[PRCo] Re: PCC Question

[John Swindler]

the PCC2 cars have a lot of electronics - if PTM has a choice - go for the Kawasaki car.  Even then there will probably be a problem with electronics.  But at least detailed maintenance manuals are available.

As for Kawasaki maintenance, there is a ten day inspection, a 60 day inspection and a 180 day inspection at Elmwood.  Cars are sent to Woodland every 5-7 years for VOH.  It's not like Luzerne 30 years ago.  I've see the VMIS maintenance reports on these vehicles.  Surprising how much gets fixed.

Currently route 36 has a 8 minute peak headway from Island Ave.  He gets a leader from Elmwood for a four minute peak headway on Elmwood Ave.  At least one other route has a four minutes headway, and the rest five minutes.  That's less than a 60 minute headway in the Green Line subway.  Almost no riders pay cash - transcards are the norm.  (You can hear the farebox signal that it is a valid transcard.)  I did a rider count on an inbound 36 car about a year ago - had over 100 riders by the time we got to 40th St. portal.  This was about 3pm in off peak direction, and there were no seniors.  Just constant on and off.  But this trip was exceptional.

The problem with the PCC2 cars is the idiots who are allowed to drive automobiles.  We also see the accident reports.

Speaking of Kawasaki cars, the Broad St. fleet is getting new electronics to replace the 30-year old cam controllers.

Cheers
John




> Subject: [PRCo] Re: PCC Question
> From: fwschneider at comcast.net
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:14:14 -0400
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> 
> 
> What is the proven need for more of them?
> 
> Do you mean Philadelphia?   It is a declining eastern city.   The population has dropped 35% since 1950.   It's not a place where a rational human would wish to restore streetcars when there are better options for spending money elsewhere ... reads growth areas like Phoenix, San Diego, Houston, Denver, Portland, Seattle, etc.   
> 
> The rebuilt PCCs for Girard Avenue were a cheaper option for something SEPTA didn't wish to do than more Kawasaki cars that would probably come in at $2 million a pop today.    They weren't good but they are air-conditioned.    The trucks have cracking problems.   
> 
> Remember that the city government was pushing for restoration of one of those "suspended" rail routes.   The only logical route, if you were being forced to restore anything, was the one they did restore because it was connected to the new shop in West Philadelphia.   I said the city was pushing ... in reality the city was refusing to sign SEPTA budget for the next year if they didn't agree to restore a rail route ... any rail route.   As soon as it was restored, then the new city government took the side of the locals around Callowhill car house who lost parking spaces because they were inside the car clearance lines and decreed that SEPTA was evil for restoring service.   Remember that was service that SEPTA only restored in the first place because the previous administration refused to sign the (5 county) budget unless SEPTA agreed to restore service.
> 
> Will we have more four-axle cars?   Throughout history the general theme for rail cars has been to reduce labor costs.   That has been true everywhere in the world.   It has simply been accomplished by different means.   In the United States we lengthened cars from 18 feet to 20 to 22 to 24 to 30 to 40 to 45 and in some cases even to 50-foot-city-cars.   In Europe, they went to trains of single truck motors and trailers because, for while each car needed a conductor, only the lead car needed a motorman.   In Britain, the practice was to go taller ... two men can handle more people if you add a second deck.   In the 1960s it became common in Europe to make articulated cars and then to go for conductorless fare collection using vending machines.  In Europe the reason for conductorless fare collection was more fundamental than we don't want to pay you ... it was that most of the men were killed in the war.   In Germany I once asked a friend about the men our parents' ages and t!
>  he answer I got was that the lucky ones were in POW camps and came home intact, the rest were dead or had lost legs or arms.    Eventually that the conductorless scheme went world wide.   
> 
> Until we understand that people are more likely to use a service that runs every minute, so that the car is there when you want to board it, we will probably continue to build articulated cars ... the longer the better to reduce crew costs.   Therefore I would not expect any more K-cars.   Why?   Because to go for a one or two-minute headway, it would be more likely to go for computer controlled, driverless vehicles which are tiny boxes on wheels.   
> 
> But the control and motor packages that gave them mechanical longevity are adaptable to other vehicles.  Frankly, they are behind the curve.   They had DC motors.   The industry is using AC motors today.   You might be able to build a body that lasts forever with stainless steel but then the body will outlast the wearing surfaces on the trucks.   
> 
> I think we can always assume that some component of whatever we build will become dated and cause the public to point to that archaic conveyance and therefore we will need to build something new to replace the relic no matter how reliable the relic still is. 
> 
> End of editorial.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Ken and Tracie wrote:
> 
> > My guess (and it is only a guess) is politics.
> > 
> > K.
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Derrick Brashear" <shadow at gmail.com>
> > To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 7:45 AM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: PCC Question
> > 
> > 
> >>> The PCC was, in general, a pretty good car. Compared to the Philly 
> >>> Kawasaki car, not nearly as good. The Kawasakis have run 30 years with 
> >>> virtually no maintenance. No PCC ever did that but we did not build for 
> >>> no maintenance in 1935 or 1945; we need to do that today because we can't 
> >>> find mechanics in our cities.
> >> 
> >> So why are more Kawasakis not being built?
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>