[PRCo] PRC Equipment - SE - DE
Phillip Clark Campbell
pcc_sr at yahoo.com
Fri May 9 14:58:57 EDT 2008
Hello Mr.Schneider!
Another way to look at this: Let's consider computers: available in the 1950s but absolutely huge; technology literally took off in 1980s and advances have been mind boggling haven't they. Apply that to transit: by 1850 some form of public transit existed and cables were on the scene; once electrics were developed the technology mushroomed rapidly didn't it.
PRC literally bought-leased hundreds of railway properties so it 'inherited' equipment of an utterly amazing variety from that mushrooming tech ala trolleys. That equipment was PRC in name only. While PRC was formed in 1902 it may have taken years before their influence was felt - by comparison the Pat was set in motion in the middle 1950s but didn't take over until 1964 did they; much planning and 'formative' work was necessary before assumption of actual operations. As mentioned before - early PRC equipment was a real hodge podge. Good PRC business conditions 'apparently' sought standardization rather rapidly or they fortuitously moved into it. DE wood equipment was ordered post-1902 and all were out of service and scrapped by early 1930s; this equipment may have been 'in the works' before PRC was formed. High floor cars were ordered as well. The low-floor trailer was developed; you mentioned how Mr.Jones was successful in twisting arms at
Westinghouse for a motor on trucks with 24" wheels. But once the low-floor looked promising a trend was started that rapidly escalated. The rest is history isn't it.
The High and Low Floors then become the PRC identity - planned, developed, purchased strictly by PRC.
ca 216 low-floor DE;
ca 608 low-floor SE;
70 SE Interurbans - 36s, 37s, 3750s, 38s;
130 SE-high-floor or
808 SE cars of distinct PRC identity - PRC 75% SE. Yes, 33s, 34s, 35s, still existed but in dwindling numbers; this equipment was smaller and less useful and most definitely made redundant with the Depression and even before that.
PRC identity as predominantly SE revenue operator seems quite valid doesn't it.
You don't know San Francisco very well Mr.Schneider do you! Muni is owned by the City but the book says it's the People's Railway doesn't it. The people tell the politicians what to do with the railway not the other way around. I lived there for a couple years in the 1980s and it is something else isn't it. Much nicer place to visit than live as locals are always protesting something aren't they. Yes - politicians did slip some past the public re: Muni didn't they but that made the public all the stronger.
Mr.Swindler mentioned the San Francisco subway turn around; I read that they wanted a loop in the subway -- the scissor crossover and change of ends was a real nightmare with 5-heavy trolley lines wasn't it. The Embarcadero rebuild in the last decade or two was to include a loop but I don't think it was built was it.
It has been observed in the literature that DE equipment is maintenance intensive relative to SE and is not used at least 50% of the time; costs more as well; clumsy operation with frequent headways; takes up much space otherwise available to passengers, esp in modern light rail. Not a matter of right or wrong and not good-better-best but a matter of expediency. Each system has advantages and disadvantages and these need to be weighed against conditions, needs, costs, maintenance, and other items. But SE seems to have the edge in the efficiency department doesn't it.
Many interesting points have been advanced - Nice discussion thank you!
Phil
----- Original Message ----
> From: Fred Schneider <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2008 5:45:20 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 3800 Series LOST
>
> I'm not sure in P. N. Jones' mind or management's mind in general
> when the decision was made to standardize on single end cars. They
> certainly were not convinced by the purchase of the 4000s ad 4100s
> because the 4200s and 4300s were double end. I don't think there was
> any pressure on the property in 1909 or 1911 to make a decision that
> early. It was 1917 before they began massive purchases of single
> end cars so they were at least fifteen years into the company before
> they had made a commitment.
>
> If I had to offer a comment here, it would be that they did it not
> because they wanted to but because the city might have been
> pressuring them. Why do I say this? Because politicians do not
> like to hear complaints from constituents about large maroon (or
> orange) boxes sitting in the middle of streets obstructing traffic.
