[PRCo] Re: Streetcars in D.C.

[robert simpson]

Wonder if they were intended to be "ugly" - or if it was really state-of-the-art for the era in which they were originally built?  They didn't have as efficient insulation at that time.

Bob 
from Krazy Kalifornia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- On Thu, 4/8/10, Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Streetcars in D.C.
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Cc: Milwaukee-electric at dementia.org, Charlesebrown at webtv.net, "SCOTT GREIG" <m1903a1 at sbcglobal.net>, "Rick Murphy" <rpmurphy at charter.net>
> Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 10:01 AM
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> > From: Ken and Tracie <ktjosephson at embarqmail.com>
> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > Cc: Milwaukee-electric at dementia.org;
> Charlesebrown at webtv.net;
> SCOTT GREIG <m1903a1 at sbcglobal.net>;
> Rick Murphy <rpmurphy at charter.net>
> > Sent: Wed, April 7, 2010 5:55:51 PM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Fw: [SFMuniHistory] Streetcars in
> D.C.
> 
> 
> > Fwd: [SFMuniHistory] Streetcars in D.C.
> > ----- Original Message -----=20
> > From: Richard C. DeArmond=20
> > To: prn-list at sfu.ca=20
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 10:24 AM
> > Subject: Fwd: [SFMuniHistory] Streetcars in D.C.
> 
> >  Overhead trolley wire does not have to be
> massive and ugly.
> > (As is in Pittsburgh) It can be almost invisible ...
> 
> 
> 
> >  Alan
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> This is preaching to the choir isn't it.  Isn't it in
> the archives here
> where it is postulated that Pgh. used the excessive
> overhead
> purposely to denigrate transit?  Endless discussion of
> same
> hasn't changed the situation has it.  This does get
> very tedious
> with time.
> 
> 
>  Phil
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 
> 
>