[PRCo] Re: PRC History

Mon May 26 14:48:21 EDT 2008

Concerning 35 and 36, Fred, they did not remain unused all those years.  35 was a West End route in early days.

And the numbers were not cast in concrete on a particular route.  9 migrated from a Perrysville short turn to the Charles St. shuttle.  98 migrated from Penn-Larimer to Glassport.  52 migrated from Carson St. to Bon Air (or was that 51 that migrated?)  65 migrated from 64 short turn to Lincoln Place.

I suspect the city routes got the two digit route numbers early.  The shuttles came later - sometimes very much later.

Somewhere I have Ollie Miller's list of PRC route numbers over the years.  

John

> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: [PRCo] Re: PRC History> Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:19:26 -0400> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > Let me play good cop, bad cop Phil, on the off chance that the word > "division" is a foreign language to you.> > Division is something you do in mathematics when you split a number > by another number.> > In railroad parlance, a division is a group of lines. For example > the Philadelphia Division of the Pennsylvania Railroad was everything > from Paoli westward to BANKS interlocking tower north of Enola, and > from (I think) Norristown north to Reading and Wilkes-Barre. Of > course it included many yards and engine terminals. (Later the PRR > changed to Regions.)> > In Pittsburgh Railways terminology, a division was synonymous with > those lines operating out of a particular car house, i.e. Division 1 > consisted of the lines running from Car House #1 while Division 13 > were lines running from Car House #13. But if they moved a line > from Car House 7 to Car House 4, they didn't always change the route > number which further complicates the story.> > We might find that the division numbers are equivalent to seniority > list numbers or crew assignment list numbers and that a line keeping > the same number if it changed car houses might have only meant that > the car crews continued to work out of the previous station. But > that's a whole 'nuther issue and one that isn't covered by the route > cards. I'm not going there.> > The route numbers were administrative in nature and were not > something the public was given. The destination numbers were > assigned supposedly for the "convenience of the passengers". > However, my father, who came from Marietta, Ohio via Cleveland to go > to college in Pittsburgh, found the PRC destination signs > bewildering. Cleveland destination signs told where the car was > going. Pittsburgh signs didn't tell him much of anything. So if > you were to have fed him bullshit that the destination numbers were > assigned to make it easier for the passengers, he would have figured > some politician was telling him another lie. Those destination > numbers were assigned very simply by starting with numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 > and 5 at Millvale Car House and then working around the city in a > counter clockwise direction until you got to 99. Yeah, right, so > how did 97, 98 and 99 get in before 93, 94, 95 and 96? Ask, > Pittsburgh Railways, I haven't a clue? And there is another > mystery. How did 35 and 36 remain unused all those years and > suddenly in 1953 become assigned to Library and Drake (in clockwise > instead of counter clockwise order) right before 37 Castle Shannon?> > Ed said that the route numbers were done because the passengers were > having trouble with the colored (coloured?) signs on the cars. I > might add that colored lights/signs on cars are also for the > convenience of passengers. Many cities used colored lights or signs > to enable immigrants, who did not speak English, to find their way > home. West Penn used color-coded signs. United Railways in > Baltimore numbered cars for routes and put colored glass in the > clerestory windows for routes, changing the numbers and glass every > time they reassigned a car to a new carbarn. Boston still color > codes routes today. I guess changing from colors to numbers simply > fits into the category of people think you are helping them if you > just make changes and tell them the changes are good for them! You > can put brighter lights in the factory this year and tell them that > is good. Five years from now you can put 40 watt bulbs in the > factory and tell them that will save their eyes from glare and that > is good.> > Go ahead and grin. I am.> > > > On May 26, 2008, at 11:43 AM, Edward H. Lybarger wrote:> > > I thought I had done that when I said that the interurban lines > > operated out> > of Divisions 12 and 13...the first digit or two of the route number > > was the> > division from which it operated.> >> > The two-digit destination numbers came about in 1914 when PRCo > > figured out> > that the average person wasn't going to interpret the colored > > marker signs> > on top of the cars and translate them into destinations or route > > numbers.> > I'm guessing there was some not-so-gentle pressure from the city > > and the> > press, as well.> >> > -----Original Message-----> > From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org> > [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of > > Phillip> > Clark Campbell> > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:30 AM> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: PRC History> >> > Mr.Lybarger!