[PRCo] Re: Retrievers and catchers
Phillip Clark Campbell
pcc_sr at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 10 00:04:32 EDT 2009
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Edward H. Lybarger
> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 4:10:42 PM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Bent Pole
> >
> > The retrievers on the museum's Red Arrow cars prior to 1941 are quite flat.
> > By then, Earll may have been the only game in town(?), and 5/14/24 have the
> > same model as 1711 does. Maybe OB built the flat model. I'll have to look
> > one of these days after I get back in town on April 11.
> >
> >
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 7:24:43 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Retrievers and catchers
>
> Mr.Lybarger;
>
>
> Pre-streamlined retrievers were a variety of shapes, some quite flat. More
> later.
>
> Yes; Earll retrievers are used on 1711 (original equipment, replaced with
> catcher, retriever installed again at PTM) as well as Red Arrow St.Louis and
> Brill cars.
>
> I am attaching photos of 1700 and 1720 by the same photographer taken in 1965;
> 1700 has a catcher while 1720 retains its retriever. Size difference can be
> noted in these 2-photos.
>
> Also included is an Earll ad showing the old and streamlined retrievers; size
> can't be compared here necessarily as we don't know when the photo for the
> 1907 retriever was taken.
>
> Below are the 'old style' retrievers found on:
> 3700-3714
> 3800-3814
> 3750-3769
>
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp069.htm
>
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp067.htm
>
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp052.htm
>
> These old style were initially installed on 1613 and 1614::
>
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp046.htm
Earll and Ohio Brass (OB) and probably not a few others produced catchers and
retrievers in the 1940s; Earll and OB lasted for another several decades.
At the end of this email are URLs for three images:
1--A photo montage of OB catchers and retrievers.
The top machine is a 'Catcher' Type-A which simply stops the upward movement of
a dewired trolley pole.
Type-B is a 'Retriever' which stops the upward movement and pulls the errant pole
down to prevent slamming against overhead. They look similar but the 'Retriever' is
noticeably larger. This is available with 2 different retrieving springs; one for rope
tension of less than 35-pounds and one for more.
Note that the base for both the Catcher and Retriever are the same; an additional base
has set screws to prevent rattling.
The Type-A Catcher (or similar from another supplier) above would be on all
Jones cars. The Type-B Retriever would be on the Brill and St.L Interurbans and
the 3750s when new; some 3750s could be changed to catchers later.
When PCCs 1613 and 1614 were first converted for Interurban service they
both sported OB 'type' retrievers which were later changed to Earll. The Mr.Vigrass
photo at Dave's website shows 1613 (or -14) at County Home equipped with an OB
doesn't it.
The Type-D 'Retriever' is a 'Streamlined' machine requiring a whole to be cut
into the body of the trolley; the retrieving spring is enclosed in the protrusion
on this Retriever. This 'could' give the appearance of being smaller when installed
but the trained eye would note the 'bulk.' This requires a totally different base
for mouting to the car.
2--Another URL shows the OB streamlined 'Catcher' for streetcars; I believe
PRCo used catchers from a variety of companies on its PCCs, probably even
Earll.
3--The last URL shows the Earll 'Retriever'which is self-resetting; it is larger than
any item above. In Pittsburgh, 1700-1724 were shipped with Earll Retrievers and the
1601-Interurbans were so retrofitted. Beginning with 1716 in 1958, the
PCC Interurbans were equipped with catchers as the Earll 'Retrievers' failed;
this was not completed until the late 1960s with 1721 being among the last.
The streamlined Red Arrow Brills and St.L cars used the Earll retrievers; I
don't know about the other equipment.
Phil
> Here is a catcher on a DE Jones car:
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp086.htm
> Note how much smaller it is than the retrievers on the old cars.
>
> Cars 3750-3769 'may' have had the retrievers replaced with catchers over time.
> Many were still used as trippers on the Interurbans but they apparently were not
> limited to these routes.