> Between 1920 and 1930 the number of registered motor vehicles in
> Pennsylvania advanced 200 percent from 500,000 to 1,500,000. I can
> just imagine the screaming in the mayor's office and the city council
> chambers. Can't you? There is a great picture of a Perrysville
> Avenue car in the early 1920s, when the line used double end cars,
> showing a 4200 laying over in the middle of the street in the
> business district just beyond Perrysville and East Streets. Two
> automobiles are trying to squeeze by the damn trolley. What a
> wonderful incentive that was to force the railways to extend the line
> over the existing 10 line to Keating Car House. Whether the revenue
> justified running an empty car an extra mile is not something the
> city cared about, is it?
>
> So I think what I'm saying here is that if we presume that Pittsburgh
> Railways did everything possible "on the cheap." And if you argue
> that point, Ed Lybarger will come down on you wearing his track
> shoes. Then we need to assume that PRC wasn't about to buy real
> estate and tear down houses in order to get the space to build loops
> unless someone was twisting their corporate arm with awesome force.
>
> There were, of course, some routes over which they could run single
> end cars without spending any additional money for loops. The 71
> and 73 lines to Bunkerhill or Highland Park car house could loop
> through the barn. Remember that those ancient low-floor double deck
> 6000s were single-end cars and they worked out of Bunkerhill. The 87
> and 88 lines could run around the block in Wilkinsburg. I would have
> to look when the wye was put in at Wilmerding for 87. The 55 and 64
> lines could run around the block in East Pittsburgh. The Bedford
> line and the Crosstown line, which was through routed with it for a
> while, also didn't need loops. Clearview Loop in Mount Lebanon was
> very early, probably before they even had single-end cars. West View
> and Bellevue were mated from the beginning and did not need loops.
> I think the lower Charles St. line could run around the block from
> the day it opened. While you might think you could have always run
> Route 68 around the block in McKeesport, such an arrangement did not
> occur until December 1922, when it became necessary to make an
> agreement with West Penn Railways to use their tracks to get a
> loop. One by one, loops were built for the other lines.
>
> San Francisco Municipal Railway, and you brought that company into
> the discussion, was a different animal. The city owned it. The
> mayor could ignore the complaints about the trolleys because the city
> owned the trolleys. But in Pittsburgh it paid to fight the railways
> company for political gain and the politicians constantly did it.
>
> Why did they go for so many single end cars in the 1920s? I'm
> wrinkling my brow. Another reason might have something to do with
> the narrow streets. Both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh had incredibly
> narrow streets. I once looked at Charlie Dengler's negatives and
> concluded that the average Pittsburgh PCC had lineal scratches within
> two weeks after delivery from rubbing parked automobiles. Like
> Pittsburgh, "Filthy-delphia" solved the same problem the same way.
> They had 1000 single end Nearside cars and 530 single-end 8000s,
> about 100 double end Hogs with PC control another 100 with K-control
> and about 223 5200s ... A lot of the Nearsides were scrapped by the
> time all the 8000s were there but it is probably safe to assume that
> 1200 single end cars and 300 double end ones in the 1940s.
> Philadelphia had cursedly narrow streets just like Pittsburgh. So
> the solution was the same ... get those bloody green boxes into loops
> and let them take their spot time off the streets. Los Angeles has
> wide streets. San Diego has wide streets. San Francisco has
> relatively wide streets. They can afford to ignore the issues.
>
>
> On May 8, 2008, at 6:03 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:
>
> > Mr.Schneider;
> >
> >
> > Even by your assumptions PRC was essentially an SE operator wasn't
> > it -- 1920s forward or aprox 2/3 of its life. PRC inherited an
> > hodgepodge of equipment, much double ended, but they swiftly moved
> > to mostly SE low-floor equipment as standard -- older inherited
> > equipment was converted to work car service or set aside rather
> > rapidly.
> >
> > Precise dating is not necessary and the fact that a few lines
> > needed loops installed for PCCs is inconsequential when the
> > majority of lines already had loops didn't they. Relative to other
> > properties that were essentially double end who found installing
> > loops for single end PCCs rather daunting -- not unlike San
> > Francisco, San Diego, even Los Angeles, cities in New Jersey and
> > many others -- PRC would be considered an SE city -- not purely
> > but mostly wouldn't it.
