[PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans

[John Swindler]

The initial service alternated with Donora thru trips - it was recorded in the Monongahela Valley Republican, which is available at state library on microfilm until about 1907.  And yes, we put a copy of streetcar articles in the PTM archives.  This newspaper is also where there is an inference that the original thru cars were PRC 3200-3209 because the cars numbers were usually reported when there was an accident.  Sorry, but further browsing thru the state library microfilm files may have to await retirement.
 
 
 
 
> From: dwightlong at verizon.net
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans
> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 11:28:39 -0400
> 
> Ed
> 
> Agreed! I just did not have the dates in memory. I believe John Baxter's ERA publication on the PRC interurbans listed them, and doubtlessly you have other records of them in the Archives.
> 
> Dwight
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Edward H. Lybarger 
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org 
> Sent: Tuesday, 02 November, 2010 08:39
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans
> 
> 
> Alternating Donora thru trips were a short-lived phenomenon early in the
> 1920s, and have been chronicled here previously. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of Dwight
> Long
> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 1:57 AM
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans
> 
> Phil
> 
> The Roscoe sign on 3769 makes sense as these cars were used in interurban
> tripper service and as I pointed out in years gone by there was some
> Charleroi-Roscoe (Elco) local service. There may even have been in earlier
> years some local service from Riverview to Roscoe, but I do not know
> anything about such.
> 
> I would have to look up the facts on the alternating service to Donora which
> you cite but my offhand impression is that it ceased before the 3800s were
> built. But it would make sense for PRC to include that reading on the
> original signs just in case they wanted or needed to run it again, even if
> it had been discontinued by then.
> 
> As to the temporary Finleyville sign, I have no idea why some Riverview
> trippers used that reading and others more appropriately Riverview. As Ed
> has pointed out, all the single end trippers went all the way to Riverview,
> where they wyed. At some point there may have been double end trippers
> which DID turn at Finleyville--such as in County Fair season--but again I
> have no specific info on such.
> 
> Now if someone can just come up with a 1700 or 1600 interurban with a
> Finleyville sign up----------
> 
> Dwight
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Phillip Clark Campbell
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Monday, 01 November, 2010 22:12
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans
> 
> 
> Mr.Long;
> Here is 1442 with a temporary Finleyville sign:
> 
> http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/1442%2035+%20Finleyville
> %20SHJ%20Pullout%20195xxxxx.jpg
> 
> 
> Roscoe sign on 3769:
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp011.htm
> 
> Donora sign on 3805:
> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp013.htm
> Yes; there was a time when every other car turned at Donora wasn't there.
> Short lived; just a few years at most.
> 
> I have seen others, Mr.Long, but they prove elusive to find don't they.
> One was on a Brill interurban.
> 
> Phil
> Without a 'coast' but not a 'cause.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Mon, November 1, 2010 10:52:54 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans
> 
> Mr.Long,
> The split signs with route and destination for terminal are nice
> in theory but don't work in practice; people see the route but
> not the terminal and then moan about the rwy when forced
> out before their stop. I mentioned this in a previous post. I
> also mentioned the separate route number ala Prc which seems
> to work much better.
> 
> I have seen photos with a Roscoe destination Mr.Long; I shall
> try to find some for you. There may be a PCC photo in the archives
> displaying Finleyville but it is hand drawn for the occasion.
> 
> Phil
> Without a 'coast' but not a 'cause.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Sent: Sun, October 31, 2010 1:06:55 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Roll signs Interurbans
> 
> Fred
> 
> A number of PCC operators had split front destination signs. The one
> (typically) on the left (as one faces the car) had the route name and the
> one on 
> 
> the right had the destination. This was a better system for companies
> with a
> lot of cutbacks and alternate routings. PRC tried to handle these by
> establishing separate route numbers, i.e. 43, 69, 55B, etc. Not nearly as
> elegant a system as split signs!
> 
> And, of course, it did not work on the interurban lines where, prior to
> 1953,
> there were no route numbers, just destinations--and they were not always
> properly displayed!
> 
> Dwight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>