[PRCo] Re: MU service on Frankstown

Wed May 14 20:31:06 EDT 2008

Only from S. Aiken to Penn, and that was less then a mile and generally level.  The hilly part of Centre Ave. was (mostly) not shared by other routes.

Likewise, the hilly part of Liberty only had the 86.  

But the hilly part of Penn Ave. had about four routes.  (Butler routes already split off)  That's where the 88 m-u trains would catch up to other cars.

It might help to understand, Fred, if you had operated propane buses from North Park on Western Ave. which also scheduled diesel buses from 77th St. 
John, ex. CTA bus driver

> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: [PRCo] Re: MU service on Frankstown> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 16:06:21 -0400> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > 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> >> > > 
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live SkyDrive lets you share files with faraway friends.
http://www.windowslive.com/skydrive/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_skydrive_052008