[PRCo] Re: Anybody Here Know Anything About This?

[Schneider Fred]

This shows all three pictures that I have ever seen of the  
demonstration project.   To the best of my knowledge, the company was  
considering converting the West End to trolley coach.  Again after  
World War II it was addressed when the company drew up plans to  
convert Ingram car house to trackless.

It might have made sense as long as Duquesne Light Company and  
Pittsburgh Railways were the same organization and as long as riding  
held up at war time levels.   But after the company broke apart in  
the bankruptcy (Ed knows the exact date ... I want to say 1950), old  
friends because quasi business enemies. By 1961 or 1962 there was a  
law suit between Pittsburgh Railways and Duquesne Light Company  
because the former was not using as much power as they were supposed  
to use and the latter was billing them a minimum demand charge.  The  
Railways simply didn't have the money to pay for power they were not  
using.   I have no idea how it was resolved.  By 1964 PRC didn't even  
exist.  Not long afterwards my contact (Charlie Schauck retired and  
moved to Youngstown).   Obviously the power company felt they had  
some basis to establish a demand charge because they had facilities  
that had been built to provide a certain amount of energy and they  
wanted to continue to be paid for that equipment.

The problem of running trolley buses was very simple.   The window of  
opportunity in which trolley coaches were profitable was very  
narrow.   A General Electric publication about 1948-1950 suggested  
PCC cars were practical if you could fill up your vehicle every five  
minutes.   That translates into about 20,000 riders per day on a line.

The trolley bus according to GE's numbers, could be successful, if  
you could fill it with passengers every 5 to 8 minutes.   That's  
probably a 13,000 to 20,000 passenger a day range on a line.   The  
Louge report in 1948 shows that none of the West End lines were any  
where near that any longer.

GE went on to suggest that anything west often than 8 minutes apart  
was in the preserve of the diesel bus and if it was used erratically,  
then the gas bus could be preferred.

The demand charge on PRC in 1962 by Duquesne Light was not the only  
example.   Ed Miller has explained to me that Wilkes-Barre Transit  
Corporation ran into the same problem with its electricity supplier  
by about 1954 or there abouts resulting in the immediate conversion  
of all the trackless routes.

I suspect, but have the numbers to prove it, that the reason the  
coaches have lasted so long in San Francisco might have something to  
do with the city of San Francisco owning the Hetch Hetchy generating  
station in the Sierra Nevada mountains.  They have to pay a  
transmission charge to PG&E to get the electricity to the city but  
otherwise it might be relatively cheap hydro electric power.   But in  
their case, the user and the generator of power are the same agency  
and refusing to use it only causes wasted capacity for the your own  
agency.

Seattle?   Vancouver?   That may be both volume issues and an  
environmentally conscious city government.   Philadelphia running TCs  
there strikes me as lunacy but when you don't know how many people  
are on the vehicle, what does it matter.

And Dayton?   How can it be economically sound in a city of 155,000  
people that lost 100,000 residents in the last 40 years?   Well, if  
you believe GDRTA's numbers, the diesel buses are are taking in 12  
cents per mile in fares and costing 95 cents a mile.   The trolleys  
are taking in 82 cents a mile and costing 1.01 a mile to run.    But  
there is no route in the system running more often than every 15 to  
20 minutes and most are 20 to 30 and worse.   By thought is that the  
routes the trolleys are on would still take in 82 cents a mile but  
would only cost 95 cents if you didn't have the trackless overhead.    
But then who figures overhead into government calculations?????    
They probably figure that the copper and substations are free.   And  
if they wear out, Uncle Sam will replace them (and the loans will  
never be paid back).   The flaw in my statement about what the  
trolleys would cost is long term.   When the cost of oil goes back up  
to $4 and $5 a gallon, it is possible that electricity will not go up  
as much.

Enough diatribe for now guys?




On Feb 25, 2009, at 3:45 PM, Joshua Dunfield wrote:

> 2009/2/25 Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>:
>> Believe there was a Twin trolleybus demonstration in downtown  
>> Pittsburgh in the
>> summer of 1936(?)  Believe it pre-dated the arrival of PCC 100 so  
>> it must have
>> been Spring.  It looped Grant, 7th, Smithfield, Liberty to Grant  
>> using the
>> available streetcar wire on all streets with ground strung alongside.
>> Here is one photo at Dave's:
>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/pitt134.htm
>
> Yes, that picture is also on the site Ken linked to:
>
> http://www.trolleybuses.net/earlyops/htm/ 
> usa_h_earlyops_pit_demo_01.htm
>
> There are two more pictures of it there.  The picture linked below is
> of the 700 block of Grant Street, consistent with your description of
> the loop.
>
> http://www.trolleybuses.net/earlyops/htm/ 
> usa_h_earlyops_pit_demo_03.htm
>
> -j.
>
>