>
> By 1948 'apparently,' 1613 and 1614 as well as 1615-1619 and 1644-1648
> were outfitted with Earll retrievers. 1700-1724 were delivered with Earlls as
> mentioned.
> The PTM publication shows photos of 1700 when delivered, front and back, and the
> Earll is clearly visible; is it PTM Pictorial?
>
> Car 1613 had its retriever removed and a standard catcher installed above the
> windows some time soon after the 1953 cutback of the interurbans. Starting
> with 1716 in 1958 retrievers on the PCC interurbans failed and were replaced
> with standard catchers; 1721 was 'reportedly' the last interurban to sport a
> retriever in the late 1960s.
>
> If a pole dewires and a catcher stops the upward movement, all that is necessary
> is for the operator to hold the rope, pull the pole down slightly to release
> tension in the catcher. This allows the centifugal crescent lever to be spring reset
> and the pole can be placed back on the overhead.
>
> Retrievers require the operator to ratchet out the rope all the which rewinds
> the retrieving spring. PRC had at least 32-pounds pressure on the pole at a nominal
> wire height of 18-feet. I could only guess that the retrieving spring fully
> wound would need to have over 40-pounds pressure to retrieve properly.
> Thus the danger to ops. On the old retrievers it was necessary to press a resetting
> lever once the retrieving spring was fully rewound -- one hand holding the rope
> under 40+pounds pressure while the other hand resets. A slight slip could pull the
> one hand into the retriever. Earll's were self-setting thus 'possibly' eliminating
> danger -- just let go of the rope if the retrieving spring pulls or reactivates.
> This is always a danger.
>
> Ohio Brass did make a streamlined retriever with the retrieving spring on the
> back side of the spindle; this required a large hole to be cut into the vehicle to
> accommodate it. When I find time I will scan this and include it.
>
>
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Edward H. Lybarger
> > > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > > Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 5:42:30 AM
> > > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Bent Pole
> > >
> > > Interesting...I was not aware that the retrievers on 1700-1724 had
> > > been replaced through the years. But then again, I was not paying
> > > attention to things like that in that era. 1711 at PTM is equipped
> > > with a retriever, as are PST cars, and we teach the device separately
> > > since it can endanger one's fingers if one is careless.
> > >
> > > Ed
> > >
> > -----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, March 29, 2009 6:14 PM
> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Bent Pole
> >
> > Mr.Lybarger;
> >
> >
> > It is difficult enough to find photos of trolleys other than doors let alone
> > the back end isn't it. Then it has to be the back of an interurban. Good
> > Grief.
> >
> > Here is one in the list files that shows the back of a 16-series Interurban
> > converted to double ender by Pat; this is the standard catcher:
> > http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/1780-rear-OB_SmithfieldC
> > arson_1974_JBHolland.jpg
> >
> > I shall try to attach a photo of 1702 in gray; this shows the standard
> > 'catcher,'
> > not a retriever. Also attached - hopefully - is a photo of 1706 with a bent
> > pole that looks like a carbon copy of the pole in the photo supplied by
> > Mr.Josephson.
> >
> > The 'retrievers' used on the PRC PCCs were made by Earll; they are markedly
> > larger than streamlined 'catchers' used on PCCs also produced by Earll, Ohio
> > Brass, and a couple others. Earll 'retrievers' were markedly round and
> > bulbous on the end appearing to use a uniform radius. 'Catchers' were
> > typically flat or modestly rounded on the end.
> >
> > Both retrievers and catchers had a base so the machine could easily be
> > removed -- lift the retaining pin, rotate the machine, then lift out;
> > these bases were sized for each and were not interchangeable. On the
> > 17-series interurbans it was easy to remove the retriever base to install
> > the same for a catcher; the end below the rear windows was perfectly
> > vertical. The back of the 16-series interurbans was an 11-some degree
> > slant; the base was mounted on 3-pedestals to be vertical.
