[PRCo] Re: SE DE

Sun May 18 14:53:34 EDT 2008

John-Boston Type 5's came late, but the Center Entrance cars, Type 4's and 
Type 3's also double ended. RICH
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Swindler" <j_swindler at hotmail.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 2:26 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE


> Chicago is the one that I was wondering about.  There was generally no 
> reversing anywhere near the loop, but there were some long, heavy 
> north-south routes.  Maybe I can find a old track map from 1920s to see 
> what sort of terminal facilities existed at some of these terminals.
>
> The Dallas PCC cars that went to Boston were to replace Type 5s used as 
> sort-turns near the subway portals.  This is a vague recollection that 
> needs verified.
>
> Maybe another question might be who was buying double end equipment for 
> trunk route service in the 1920s???  Brooklyn had several hundred, and the 
> Boston Type 5s came rather late in the game.  But I can not recall ever 
> seeing any pix of 5-6 cars waiting to reverse ends in a large city??
>
> John
>> Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 12:36:37 -0400> From: allmanr at verizon.net> 
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > just 
>> occurred to me that several huge systems used predominantly double > 
>> enders, costs and lost seating capacity aside:Boston-pre-PCC 100%-despite 
>>  > loops on most lines(and btw, also post-PCC), Chicago(many outer routes 
>>  > lacked loops), Brooklyn, Third Avenue, Baltimore, LARwys; San 
>> Francisco, > Washington DC> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John 
>> Swindler" <j_swindler at hotmail.com>> To: 
>> <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>> Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 9:54 AM> 
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE> > > > But I grew up in Pgh late 50s and early 
>> 60s, Fred, so the gas stations > > sprouting up in the loop terminals is 
>> a remembrance. Things like > > Birmingham and Vera Cruz converting HL 
>> cars to K controller and to single > > end operation involved 'noted in 
>> passing' while reading magazines.> >> > Hard to think who else might have 
>> converted double end car!
> s to single end > > 'Peter Witt' operation other then Birmingham. Didn't 
> Baltimore have > > mostly DE cars until the PCCs, but still had loops at 
> most terminals? And > > most routes 'through-routed' to avoid downtown 
> terminals. And Mitten > > management bought 1500 nearside cars around 
> 1912, but a lot of routes were > > on parallel streets. And didnt' Red 
> Arrow converted 69th St. terminal > > from stub to loop at some point but 
> kept the stub terminals at outer ends?> >> > You could almost claim that 
> all large cities eventually went to single end > > operation, and then 
> note the exceptions. And why would the large cities > > do this but not 
> the Lancasters? As Russ, Herb and I have been claiming: > > headways. And 
> this was a lesson lost on MUNI management by 1970s.> >> > That was the 
> major consideration pushing this issue. Just about > > everything else was 
> secondary.> >> > John> >> >> >> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: 
> [PRCo] Re: SE DE> Date: Sat, 17 > >> May 2008 18!
> :02:51 -0400> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > Not sure > >> ho
> w many places converted DE to SE. Pittsburgh did. > Birmingham might > >> 
> have. I never paid much attention to what was > happening in Vera Cruz. > 
>  >> You're right about management not > caring ... but they do care if it > 
>  >> means you can cut cars out of a > schedule or if cars back up or if > 
>  >> politicians complain because of the > problem. Come on John ... gas > 
>  >> stations were not issues when we > made those changes ... Pittsburgh > 
>  >> leased a lot of loops for gas > stations but that was late in the game 
>  > >> and had nothing to do with the > earlier years. You will also recall 
> how > >> the city reacted to PRC > doing that ... "How dare you make money 
> doing > >> that!!!!!!!"> > On May 17, 2008, at 5:06 PM, John Swindler 
> wrote:> > >> > >> >> > Switch points and frogs needed for stub terminals, 
> but not needed > > >> > for a loop. Although it is nice to have a siding 
> at a loop.>!> > >> > Also, with a loop, if large enough, the center part 
> can be leased > > > > for a gas s!
> tation. Pirl St. comes to mind, but won't swear to it.> >> > > > And 
> management doesn't care if the motorman has to "lug" handles, > > > > 
> farebox and supplies to the other end. They do care if cars back > > up > 
>  > because of scheduled headway and congestion at the terminal.> >> > 
> Didnt' > > Vera Cruz shop double end cars to convert to single end? > > 
> Likewise > > Birmingham?> > John> >> >> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> 
