[PRCo] Re: I Meant "Wye"

[Ken & Tracie]

I posted a photo of ex-16 1797 in the subway, on Route 52. It was from Peter 
Ehrlich's collection.

I believe you are correct about 1672, though I am not sure how often it was 
run after the late 1970s. As I recall, it was very rough....but maybe I'm 
thinking of 1640.

I know 1613 was the last to be rebuilt under the "old" program, not Early 
Action, but the follow up program.

I seem to recall sources stating ninety cars were part of Early Action, but 
you mentioned only seventy. So maybe what I read was a source which didn't 
distinguish between Early Action and the subsequent program.

Harold G. told me the Pittsburgh cars received new sheet metal. I did notice 
the body work was much better than what I saw in Boston.

K.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Swindler" <j_swindler at hotmail.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 8:56 AM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: I Meant "Wye"


>
>
> Wasn't 1672 a car that was never put through the overhaul program and 
> scapped in mid-1980s still in PRC colors?
>
> The cost escalated near the end due to Carter era inflation and 
> deteriorating condition of cars available for rebuilding.  Those with less 
> exposure to salt - such as the interurban 16s - were early candidates for 
> the rebuilding program.
>
> At least PAT was honest with the cost accounting, which is more then can 
> be said for Boston.  The PAT rebuilding cost was around $25-30,000 per car 
> at the same time Boston was consuming $300,000 per car for PCC rebuild. 
> Let's just say never trust an in-house overhaul program to be honest with 
> the cost accounting in todays environment involving your federal tax 
> dollars.
>
> Without checking the state electric vehicle inspection sticker records. 
> wasn't there a period in mid-1980s that a few ex. 16s were kept in service 
> for route 49 (now 52)???
>
> John
>
>
>> From: ktjosephson at embarqmail.com> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> 
>> Subject: [PRCo] I Meant "Wye"> Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:36:50 -0700> > 
>> No loop at Dormont. It was a wye.> Sorry about that. Also, am thinking a 
>> couple of 1600s may have been running > in 1986-87, renumbered as 1700s, 
>> of course. ;-)> > Also, the two "flat front" 1600s I know of were 1779 
>> and 1781, not 1976. I > believe at least one, if not both, were 1600 
>> interurbans:> > http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/pitt385.htm> > 1781 
>> was damaged and sitting on the former Route 40 right of way when I > 
>> photgraphed it during December, 1976. You can see it was one of the cars 
>>  > which was tried out as a double ender. I was surprised to find 1669 
>> still in > Pittsburgh Railways color at that late date. By the time I 
>> returned in 1979, > former 1613 was redone as 1799, in Pittsburgh 
>> Railways red and white. I do > not know if any other 1600s lasted in 
>> Pittsburgh Railways colors during the > entire three years. I know!
>  1713 was repainted to Pittsburgh Railways colors > before being repainted 
> "T" white, black and gold.> > Was there a third "flat front" car 
> renumbered as 1976? Or was that something > incorrect I read somewhere? 
> Probably just my failing memory.> > > > K. > > > -- Attached file removed 
> by Ecartis and put at URL below --> -- Type: image/jpeg> -- Size: 66k 
> (68072 bytes)> -- URL : 
> http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/02-pat1779.jpg> > > --  
> Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --> -- Type: 
> image/jpeg> -- Size: 55k (56414 bytes)> -- URL : 
> http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/02-pat1781.jpg> > >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.
> http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_072008
>