[PRCo] Re: SE DE

[Edward H. Lybarger]

West Penn had three city loops before they built the glamorous terminals of
the late 1920s.  One was in Uniontown, where there was a severe congestion
problem.  The 1913 terminal was a "through track" arrangement that allowed
cars to operate single-ended.  Another was the Main-Otterman-Pennsylvania
loop in Greensburg, and the third was in McKeesport.  There was no need at
the ends of those lines, as stated, because of long headways and generally
ample turnaround times.

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
[mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of John
Swindler
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 2:32 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE

 
The point about West Penn also touches on headway issue.  No reason to put
loops in Brownsville, Fairchance, Latrobe, etc., which were used by one line
only on 30 or 60 min. headway.  But opportunity taken to have loops
Greensburg, Connellsville where several lines terminated.  Maybe the thought
was - as long as we are building a terminal, lets put in a loop for ease of
operation.  Just a guess.  They didn't have to put in a loop, but they did.
 
John
 
> Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 15:48:16 -0700> From: pcc_sr at yahoo.com> Subject:
[PRCo] Re: SE DE> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > > ----- Original
Message ----> > From: John Swindler <j_swindler at hotmail.com>> > To:
pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 2:06:44 PM>
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SE DE> > > > > > > > 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 > > station. 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> > > Mr.Swindler;> > > That brings
Boston to mind doesn't it. The!
 y bought the Dallas DE PCCs and they eventually were used in SE fashion;
believe one trolley pole was removed as well. SF had DE PCCs which were
single-ended with double controls kept for special backup maneuvers only -
unused doors were sealed; Muni city owned since inception. Even WP was quite
SE 'operation' with DE equipment; Connellsville and Greensburg both had
loops in terminals so trips between the two rarely changed ends. Believe
Mr.Schneider pointed this out before about the 700s being used not unlike SE
cars. Obviously Trafford, Latrobe, Fairchance, Brownsville, Martin etc. ends
were stub and required a change but they only operated every 30-minutes or
less didn't they, not 3-minutes!> > The North American PCC fleet is
essentially SE; Dallas-25, IT-08, PE-30, & SF-10+ the big exceptions for new
equipment - well under 2% by any count. Some cities had to add wyes / loops
didn't they.> > > Phil> > > > > >
_________________________________________________________________
Give to a good cause with every e-mail. Join the i'm Initiative from
Microsoft.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Join/Default.aspx?souce=EML_WL_ GoodCause