[PRCo] Re: SE DE

[Fred Schneider]

Canal had a double scissors crossover just like the one on Carrollton  
today.

On May 18, 2008, at 9:36 AM, John Swindler wrote:

>
>
> Just wanted a clarification for others.  And according to a couple  
> track maps in the book on New Orleans trolleys, it wasn't just a  
> simple scissors crossover at the other end either.    Canal must  
> have been quite an operation.
>
> John, who didn't get to New Orleans until around 1970, but did see  
> two man cars with exact fare.  Now there was a lesson in  
> productivity.  (:>)
>
>
>
>> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE> Date:  
>> Sat, 17 May 2008 17:55:55 -0400> To: pittsburgh- 
>> railways at dementia.org> > I'm talking about the Cemeteries end of  
>> the line.> > On May 17, 2008, at 4:37 PM, John Swindler wrote:> >  
>> >> > Are you implying, Fred, that the Canal cars did not use the  
>> loop at > > the foot of Canal St. in 1958?> >> > ?> >> > John> >>  
>> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE> Date: >  
>> >> Sat, 17 May 2008 16:11:17 -0400> To: pittsburgh- > >>  
>> railways at dementia.org> > New Orleans ran 45 second headways on >  
>> >> Canal in 1958. Don't remember > extreme stacking. Of course  
>> they > >> had two man crews. The conductor > was flipping the  
>> seats while > >> the motorman was changing poles and > dashing to  
>> the other end > >> with his handles.> > On May 17, 2008, at 3:09  
>> PM, Phillip Clark > >> Campbell wrote:> > > ----- Original Message  
>> ----> >> From: Herb > >> Brannon <hrbran at sbcglobal.net>> >> 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.  
>>>> T!> > he> >> 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 min!
>  imum. A > >> > > single-end car> >> was also easier to justify the  
> cha
> nge 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 hig!> > hly  
> obvious that PRC made quite a > > conscious decision to go SE > >  
> by t> > he 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 wer!
>  en't they. > > The > > Great Depression helped with that weeding  
> as well didn't it.> >> >> > > > Phil> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >  
> _________________________________________________________________>  
> > E-mail for the greater good. Join the i’m Initiative from  
> Microsoft.> > http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Join/Default.aspx? 
> source=EML_WL_ > > GreaterGood> >> > >
> _________________________________________________________________
> E-mail for the greater good. Join the i’m Initiative from Microsoft.
> http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Join/Default.aspx?source=EML_WL_  
> GreaterGood
>