[PRCo] Re: MU service on Frankstown

Wed May 14 16:06:21 EDT 2008

Liberty used Centre.

Was 83 that Erin St. route?

On May 14, 2008, at 4:03 PM, John Swindler wrote:

>
> Route 86 came out Liberty.  It was route 84 Larimer that came out  
> Centre.
>
> There was also a route 83, but I think that was in the Hill  
> District as alternate routing for 85, or perhaps a route 82 short- 
> turn.  It's difficult to keep current with these routings from the  
> 1920s.
>
> There is a pix of mu cars on 82 on the Pittsburgh digital photo  
> website.
>
> I would venture a guess that the acquisition of multiple unit cars  
> to speed up motor-trailer operation on heavy trunk corridors was  
> overtaken by the advent of one-man operation.  By the way, you  
> never asked the question of why there were no 5300s??   It might be  
> the same answer as to why there were no volume purchases of 4400s,  
> 4500s and 4600s.  (the low 4400s that did exist were an  
> afterthought)  Or am I the firt to notice this???
> John
>
>
>> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: [PRCo] Re: MU service on  
>> Frankstown> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:01:11 -0400> To: pittsburgh- 
>> railways at dementia.org> > Route 96 was cut back to 62nd Street loop  
>> on or before January 1, > 1923. It wasn't an issue. Route 94/95  
>> was the only issue by that > time. The route cards do not show an  
>> MU trains on 82 LINCOLN but > that doesn't prove it didn't happen.  
>> There are a lot of things that > were never recorded in route  
>> cards. There is a bogus > publicity picture of one that PTM  
>> published in a magazine but that > picture wasn't even on the 82  
>> line, it was taken near "Wilkinsburg > Junction" on Forbes St. Tom  
>> Phillips believed he saw a relative of > his in the picture who  
>> was the company's treasurer.> > While I am not going to say that  
>> Chick's memory is faulty, all of us > have problems as we age and  
>> a man in his 90s who dozes off is more > likely to have memory  
>> problems than a tuned in 20 year something. > Is it not possible  
>> that he remembe!
>  rs riding or seeing an MU car and > connects that event with the  
> picture PTM (PRMA) published? Of > course you see my cynicism. Jim  
> Henwood trained me well. So did > Ed Lybarger.> > But I have not  
> totally tuned out Chick because there are flaws in the > route  
> cards. They fail over and over and over to note when PAYE > cars  
> were put in service or when low-floor cars were installed. Some >  
> times it was mentioned. Some times it wasn't. So why should them >  
> not forget to record MU service?> > The most convincing argument so  
> far to support MU cars on route 82 is > that the trailer column on  
> the route cards for that line shows no > entry prior to April 27,  
> 1925 and then suddenly we have "trailers" on > Saturdays and  
> Sundays until 1930. Were they trailers or really some > of the, by  
> then, numerous multiple-unit cars? The first entry shows > 14  
> motors and 14 trailers in the rush on April 27, increasing to 17 >  
> and 17 on May 28, 1925, to 18 and 18 on Nov. 23, 1925, to 19 and 19  
> > on!
>   February 8, 1926, to 20 and 20 on Nov. 4, 1926, and finally >  
> peaking
>  at 23 and 23 in the 1926 Christmas rush. Then the number > starts  
> dropping. To quote John, "Good help is so hard to find." > On  
> Saturday morning May 2, 1925, they ran 12 motor cars with 14 >  
> trailers. Huh?????? Two three car trains or one four car train? > I  
> don't really believe it.> > There were other routes on Lincoln too.  
> One of the predecessors of > 86 was on Lincoln and route 86 itself  
> used Centre and Penn at various > times. Remember, it was the  
> predecessor route to 87 Ardmore. > > On May 14, 2008, at 12:25 PM,  
> John Swindler wrote:> > >> > It wasn't Frankstown Ave. that I was  
> considering. It was Penn > > Avenue. The 96 may have already been  
> truncated at 62nd St. > > (remember, it was a downtown route  
> originally) but there was still > > the Bloomfield loop and the  
> Fifth-Shady-Penn cars and also the > > Butler cars. At one time  
> there were seven routes on Penn Ave. So > > replacing a motor- 
> trailer with a m-u train on 88 probably didn't > > help increase  
> overall operation!
>  al speed. The service also had to > > be speeded up on the other  
> routes using Penn.> >> > Chick Siebert remembers riding an mu train  
> on 82 Lincoln. That > > would be an easier route to mu as not much  
> else shared Centre, > > other then a Larimar route.> >> > As for  
> Howard's comment, would not apply in this circumstance. > > Again,  
> making the assumption that PRC management could look into > > the  
> future.> >> > You never mentioned how many cars/trains were  
> assigned to 88 in peak?> >> >> >> From: fwschneider at comcast.net>  
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: MU service on > >> Frankstown> Date: Wed, 14  
> May 2008 10:13:49 -0400> To: pittsburgh- > >>  
> railways at dementia.org> > John:> > My first instinct was to look up  
> > >> the assignments to see how many MU > cars ran. The route card  
> > >> doesn't even show that ... it shows a > timetable that  
> overlaps > >> the MU and non-MU periods. About 3/4ths of > the rush  
> hour cars on > >> 88 pulled trailers and balance were singles ... >  
> probably means > >> that!
>   with MU cars 3/4ths were also MU and balance were > singles. > >> So
> I did look that up.> > In that period, route 87 was using > >>  
