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

[Dwight Long]

Derrick

Yes.  Then she would have it down PAT.

Dwight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Derrick Brashear 
  To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org 
  Sent: Sunday, 21 November, 2010 09:30
  Subject: [PRCo] Re: SLPS/SHRT/PTC/MUNI PCC Question


  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
  >>> 
  >>> 
  >>> 
  >>> 
  >> 
  >> 
  > 
  >