> > When converted to catchers by PRC the catcher base was either bolted or
> > welded to the retriever base on the 16s. Pat apparently mounted the base
> > directly to the car body upon rebuild.
> >
> > During testing for Interurban service, 1613 and 1614 originally sported
> > OB-type retrievers mounted cirectly in the center below the windows:
> > http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp046.htm
> >
> > Presumably when the other 16s were converted for interurban service, 1613
> > and 1614 then received Earlls mounted toward the right side. 1613 certainly
> > has an interesting history doesn't it. Following the cutbacks of the
> > interurbans in 1953, 1613 had its B3 trucks removed and replaced with B2s
> > and the city catcher was installed 'above' the windows yet it retained the
> > air horn, pilot, and roof light for interurban service. Under Pat the roof
> > light along with pilot were removed, the latter replaced with a lifeguard.
> > 1613 received a new roof light upon overhaul; I believe it retained the
> > lifeguard.
> >
> > Even the Jones cars were occasionally outfitted with streamline catchers
> > used on PCCs:
> > http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp035.htm
> >
> > http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp046.htm
> >
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----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: Saturday, March 28, 2009 6:38 PM
> > > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Bent Pole
> > >
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----
> > >
> > > > From: BobDietrich
> > > > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > > > Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 3:32:37 PM
> > > > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Bent Pole
> > > >
> > > > Here is a dumb guess! The spring tension on trolley poles often
> > > > causes the poles to bow. Could it be that this is simply bowing of
> > > > the pole, it would bow more in the center than toward the ends. Or
> > > > could it be weakened there from so much bowing and appears to be
> > > > starting
> > > to bend?
> > > >
> > > > OR could the retriever yanked it down so hard a couple of times that
> > > > it
> > > bent?
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Mr.Dietrich;
> > >
> > > This is not a dumb guess is it; this is information I intended to
> > > include before.
> > > The tension of the springs and the resistance of the overhead causes a
> > > natural 'bow' in the pole which amplifies with time. Simply for the
> > > sake of discussion let's call it a 'convex bow.' Your description is very
> > good.
> > >
> > > Let's use deductive reasoning to apply the above to backing maneuvers.
> > > The pole wants to stand on end but the overhead resists; this could
> > > force a kink in the pole like 1702 supplied by Mr. Josephson:
> > > http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/pat1702.jpg
> > > The pole may not dewire in such cases.
> > >
> > > We associate backing with the 42-Dormont. Most every yard had much
> > > backing maneuvers didn't they. In South Hills after the rush hour the
> > > cars pulled onto tracks 3-6 facing south; shopmen wyed them south of
> > > the buildings, brought them to the ladder track, then backed them onto
> > > tracks 1-6 facing north. In the summer overhead is soft allowing the
> > > pole to rise more against the overhead in backing maneuvers increasing
> > > the risk of kinking the poles. This would be quite prevalent on
> > > tangent wire at spans; PRC contact wire is light.
> > >
> > > In addition to South Hills, Craft was primarily backup maneuvers to
> > > spot cars properly; so was Keating as was Glenwood and Ingram.
> > >
> > > In the photo supplied by Mr.Josephson, 1702 has a trolley 'catcher,'
> > > not a 'retriever.'
> > > We tend to use these terms interchangeably don't we but they are
> > > distinctly different machines. A 'catcher' has a spring simply to
> > > keep the rope taut; a crescent lever on the back of the rope spindle
> > > is activated by centrifugal force to engage teeth around the perimeter
> > > which stops the rope from moving out and stops the upward movement of
> > > the pole. A 'retriever' has all this but also has an additional
> > > spring to pull the pole down which is activated when the crescent
> > > lever deploys. The PRC interurbans, both conventional and PCC cars, used
> > 'retrievers;' city cars used 'catchers.'
> > > 1716 was the first to lose its 'retriever' in 1958; as 'retrievers'
> > > failed they were replaced with 'catchers.' 1721 is the last car to
> > > use a 'retriever' into the latter 1960s.
