[PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question

Fred Schneider fwschneider at comcast.net
Sat Nov 20 10:33:56 EST 2010 

Ah so ... the argument that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.   The 1936 PCC was a lot more stylish than a Barber car, wasn't it!   But the manufacturer of the Barber car touted his product as being very practical.   After accident, anyone who could build a chicken coop could repair that vehicle.   


On Nov 20, 2010, at 10:07 AM, richard allman wrote:

> my preference had less to do w/ presence or absence of standee windows than 
> the graceful shape of the pre-war cars-and the wartime cars, as opposed to 
> the somewhat more sculptured lines of the post-war cars-not that I like one 
> and despise the other, just a mere preference, though I have modeled more of 
> the post-war stuff, more due to availability than anything else!
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Fred Schneider" <fwschneider at comcast.net>
> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>; "richard allman" 
> <allmanr at verizon.net>
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 8:57 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
> 
> 
>> And you were not the only one who didn't like standee windows.
>> 
>> Remember Powell Groaner's statement, "I will not have those little 
>> apertures in my cars."   And so the Kansas City cars came without standee 
>> windows.   So did the Red Arrow 11-24 series bodies which didn't qualify 
>> as PCCs because of the trucks.  Illinois Terminal also didn't go with the 
>> flow.   Dallas didn't either but their cars were probably designed much 
>> earlier.
>> 
>> If we had continued to buy equipment like Germany did and if TRC had 
>> remained viable, can you imagine what a PCC would be like today? 
>> Probably a low-floor car, air-conditioned, huge windows, ugly looking as 
>> sin, with AC motors.   Probably not much different than what you see out 
>> there anyway but it would have been standardized instead of every property 
>> having its own reward for consultants.  That might knock a few hundred 
>> thousand dollars off each car.
>> 
>> Of course we would still have the French Canadians arguing that they have 
>> the right to support Bombardier even if it does violate Canadian federal 
>> law.
>> 
>> Oh well.
>> 
>> 
>> On Nov 20, 2010, at 1:06 AM, richard allman wrote:
>> 
>>> oops, you're right, but I stand by my preference for the air car body!
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Fred Schneider" <fwschneider at comcast.net>
>>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 11:16 PM
>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> No.   The St. Louis 1600s were not air cars.
>>>> 
>>>> Ever single car in St. Louis was an all-electric.   The 1500s were the
>>>> first all-electrics built but they had a pre-war body.
>>>> 
>>>> Go back and read the PCC books again, Rich.
>>>> 
>>>> Bill Rossell moved from Brooklyn to St. Louis after B&QT was sold to the
>>>> city in 1940.   Apparently because of B&QT's involvement with the PCC
>>>> between 1929 and 1935, and Bill's intimacy with it as management in
>>>> Brooklyn, he wanted to continually improve the car.   In essence the 
>>>> test
>>>> bed for improvements moved from Brooklyn to St. Louis in 1940 along with
>>>> Bill.
>>>> 
>>>> Remember the first standee window car was in Brooklyn in 1935.  The next
>>>> one was in St. Louis in 1941.
>>>> 
>>>> Those car full lights over the headlights ... remember them from 
>>>> Brooklyn?
>>>> They turned up next in St. Louis because Bill went there.
>>>> 
>>>> And the major change was the all-electric design in 1940 with the 1500s,
>>>> 1600s and 1700s.   There is a TRC bulletin comparing the St. Louis 1500s
>>>> with the Pittsburgh 1200s built at the same time which concluded that 
>>>> you
>>>> couldn't run one of those St. Louis drum brake cars on Pittsburgh's 
>>>> hills.
>>>> I think I moved that book along with all my other PCC archives to the 
>>>> PTM
>>>> library.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 11:03 PM, richard allman wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Very plausible explanation, Fred!
>>>>> ok-time to stir the pot a bit-I've a tough couple weeks!
>>>>> I have always liked the St. Louis cars, (though have only ridden them 
>>>>> in
>>>>> San
>>>>> Francisco and Shaker Heights) because they were very graceful in their
>>>>> lines. I have a general preference for air cars because of their
>>>>> appearance-somewhat more pleasing to me than the all-electrics-which I
>>>>> like
>>>>> just a wee tad less. Yeah, yeah, the SLPS 1600's were air cars, but the
>>>>> 1700's had the basic air car body w/ standee windows and both series 
>>>>> were
