[PRCo] Re: SE DE

[Fred Schneider]

I know, I was there.

But I was talking about the other end of the line.

On May 18, 2008, at 2:41 PM, Bill Robb wrote:

> Canal had a loop just in front of the ferry terminal and four  
> tracks coming out of the terminal.
> http://davesrailpix.com/norl/htm/no197.htm
> http://davesrailpix.com/norl/htm/no199.htm
> http://davesrailpix.com/norl/htm/no214.htm
> Canal Street trackage, 1955:  http://www-sal.cs.uiuc.edu/~friedman/ 
> canal/CanalTrack-1955.htm
> More loop photos:
> http://www-sal.cs.uiuc.edu/~friedman/canal/Pic329.htm
> http://www-sal.cs.uiuc.edu/~friedman/canal/Pic331.htm
> http://www-sal.cs.uiuc.edu/~friedman/canal/Pic333.htm
> Bill Robb
>
>
> 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
>>
>
>
>
>