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

[Derrick Brashear]

Personnel hygiene issues would be if she objected to the smell of her boyfriend?

Derrick

On Nov 21, 2010, at 1:34 AM, Ken and Tracie <ktjosephson at embarqmail.com> wrote:

> Personal, not personnel.
> 
> K.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ken and Tracie" <ktjosephson at embarqmail.com>
> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 10:27 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
> 
> 
>> On July 4th, 1982, my girlfriend and I were sitting behind the motorman on 
>> a
>> 1700. His girlfriend had been occupying the "fan seat", but got up and 
>> stood
>> next to him. She bent over with her butt near our faces. To put it 
>> politely,
>> she had personnel hygiene issues and we retreated further back into the 
>> car.
>> 
>> Perhaps too much information, but I can imagine one of these cars packe
>> with sweaty steel workers who came off duty and were riding home on a hot
>> summer day.
>> 
>> I took this photo from the back of the car after we looped Downtown and 
>> were
>> returning to Mount Lebanon:
>> 
>> And yes, that's his girlfriend seated up front, in the dark blue shirt.
>> 
>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/pitt408.htm
>> 
>> K.
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Dwight Long" <dwightlong at verizon.net>
>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 10:04 PM
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
>> 
>> 
>>> K
>>> 
>>> You might not have enjoyed riding in a PRC 1700 on the hottest days of
>>> summer, particularly at rush hours and if there had been a light rain!
>>> 
>>> Dwight
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: Ken and Tracie
>>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>>> Sent: Sunday, 21 November, 2010 00:30
>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I remember discussing the StLPS 1600s and 1700s outer appearance with
>>> Fred
>>> the Third some years ago. I stated they appeared "bloated" in appearance
>>> from the front end, especially when using a smaller sealed beam
>>> headlight.
>>> 
>>> Fred countered that the wider body was appreciated by the riding public
>>> due
>>> to the increased interior room.
>>> 
>>> Too me, the best looking post war cars with standee windows were the 
>>> last
>>> of
>>> the Philadelphia cars, the Johnstown cars, the TTC cars and the Muni 
>>> Baby
>>> Tens.
>>> 
>>> I also like the looks of the Pittsburgh 1700s and the Boston Picture
>>> Window
>>> cars.
>>> 
>>> I prefer the Boston war time cars without the added roof monitors. I 
>>> like
>>> any pre-war body St. Louis Car Company body with vents in the trolley
>>> base
>>> cowl.
>>> 
>>> Just my personal visual  preferences...I enjoy riding any of them.
>>> 
>>> K.
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Bill Robb" <bill937ca at yahoo.ca>
>>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>>> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 8:29 AM
>>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> I also thought the pre-war cars were more graceful, but during the last
>>>> years of
>>>> the PCCs I came to appreciate the post-war front end was almost as
>>>> graceful when
>>>> walking by stopped TTC 4300s at Yonge and Queen. Unfortunately the 
>>> post
>>>> war back
>>>> end drops straight down from the roof line. The tapered pre-war rear
>>> end
>>>> is my
>>>> favorite. I remember MU cars as having a less graceful profile than 
>>> the
>>>> non-MU
>>>> variety because the couplers cut the lines off abruptly.
>>>> Bill
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>