>>>>> wider(9'). Some ancient sage   said :
>>>>> De gustibus non disputandum est - which means taste cannot be disputed.
>>>>> One
>>>>> more time-I really like the air cars! Let the battle begin!!!!
>>>>> RICH
>>>>> 
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>>> From: "Fred Schneider" <fwschneider at comcast.net>
>>>>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 8:03 PM
>>>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Because the 1500s were largely assigned to the Broadway line at the 
>>>>>> end
>>>>>> and it was the first PCC line to go bus.    In 1940, before the second
>>>>>> order of PCCs, Delmar was being serviced with motor cars (about the 
>>>>>> age
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the Pittsburgh 4100s) pulling trailers.   The city may have still had
>>>>>> Birneys ...  I have pictures of them in the 1930s.
>>>>>> By the late 1940s there were still Peter Witts on some routes, some
>>>>>> incredibly ancient stuff still running and the 1600s were running on 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> county lines out to Kirkwood which were much more picturesque than
>>>>>> following 1500s up and down Broadway through industrial districts. 
>>>>>> It
>>>>>> would be a question like ... would you rather photograph cars in
>>>>>> Pittsburgh on Butler Street or running to Washington PA or in the 
>>>>>> middle
>>>>>> of Ardmore Blvd.   You know what is going to win.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have pictures of the 1500s.   Steve Maguire had one good negative 
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> printed years ago but I don't know if he took it ... just found it in
>>>>>> his
>>>>>> sand box and rewashed it.   He traded a lot and you never really knew
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> was his and what came from others.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Bill Janssen had a quite a number of the 1500s ... he grew up in 
>>>>>> Peoria
>>>>>> and I think he still had a sister (a nun for that matter) who lived in
>>>>>> that area ... which gave him a reason to go back.   Today his 
>>>>>> collection
>>>>>> is at the East Troy museum.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Might also have something to do with an ideological thing .... 'When 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> have one the last midwest interurban network at your back door, would
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> waste your Saturdays or Sundays on PCCs or would you go out and
>>>>>> photograph
>>>>>> the Illinois Terminal?'  I think the ITS would win.   The Broadway 
>>>>>> line
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> St. Louis was abandoned in 1955; the Illinois Terminal was still 
>>>>>> running
>>>>>> trains from St. Louis to Peoria until 1956.   You would ignore those
>>>>>> (and
>>>>>> I'm quoting Andy Maginnis) "steel wheeled buses" in the hope that the
>>>>>> ITS
>>>>>> would be forced to substitute an ancient orange interurban car for one
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> newer stainless steel cars this weekend.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 6:48 PM, richard allman wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> as long as we're on the subject, there a a ton of great shots out 
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> excellent photographers through the PCC era in St. Louis, but hardly
>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the 1500's. Wonder why?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>>>>> From: "Fred Schneider" <fwschneider at comcast.net>
>>>>>>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 6:10 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> OK ,,, so you guys are quoting what Steve and I put in the PCC 
>>>>>>>> books.
>>>>>>>> No
>>>>>>>> way I can remember every detail we put in those books three decades
>>>>>>>> ago
>>>>>>>> nor would I even try.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It's much more fun keeping up with the new systems today.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 1:50 PM, Fred Schneider wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> OK, I see what you are talking about.   Perhaps SLPS did have their
>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>> in-house radio system.   It shows up best in color against a dark
>>>>>>>>> background.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Ken and Tracie wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Please view these photos:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/stl/htm/stl018.htm
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>

More information about the Pittsburgh-railways mailing list