[PRCo] Re: One More Thing

[Phillip Clark Campbell]

----- Original Message ----

> From: Fred Schneider <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 7:00:04 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: One More Thing
> 
> Perhaps you would like to explain to me what the War
> Production Board action with respect to an order of
> cars delivered in 1944 had to do with the 1700s five
> years later, particularly after an intervening order
> of 100 cars?  I'm looking at the word "thus" in your note.
> 
> The 1600s were actually comprised of one car as an
> all-electric and 99 air-cars, so, Phil, you cannot in
> sincerity claim that is 100 identical cars either.


Mr.Schneider:


I am quoting myself here aren't I:

"Pittsburgh ordered all its PCCs in 100-car lots..." (with the notable exception of #100 which I distinctly mentioned)  and the 'operative word here' is 'ordered' isn't it - not 'thus'

100
1000--1099
1100--1199
1200--1299
1400--1499
1500--1599  (War production board reduced this
__________to 1500--1564  BUT  PRC 'did order
__________100' 15s, didn't they.
1600--1699  --  this was the order wasn't it and they did get this in car numbers didn't they.

Since we 'know' that PRC ordered its PCCs in 100 car lots we can 'thus' conclude that the 17s were ordered as 100 cars as well  --
1700--1799.  This is historical fact as Mr.Josephson point out isn't it.

I 'never' said anything about identical cars did I.  But to take this a step further, if the '1600s' are not identical cars  (which is true in spite of the original order for 1600s being a 100-car-order for air-electrics)  then the 1700s aren't identical either are they.  They are identically All-Electric but with distinctly different parts, hardware, and even appearance on the first 25 relative to the last 75 (25+75=100.)  Even the public recognized the 1700-series PCC Interurbans were different.  I have noted in the archives that some refer to the 16s as 1600 and 1601s and I like this distinction and follow it myself, but it is and was clearly a 100-car order from the get-go.

To nitpick this further  -  none of the orders is identical since 75% is Westinghouse and 25% GE.  I am sure we can find other areas of difference within car lots as well; those with more time can list these can't they.

Is this something personal Mr.Schneider where you take such exception to my posts?  This is not the first time is it.  You are obviously a 'very intelligent person' and I find it difficult to believe that you miss the 'very obvious.'  I absolutely do not know it all and I make some statements as questions in search of better / more correct information;  this is where I expect comments contrary to what I stated and where they are 'most welcome.'  But that is not the case here is it.  You often seem to answer a question that is not asked and 'thus' never answer the original question - or you make comments around a question without actually answering it.  Reading the archives I found this rather amusing (and 'good entertainment' is needed for the laborious project of reading archives isn't it.)



Phil




> >> ----- Original Message ----

> >> From: Ken & Tracie 
> >> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 8:42:23 AM
> >> Subject: [PRCo] One More Thing
> >>
> >> To the person who just e-mailed me privately to tell me
> >>1774 was  the last 1700 built and there were no
> >>GE 1700s numbered 1775-1799,


> > On Jul 27, 2008, at 1:53 AM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:

> > Pittsburgh ordered all its PCCs in 100-car lots
> > didn't they except for #100.  The WW2 board
> > reduced the order for 1500s to 65-cars thus
> > the 17s were ordered and delivered as 1700--1799
> > with the first 25 designed and built for
> > Interurban service.
> >
> >
> > Phil