> >
> > It is a given among fans of PRC that the DE low-floors came first;
> > 4398 was a late addition to the PERC fleet.
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Fred Schneider
> >> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2008 1:45:32 PM
> >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 3800 Series LOST
> >>
> >> No Sir, the predominant equipment wasn't single-end. That was only
> >> in the later years.
> >>
> >> And by the way, I don't require a Mister just because I've reached
> >> the age of 68.
> >>
> >> Pittsburgh Railways endured from 1902 until 1964.
> >>
> >> From 1902 until 1909 there wasn't a single-end city car on the
> >> property. I'm being careful with semantics because of the 3600
> >> series Kuhlman interurbans.
> >>
> >> From 1953 until 1964 they didn't operate any double-end cars.
> >>
> >> When the ratio shifted from more double-end to more cars with
> >> controls in only one end was something that would require more
> >> research than I have time for or resources available for here. There
> >> also needs to be a distinction made between cars on the fleet and
> >> cars in service. You'll note from the roster that some double end
> >> cars were also rebuilt into single end cars. I'm speaking of both
> >> high floor cars, i.e. some 3500s that were rebuilt to match the 4000s
> >> and 4100s as well as some low floor cars that were rebuilt as single-
> >> end cars.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure when the balance shifted to single-end but probably some
> >> time in the middle 1920s. As I recall, the roster shows 3400s and
> >> 3500s still around in the early 1930s. Low floor cars went in
> >> service on Oakmont - Verona in 1921 but in 1922 the route cars shows
> >> a 3200 derailed on the line. It makes sense that all the 3100s and
> >> 3200s and 3300s and 3400s would have been around in 1922 because you
> >> didn't yet have all of the 4800s yet. They were still running
> >> single-truck cars and open cars in the summer to the parks because
> >> they needed them. The last single-truck open cars were not retired
> >> until 1923.
> >>
> >> I've been converting all the important information on the route cards
> >> to computer based records. There is a lot of drivel on them that
> >> isn't worth keeping. We really don't care that a route was diverted
> >> for a few hours because of a flood or a parade or a breakdown. I'm
> >> only entering the permanent changes and the long term changes. Yes,
> >> when they diverted route 53 off the 10th Street Bridge from 1930
> >> until 1933 to build the new suspension bridge, that I think is long
> >> enough to record. Also in those cards is a whole lot of information
> >> on loops. PRC was building them all through the teens and twenties
> >> and thirties and forties and fifties to accommodate single end high-
> >> floor, low-floor, and PCC cars. It wasn't something that happened
> >> over night.
> >>
> >> For example, route 48 Arlington didn't get a loop until 1947. Route
> >> 78 never did. Route 76 conveniently looped around blocks at both
> >> ends except that the Wood and Tioga (Hamilton Short) loop appears to
> >> have been built about 1915 and the extension to Jane St. loop didn't
> >> take place until 1937. Route 46 Beltzhoover didn't get a loop until
> >> 1940. I'm not sure when 68 started looping in McKeesport ... I'm
> >> not done with one. Route 53 Carrick didn't get the loop at
> >> Brownsville until 1924. Perrysville got single-end cars when
> >> Keating Car House opened in the 1920s. Gives you an idea.
> >>
> >> And now the industry has reverted back to the expense of two control
> >> stands. I am not sure why. My suspicion is that the industry is
> >> dominated by politicians and not by bean counters and it no longer
> >> matters which method costs less.
> >>
> >> Last Saturday night a group of us ... Russ Jackson, John Swindler,
> >> Joe Boscia, myself were sitting on Ed Lybarger's back porch. Herb
> >> Brannon was there too. The discussion was about contemporary
> >> industry practices. Joe worked for New Jersey Transit and is now in
> >> consulting. Russ worked for Louis T. Klauder in rail car design.
> >> After than he did the same thing for SEPTA and was in charge of the
> >> Kawasaki surface cars and the N-5 project (P&W) and then he went back
> >> into corporate consulting ... I don't think he'll ever retire John
> >> heads the senior citizen program for PennDOT. Somehow the
> >> discussion brought up the qualifications of the current SEPTA general
> >> manager: fund raising, political schmoozing, etc., but at no point
> >> was increasing passenger revenue part of the deal. Afterward
> >> someone said we should have recorded it. So now you know why the
> >> cars are now double-end again or you may have an inkling.