> > >
> > > A sudden and instantaneous stopping of the upward movement of the pole
> > > could cause the pole to develop a 'convex kink' ala 1702 equipped with
> > > a 'catcher.' Even more damage to the pole, and car, is possible if a
> > > retriever pulls the pole to the roof; this is not common, but possible.
> > >
> > > >> ----- Original Message ----
> > > >> From: Bill Robb
> > > >>
> > > >> Trolley poles get bent when cars dewire at high speed and the pole
> > > >> strikes any bracket arms in the poles path before the car comes to
> > > >> a
> > > stop.
> > >
> > > Relative to the photo of 1702, bracket arms do not exist but the pole
> > > would strike span wires on dewirement. Let's use deductive reasoning
> > > again. The pole dewires, moves upward (remember, while tubular, the
> > > pole - the whole pole - is a mass in motion,) and strikes a span.
> > > The part of the pole between the span and the wheel - mass in motion -
> > > continues an upward movement with a potential 'concave kink' as a
> > > result. The the 'most likely kink' as a result of dewirement, failed
> > > catcher or one without time to activate, then striking a span is in the
> > opposite direction of that on 1702.
> > >
> > > >> I remember seeing a picture (perhaps in Trains) of a Niagara St.
> > > >> Catharines and Toronto interurban that dewired and bent the pole
> > > >> out of
> > > shape.
> > > >> Bill
> > >
> > > Pg.375 of Interurban Era by William Middleton in the chapter entitled:
> > > 'Wrecks and other mishaps.' The photo is by Middleton himself. On
> > > pg.342 is another photo of the very same car, 620, by Middleton;
> > > 'presumably' both pictures were taken on the same day as Middleton
> > > chased the car with his auto.
> > >
> > > There were extenuating circumstances to this dewirement weren't there:
> > > In the photo on pg.342 please note the distinctly bowed/arced trolley
> > rope.
> > > It is revealed that a high cross wind was present when the pole
> > > dewired, this from the photo caption pg.375.
> > >
> > > We need to do a little more deductive reasoning don't we. Trolleycars
> > > are 'generally'
> > > 11' to 14' high; contact wire is 18' to 20' above the rail. That
> > > leaves a 4' to 9' gap between trolley base and contact wire. How much
> > > further does a dewired pole travel before the 'retriever' activates?
> > > A couple feet which leaves a gap of 6' to 11'. The 'retriever' is
> > > designed to prevent pulling the pole to the roof. It would seem that the
> > maximum retrieval would be 6'
> > > or less; remember that this is a wound spring which unwinds and loses
> > > strength in the process.
> > >
> > > Now let's apply this to 620 - bowed trolley rope, strong crosswind.
> > > Pole dewires; it must move considerably before straightening the bowed
> > > rope or before causing enough centrifugal force at the 'retriever' for
> > activation.
> > > This means much more rope needs to be retrieved to pull the pole clear
> > > of the overhead and the pole probably hit the bracket arms before this
> > > happened; after all the car was moving quite fast.
> > >
> > > There are limitations to 'retrievers.' The pneumatic 'retrievers' on
> > > Pacific Electric brought the pole down to the roof but they had to
> > > rise to a pre determined level first; if there are many cross spans
> > > then the rise is canceled and the pole can be damaged. Not every
> > dewirement causes damage.
>
http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/1702_Catcher.jpg
>
>
>
>
http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/1700_GrantLiberty_GWidemark.jpg
>
>
http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/1720_SHJ_GWidemark.jpg
>
>
http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/Earll-Ad.jpg
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 116k (119349 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/Catcher-Retriever_OB_A-B-D.jpg
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 68k (69917 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/Catcher_OB_C-Streamline.jpg
-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: image/jpeg
-- Size: 71k (72850 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/Earll.jpg
More information about the Pittsburgh-railways
mailing list