> Subject: [PRCo] > > Re: SE DE> Date: > >> Sat, 17 May 2008 15:03:05 -0400> 
> To: pittsburgh- > > > >> railways at dementia.org> > A lot of reasons for 
> single-end > >> > > equipment:> > 1) you can put more people in more 
> seats. Depending > >> on > > how wide the > center doors are or whether or 
> not there are > >> center > > doors, a single- > end car will seat 9 to 23 
> more people > >> than a > > double-end car. > Therefore you have more 
> happy customers.> > >> > 2) > > Happy customers produce more revenue.> > 
> 3) Seats cost le!> > ss > >> than additional controls, !
> wiring, air brake > piping and hand> >> >> brake rigging.> > 4) Turn a
> round time at the ends of lines using > >> > >> >> single end equipment > 
> is shorter than that required for double- > >> > >> >> end equipment. The 
>  > operator doesn't have to lug the handles, > >> > >> >> money changer, 
> his supplies > and the fare box to the other end of > > >> >> >> the car 
> and flip all those > blankety-blank seats. You can go > >> > >> >> through 
> a loop, fill in the day > card, and be out in 30 seconds. > >> > >> >> The 
> double end car will require > several mi!> > nutes. So single end > >> >> 
> cars on a line might save a car or > two in > > the rush hour and > >> >> 
> that, in today's dollars is $2 million for > an > > articulated or > >> >> 
> about $1 million for a single car.> > 5) Traffic > > congestion favors > 
>  >> >> single end equipment because you can > turn it on > > private > >> 
>  >> property.> > Working against it and in favor of the double- > > end > 
>  >> >> cars you already have:> > 1) loops, either on private property > > 
> or > >> >> around city streets !
> cost > money. Special work is incredibly > > > >> >> costly to fabricate. 
> ("Spec!> > ial > work" is the term used for track > > frogs and switch 
> points. It is > > > usually a manganese steel which is > > much harder and 
> more durable than > > > ordinary carbon-steel.)> > 2) > > If you build the 
> loop on private > > property, the real estate costs > > > money. If there 
> is already a house > > there, it costs money to > > > demolish it, fill in 
> the basement and level > > the property.> > 3) If > > you have a large 
> fleet of undepreciated and not > > fully > amortized > > double-cars, you 
> really don't want to write them off > > and > buy ne!> > w single-end cars 
> if you can you don't have to. You also > > > don't want> > to spend the 
> money shopping those double-end cars to > > > convert them > > into 
> single-end cars if you don't have to because that > > > costs > > money.> 
>  > 4) Stockholders don't like you spending their money on > > > > things 
> you > don't need.> > 5) When I say dou!
> ble-end cars you > > > > already have, remember that > everyone alread
> y had double-end cars. > > > > That is the way the industry > start!> > 
> ed.> > 6) You can also turn > > double-end cars on a spur onto private> > 
> property > but once you have > > the land for a spur, you might as well > 
>  > take > advantage of items i, > > 2, 3 and 4 in the first section.> > And 
>  > > then there is the narrow > > versus wide streets issue.> > Finally 
> there > > is the status quo > > issue. Every business is filled > with 
> people whose > > mentality > > favors "we've always done it that way and > 
> we should > > continue to > > do so" regardless of whether or not it makes 
>  > any sense > > at all.> > > > > On May 17, 2008, at 2:38 PM, Phillip 
> Clark Campbell > > wrote:> > > > > ----- Original Message ----> >> From: 
> John Swindler > > > > <j_swindler at hotmail.co!> > m>> >> To: 
> pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> >> > > Sent: Saturday, > > May 17, 2008 
> 8:34:55 AM> >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE> > > >>> >>> >> > > Ah, Fred,> >> 
> Russ Jackson told us a very valid reason for > > l!
> arge > > cities to go to > >> single end> >> equipment, and Ed Tennyson > 
>  > has > > told us about the 1700 series > >> interurban> >> purchase.> >>> 
>  > > >> > > Russ' stories about MUNI also says a !> > lot about the Third 
> Ave. Ry. > > > >> route> >> structure in Manhattan.> > > >> > 
> Mr.Swindler!> >> > > > ....And those stories are?> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > 
>  >> > _________________________________________________________________> > 
>  > > Change the world with e-mail. Join the i'm Initiative from Microsoft.> 
>  > > > http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Join/Default.aspx? > > > > 
> source=EML_WL_ChangeWorld> >> > >> > 
> _________________________________________________________________> > 
> 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> >> > > >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.
> http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_family_safety_052008
>
>