> >>
> >> fws3
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On May 8, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:
> >>
> >>> Mr.Schneider!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This is easily recognized isn't it -- NO OOOOPS about it is
> >>> there!!. That still leaves the fact that the predominant equipment
> >>> on PRC was single end doesn't it. The high-floor 4000s, 4700s thru
> >>> 5500s, 3750s, 3700s, 3800s, 3600s all single end. Inherited
> >>> equipment was hodge podge and with the introduction of the low-
> >>> floor it became the standard equipment, predominantly single end.
> >>> This made it very easy for the introduction of PCCs. A backup
> >>> controller doesn't change the operating configuration does it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Phil
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----
> >>>> From: Fred Schneider
> >>>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2008 3:44:37 PM
> >>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 3800 Series LOST
> >>>>
> >>>> OOOOPS! Phil, all of the early low-floor production cars were
> >>>> double end. Note the word production.
> >>>> The first four cars were converted trailers. They were initially
> >>>> single-end but I think they evolved with time into double end cars.
> >>>> The only one that last any length of time was 4423 which became an
> >>>> instruction car and then became a play room for Bob Brown and
> >>>> company
> >>>> in the old Pittsburgh Chapter of the National Railway Historical
> >>>> Society. Most of the NRHS members were drafted during the war and
> >>>> the car shell became a lovely candidate for a war time metal scrap
> >>>> drive. After the war most of those guys created the Pittsburgh
> >>>> Electric Railway Club. I think many years later there was a
> >>>> Pittsburgh NRHS Chapter again but not the same guys. And there
> >>>> really isn't any one I can ask. Note that there are three
> >>>> founding
> >>>> members of PERC still around but all the old guys that were in the
> >>>> prewar NRHS group are pushing up daisies.
> >>>>
> >>>> Then came the 4200s and 4300s. the double end motor cars came
> >>>> between
> >>>> 1914 and 1917. There were also a dozen second hand double-end
> >>>> cars
> >>>> from Beaver Valley Traction Company that PRC acquired in the 1920s
> >>>> and numbered 4400-4411; they were built in 1917 as a tag onto the
> >>>> 4350s.
> >>>>
> >>>> The single end cars were all built starting in 1917 and continuing
> >>>> into 1927.
> >>>>
> >>>> The exception to that rule is that 3556 was the prototype for the
> >>>> 3700-3714 interurbans.
> >>>>
> >>>> The 3750s were equivalent to the multiple unit equipped 5000s,
> >>>> 5100s
> >>>> and 5200s except that they were built for interurban service. When
> >>>> new they had toilets. They also had a higher gear ratio between
> >>>> traction motor pinions and the bull gears on the axles allowing for
> >>>> higher speeds but of course slower acceleration. When the company
> >>>> selectively speeded up certain cars of the 4700-5549 group, I think
> >>>> they also did all the 3750s. Ultimately ten of the 4350s were
> >>>> done,
> >>>> probably for the 99 Glassport line and our 4398 is one of the few
> >>>> high speed double end cars.
> >>>>
> >>>> One thing I noticed when the truck was apart a few weeks ago is
> >>>> that
> >>>> it has helical drive gears. Now that wasn't something that the
> >>>> car
> >>>> got when it was new. I suspect the helical gears were
> >>>> installed as
> >>>> part of the rebuilding when the cars were speeded up to make them a
> >>>> little less noisy. That was done in the early 1930s
> >>>>
> >>>> I put a roster on line perhaps five years ago and I'm putting it on
> >>>> again. But you need Microsoft Word to open it.
> >>>>
> >>>> To make life easier for those who do not have Word, i.e. those who
> >>>> have the home MS Works edition or have Word Perfect, I resaved
> >>>> it as
> >>>> a text file. It isn't formatted into pages ... just a bloody
> >>>> run on
> >>>> document, but you will be able to open it and read it.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
More information about the Pittsburgh-railways
mailing list