> >> >> > Below you wrote: "In the earlier years, it hadn't become the calcified> > railroad mindset that allowed change only under duress." This is the> > 'concrete' to which I referred didn't I. Nothing new under the sun > > is there> > so calcification probably happened to PRC - just when.> >> > I recognize that PRC had 'book-keeping' route numbers in the 3-or-4- > > digits> > but used only 2-digits on the cars themselves didn't they. Can you > > state a> > purpose for the 3-4-digit variety?> >> > Someone mentioned something about assumptions didn't they. That is > > all they> > are - not unlike postulations that are expressed while looking for > > facts /> > truth; nothing implied that it is truth is there.> >> >> >> > Phil> >> >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----> > From: Edward H. Lybarger <trams2 at comcast.net>> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 9:00:35 PM> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: PRC History> >> > There was never any concrete. But there were railfans who liked to > > think> > that the system as it was about 1940 should be the gold standard. The> > change after that was of course shrinkage, but the fans cried every > > time a> > route was lost. Much whining and caterwauling occurred between > > 1951 and> > 1971, by which time the system took essentially its present > > dimensions.> >> > You are reading something into my route vs destination comments > > that is not> > there. They were absolutely arbitrary. All the PRCo routes had > > numbers.> > The interurbans never had two-digit destination numbers, however. > > They had> > four-digit route numbers, because they operated out of Divisions 12 > > and 13.> > I think you actually need to study the route cards like Fred, John > > and I> > have done to even begin to comprehend what the relationships were > > between> > the route numbers and the destination numbers.> >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message-----> > From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org> > [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of > > Phillip> > Clark Campbell> > Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 3:44 PM> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> > Subject: [PRCo] PRC History> >> >> > Mr.Lybarger!> >> > We could say that the only 'constant' is 'change' couldn't we. > > This is very> > true everywhere today inside and outside the railway companies > > isn't it.> > Outsiders notice it most; people living through the change don't > > notice it> > as much until they reflect do they. Just look at the city Of Pgh > > itself> > over the years / decades -- goodness! From your studies have you > > found a> > time frame where the mindset of PRC became set in concrete? I > > would guess> > that this is after the railway was essentially formed and > > stabilized. The> > consolidation of hundreds into PRC would see a tremendous amount of> > restructuring for a couple decades. Once auto competition became > > keen the> > railway would 'probably not' realize much growth but rather > > adjustment to> > reflect needs; this might be when the concrete sets.> >> > This distinction may have come later than mentioned below but it is > > now> > generally recognized that Interurbans used Destination signs and > > city lines> > used Route Signs. Destination signs were just that - the town to > > which the> > Interurban traveled and usually lacked letter / number preface. > > City routes> > used letter / number preface to a name of a location / dominant > > street /> > etc. There are exceptions - Johnstown didn't use letters / numbers > > and> > neither did Boston in the past - could be others.> >> >> >> > Phil> >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----> >> From: Edward H. Lybarger <trams2 at comcast.net>> >> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> >> Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 7:16:18 AM> >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 97> >> >>> A point that has been eluding us all in these discussions is that > >>> until> > 1938, the numbers we came to know as route numbers were officially> > "destination numbers." The route numbers were the three-digit > > numbers.> >> >>> The other thread that can't ever be forgotten is how much things > >>> changed> > in a fairly quick time frame. In the earlier years, it hadn't > > become the> > calcified railroad mindset that allowed change only under duress.> >> >>> >> -----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 25, 2008 1:00 AM> >> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org> >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 97> >>> >>> >> Maybe because very early 98 wasn't Glassport-Wilmerding, and it is > >> the> >> railfans on this fantrip that were correct.> >>> >> So what listing do you have for 97, Fred???> >>> >> John> >>> >>> From: fwschneider at comcast.net> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 97> >>> Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 16:29:49 -0400> >>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org So, Boris, what is your point> >>> by enclosing was is obviously a fantrip rollsign?> >>> During the PCC era 98 was Glassport - Pirl Street. Very early 98 was> >>> also Glassport Wilmerding.> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > 
_________________________________________________________________
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