>
>>It seems the  Did--Better  reference from Boris is in equipment and infrastructure maintenance, not related to expansion // survivability.
>>..
>>LATL  certainly qualifies in this category  --  excellent Track, Overhead, Equipment maintenance right up to the end.
>>..
>>San Francisco Muni   NEVER   had preventive maintenance until the advent of the Boeing lrv in the 1980s  (The People's Railway, pg.204, 2nd column.)       But Muni never contended with Winter Snows.       Caught up to them in the 1970s  --  PCCs in horrible condition eletro / mechanically  --  best I would describe it is  Criminal__Neglect.
>>.
>>.
>>.
>>Jim
>>

-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/Wiring.jpg