[PRCo] Re: SE DE

[Herb Brannon]

I have always been one who enjoys high productivity but with superior results. It is not necessary, as the old saying goes, "to beat a dead horse." Like Snoopy says, "why do a lot of barking when there's not much to say." With the private transportation companies, and to a minor degree some of today's transit authorities, the driving force behind any decision was and is economics first, safety second (until a government agency mandates compliance), and customer satisfaction third. The single end car gave money saving options not available with a double end fleet back "in the day." Oddly enough, today the double end car gives those money saving options because much less money is spent on roadbed, power distribution, overhead construction, land acquisition, etc. 
   
  I worked for Daniel, Mann, Johnston & Mendenhall (Civil Engineers) in 1979/80 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. In the office where I worked (Safety/Training) we kept a sign with the word KISS, or, Keep It Simple Stupid...........I like that. 
Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com> wrote:
  ----- Original Message ----
> From: Herb Brannon 
---------------------------------

> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 6:07:52 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE
> 
> Congestion on city streets was increasing as were the headways of all streetcar 
> routes in the early 20th Century. A streetcar line, operating with double-end 
> cars and a "tight" (meaning frequency on the line of five minutes or less 
> between vehicles) headway, encountered a problem at the end of the line. The 
> double-end car required trolley poles to be changed, seats to be reversed and 
> operator controls to be moved to the new head end of the car. On a line with a 
> three minute headway cars would be stacked up waiting to reverse and head back 
> the new direction. Most of the time these cars were stacked up in the middle of 
> a busy street. With the turnaround loop there was a smooth and continuous flow 
> of streetcars and blocking of streets was kept to the minimum. A single-end car 
> was also easier to justify the change from a two man to one man crew on routes 
> carrying heavy passenger loads. 

Mr.Brannon;


This is a great contribution to settling the 'why' question isn't it. Even those with model trolleys tire of changing poles very fast and most DE equipment is operated as SE. The labor angle you introduce is highly significant isn't it as this substantially contributes to costs. It is highly obvious that PRC made quite a conscious decision to go SE by the teens with multiples of orders for low-floors. PRC obviously had too much experience with this changing as well as double maintenance on controls. I remember something in the archives that PRC wanted a loop on 42-Dormont didn't they but space available dictated a wye and this was early on. DE equipment was utilized while available but was phased out 'about' 15-years after the first SE low floor orders weren't they. The Great Depression helped with that weeding as well didn't it.


Phil









Greetings From The United States North Coast
   
   
  Time Is The Fire In Which We Fry
  Unknown Author