[PRCo] Re: Car 1600

Wed Jul 15 15:13:15 EDT 2009

You are saying it was short term for public exposure.

I did not.

I said it probably floated around the system as people got tired of  
an odd ball.    May have had nothing to do with exposure.   Please  
show me all the dates to support your contention.

On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:21 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:

> Mr.Schneider;
>
> I did not quote you to refute you;  I quoted to confirm.
> I didn't say anything different than what you said.
> You often misrepresent what is written don't you.
>
> The car was 'basically' based at Craft;  she was based
> at other barns 'short term' for public exposure to the
> newtrolleycar.
>
> Good grief!
>
>
>
>  Phil
> Without  a   'coast'   but  not  a   'cause.'
> --  -- --  -- --  --  --  -- --  -- --  -- 
> --  -- --  -- --  --  --  -- --  -- --  -- 
> "The  Bible  is  the  rock  on
> which  this  Republic  rests."
>
> ........Andrew Jackson,
> ........7th President, U.S.A.
>
> http://www.eadshome.com/Andrew%20Jackson.htm
>
> http://home.att.net/~jrhsc/andy.html
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Schneider Fred <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 2:19:43 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Car 1600
>
> You, Philip, are quoting what I was told then to refute what I know
> now.   I explained several days ago that it also worked out of Tunnel
> and Homewood and possibly Herron Hill or Manchester.   The pictures
> Bill Vigrass pictures you have posted serve only to confirm that it
> also was assigned to Tunnel Car House.
>
> Logically, the only routes it would not have worked on were the
> Ingram, Keating or Millvale lines because they were General Electric
> barns.   Their mechanics would have been unfamiliar with maintaining
> a Westinghouse accelerator if it developed a problem.   And even
> then, my perceived rule was broken when it was assigned to route 22
> CROSSTOWN.   That same imaginary rule was waived when 1700 was
> assigned to route 22 before the HB lifeguard was removed and the
> interurban appurtenances were applied in 1949.
>
> If every author waited for the last survivor of the civil war to die
> so that no one could argue with what he wrote," there would no books
> out the civil war to read before the 1970s.   The same applies to
> trolleys.   It isn't always necessary to quote what an author wrote
> 30 years before in a book when more better information has since
> become available.   I do take pride in my work on those two books,
> however, and for the most part they have stood the test of time.
> But like every book, there are flaws in them.
>
> On Jul 14, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:
>
>> Excellent point Mr.McGuire;  the railway is known to show
>> off its equipment to attract riders.
>> Quoting more of the photo caption on pg.172 of the 2nd
>> PCC book:  "The car [1600] was used on any line based at
>> Craft Ave. Car House."  Car 1600 was 'possibly' based at
>> a number of barns for demonstration purposes.  These
>> photos show the car on the 48 and at SHJ:
>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp007.htm
>>
>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp008.htm
>>
>> I have seen the photo of 1600 on the 22 offered on ebay.
>>
>> Here's a couple at Craft:
>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp104.htm
>>
>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp105.htm
>>
>> We know that interurban 1700 was used in demonstration
>> on the 22-Crosstown don't we.  The pilot was replaced with
>> a lifeguard for this demo wasn't it.  This has led some to
>> incorrectly speculate that 1700 was delivered as a city car
>> and converted for interurban use by PRC.
>>
>>
>> Phil
>> Without  a   'coast'   but  not  a   'cause.'
>> --  -- --  -- --  -- 
>> "The  Bible  is  the  rock  on
>> which  this  Republic  rests."
>>
>> ........Andrew Jackson,
>> ........7th President, U.S.A.
>>
>> http://www.eadshome.com/Andrew%20Jackson.htm
>>
>> http://home.att.net/~jrhsc/andy.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Mark McGuire <macmarka at netzero.net>
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 8:23:15 PM
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Car 1600
>>
>> That's why I simply had mine with "CAR HOUSE" on the dest. sign. I
>> suspect PRCo probably wanted to see how it ran on certain routes.
>> More than that, I'd say they may have wanted to show it off. If you
>> look at that Bromley photo, the car looks pretty new. What better
>> route to show off a car than on 22.
>> ---------- Original Message ----------
>> From: Schneider Fred <fwschneider at comcast.net>
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Car 1600
>> Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:24:02 -0400
>>
>> All sorts of places, Ken.  I had my St. Petersburg model painted for
>> 76 Hamilton which matches one of the pictures in the Westinghouse
>> advertising book.   I know it worked out of Homewood in the beginning
>> and it was there at the end ... or it was there for work at the
>> end.   Bromley has a picture of it on 22 CROSSTOWN ... that suggests
>> it was assigned either to Herron Hill or Manchester for a while.
>> I've seen pictures of it at Kennywood on route 68 ... guess it must
>> have been at Craft for a while.   And I've seen pictures of it
>> working on the Sousside.    Suspect it migrated around every time a
>> carbarn foreman got tired of it.
>>
>> Was it a bad car?  Not really.   Not any different from a Johnstown
>> car.   After they quit running the guts were incorporated into new
>> cars in Brussels and those were still around when I rode them in the
>> 1980s.   It is simply that every time you inflict a single oddball
>> vehicle on a repair shop or a motorman, most would rather see you
>> give it to some other shop or motorman.    Human nature.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2009, at 10:05 PM, Ken and Tracie wrote:
>>
>>> So where did one-of-a-kind all electric car 1600 see the most
>>> service? Was
>>> it being serviced or just mothballed when it was destroyed by fire?
>>>
>>> K.
>
>
>
>
>
>