> Frankstown Avenue and turning back > at East Liberty and 86 was >  
> >> coming out Liberty and Centre and briefly > using Penn and > >>  
> Frankstown to get to the Shetland loop. There wasn't > a whole lot  
> > >> of impingement on the 88 cars except once you got down > into  
> the > >> Strip District and then I suspect that traffic was  
> probably > so > >> bad that it would not have mattered what cars  
> you had, you would > > >> not have moved f!> > ast.> > Route 86  
> went one-man in 1926. Route 87 Ardmore went one > > man in > 1924.  
> Route 86 was the inner end of the 87 everyone on > > this list >  
> knows. It was a very heavy route and one of the first > > to go  
> one- > man. The MU cars came later. Route 68 McKeesport in > > 1931  
> was one > of the last.> > When we consider that San Francisco > >  
> and Chicago had two-man cars > until 1958 and Philly into the > >  
> 1970s, the Pittsburgh conversions were > phenomenal.> > But then, >  
> > John!
>  , remember our scholarly friend Howard White. He once > came to >  
> > me asking "What percent of corporate decisions are good > ones?"  
> I > > didn't know what he read that morning ... might have been > >  
> > something he saw in the Wall Street Journal. But the answer was,  
> > > > "An incredibly well managed corporation might make 58% of its  
> > > policy > decisions correctly and 42% incorrectly. A company > >  
> cruising for > bankruptcy might make 52% of its decisions properly  
> > > and 48% of them > would be faulty." There was a lot of room in  
> any > > corporate busin!> > ess > environment for stupid decisions.  
> May simply be that the orders> > of > the MU cars were a classic  
> example of "Let not the right hand > > know > what the left hand is  
> doing."> > fws> > On May 14, 2008, at > > 9:30 AM, John Swindler  
> wrote:> > > Hi Fred> >> > Maybe to get rid > > of a high floor car  
> or single truck car from a > > predecessor?> >> > > > The low-floor  
> trailer fleet didn't disappear with delivery of >!
>>>> 5000s. Maybe the higher performance level of mu train not neede
> d, > > > > or could not be used, as would be similar to mixing PCC  
> cars and > > > > low-speed cars on a route. For operational  
> scheduling reasons, > > > > perhaps a motor-trailer operation  
> worked best on 88. As single > > > > cars the 5000s could replace  
> two older cars. Did the 5000s stay > > on > > 88???? There were a  
> lot of routes operating on Penn Ave.> >> > > > Maybe the delivery  
> of 5100s, 5200s, and 3750s was in anticipation > > > > of future  
> plan that did not foresee one-man cars on routes like > > > > 88.  
> This is like asking why did so many cities buy PCC cars > > after >  
> > WWII only to discontinue rail service !> > a few years later.> >>  
> > We keep forgetting that we are looking > > back to this era with  
> 20/20 > > hindsight. We know that there was a > > Great Depression  
> around the > > corner. PRC management didn't. > > Likewise we know  
> how auto > > ownership, suburban development, etc > > occurred.> >>  
> > Just surmising.> >> > John> >> >> From: > > fwschneider at comcast.!
>  net> Subject: [PRCo] MU service on > >> > > Frankstown> Date: Tue,  
> 13 May 2008 22:28:48 -0400> To: pittsburgh- > > > >>  
> railways at dementia.org> > Here is an issue that cries out for > > >  
> >> resolution should anyone want to > read stacks of newspapers.> >  
> > > > >> Why did Pittsburgh Railways install MU cars on route 88 >  
> > FRANKSTOWN > >> > on December 10, 1924 only to eliminate the > >  
> service on April 8, > >> 1925?> > One might suspect that they > >  
> converted the line to one-man > >> operation > so that there would  
> > > no longer be a labor saving by > >> running MU > trains. That >  
> > wasn't the case. While PRC was > >> converting to one-man >  
> service > > all through the period fro!> > m 1926 > >> to 1931,  
> route 88 did not > get one-man cars until > > Feb. 9,> > 1930 on >  
> >> Sundays and October 6, 1930 on > Monday through > > Saturdays.  
> In > >> fact, the platform hours do not drop > > > completely on  
> October 6-11, > >> 1930 rather obviously because they > > >  
> continued to r!
>  un trailers in > >> the rush hours on 88 FRANKSTOWN > > through >  
> Augu
> st 29, 1931 and they > >> needed conductors on !> > > > the motor  
> cars to pass > bell signals from the trailer conductors > > > > to  
> the motormen of the motor > cars.> > So why did they quit > > > >  
> running the MU cars? And why did they buy the > 5100s, 5200s and >  
> > > > 3750s after they quit running the 5000s on FRANKSTOWN?> >  
> Maybe > > > > just reading the Sun Telly or the Press or the Post  
> Gazette on > > > or > > about April 8, 1925 will yield an > > > > >  
> answer..................................... > >> > > >  
> _________________________________________________________________>  
> > > > Get Free (PRODUCT) RED™ Emoticons, Winks and Display Pics.> >  
> > > http://joinred.spaces.live.com? > >  
> ocid=TXT_HMTG_prodredemoticons_052008> >> > >> >  
> _________________________________________________________________>  
> > Windows Live SkyDrive lets you share files with faraway friends.>  
> > http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html? > >  
> ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_052008> >> > >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live SkyDrive lets you share files with faraway friends.
> http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html? 
> ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_052008
>