[PRCo] Re: Allenport?--Correction

Thu Dec 8 19:57:05 EST 2011

Your photo number 3 is clearly not Allenport, Phil.  It is Mapleview Siding and the Nachod contactor protects the street track it is just about to enter at the south end of McKeen Avenue in Charleroi.   There is a street called Maple Terrace on the hillside above it.
Go to Bing Maps and find McKean Avenue between 1st Avenue and Boltz ... looks southward from there.   

I cannot find the brick house in any of the aerial maps today.

On Dec 8, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Phillip Clark Campbell wrote:

> This sentence:
> "If the roll sign on 1707 is correctly set in photo #3 then it is heading NB.
> This rules out an Allenport location as well doesn't it."
> Should read:  "...photo #-2..."
> 
> Another discrepancy between the photos:
> In photo #2 the first line pole on our right shows a dual display
> signal; also on this pole is a line side phone.  Please note this
> phone extends toward the track.
> 
> In photo #3 the first line pole to our left of 1707 shows the signal
> mount; a line side phone is 'apparently' there but it protrudes
> behind the pole and toward the RR, not the interurban.
> 
>  
> Phil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Phillip Clark Campbell <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> To: "pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org" <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org> 
> Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2011 3:39 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Allenport?
> 
> Mr.Lybarger;
> 
> Enclosed is a photo montage which might help some with
> identification.  All these photos were found on the internet
> some time back; locating them in my folders took considerable
> time.  Please let me describe the montage:
> 
> 3761 photo in dispute.
> 1707 appears in identical location, more is visiible.
> 1707 again
> Mapleview.
> 
> The first 2-photos show discrepancies as a 'white' bldg is missing
> in the photo of 3761.  As the tape on the fan monitor is missing from
> 1707 it strongly suggests 1949.  You indicate 3761 is in 1952.  The
> house appears in both doesn't it.
> 
> The view of 1707 includes more, two-white bldgs, one already
> mentioned.  The other bldg to the right of the line poles suggests
> the RR is some distance again to the right.
> 
> 
> If the roll sign of 1707 is set correctly the car is heading north.
> 
> I found the 3rd photo of 1707 in several locations on my computer,
> one as plain 1707 and another listing the location as Mapleview.  As
> already noted the PCC book lists the location as Allenport.
> 
> A discrepancy between the first-2 and 3rd photos is the very level
> terrain at the interurban track and roadway.  The first-2photos hint
> at a grade for the road.
> 
> While it appears the track curves to the left into the roadway in the
> first 2-photos, would this give enough spread between the RR to
> show the additional bldg in the 2nd photo to our right of the line poles?
> Additionally, the double set of line poles in photo #3 is not revealed in
> photo #2 although the spread 'may' prevent them in the 3rd photo.
> 
> But the contactor for the nachod is visible in the first 3-photos.  The RR
> would also have to curve away considerably to allow one set of line poles
> not to be included in photo #2.
> 
> Photo #3 also suggests a 1949 date since 1707 does not have the
> tape on the monitor.  This 'suggests' but by no means assures that
> photos 2 & 3 could be the same date.
> 
> If the roll sign on 1707 is correctly set in photo #3 then it is heading NB.
> This rules out an Allenport location as well doesn't it.
> 
> As stated, the 3rd photo has several different file names on my computer
> as simply 1707 and one includes "Mapleview" thus the 4th photo of
> Mapleview in 2008.  I presume I got this from the list archives and
> relabeled the photo as indicated by the text; nothing in the photo archives
> shows "Mapleview;" as I noted elsewhere photo labels are wanting and
> usually not descriptive of the photo.
> 
> 
> With the RR by the river and close to the interurban from Roscoe to
> Mapleview the topography is quite flat.  This would not preclude some
> undulating but the 3rd photo seems to rule that out while the first two
> suggest the road is on a grade.
> 
> These photos seem to rule out Allenport don't they.  What do you think?
> The first two photos suggest a grade to the road; the third photo rules that out.
> 
> "New Switch" is a possibility as the road makes an "L" formation to the
> north of the siding, south to west.  I would expect to see the PRR RR
> crossing of the interurban in the first 2-photos.
> 
> 
> To further complicate the picture I understand the first 10-12 1700-series
> Interurbans were fitted with radio phones for Washington service.  This
> alone does not preclude service on Charleroi; I would "assume" that
> base service would find cars with phones and only 7-cars were needed.
> Trippers could be any car.
> 
> It seems the more we learn the more questions that are raised!
> 
> 
> Phil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Edward H. Lybarger <trams2 at comcast.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org 
> Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2011 11:08 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Washington Interurban Forensics
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> I'm sticking with "3761 SB at Allenport Siding" for the other one unless
> there is conclusive evidence against it.
> 
> Ed
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org
> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org] On Behalf Of Phillip
> Clark Campbell
> Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 10:53 AM
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Washington Interurban Forensics
> 
> Mr.Lybarger;
> 
> -------------
> 
> With 3761 we have a photo on a known system which remains unidentifed.  The
> topography changes considerably with time; cutting the Grant St hill
> considerably is evidence.  Perspective over 1-years, different lenses on
> cameras, different depth-of-fields etc. can be fooling.  Trying to identify
> the E-McKeesport photo was anything but orderly and methodical -- start with
> the "givens" and then rule-out.  It takes field work, not hunches.
> 
> Phil
> 
> 
> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> -- Type: image/jpeg
> -- Size: 644k (659868 bytes)
> -- URL : http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/3761-1707-1707-Mapleview.jpg
> 