[PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.

Herb Brannon hrbran at cavtel.net
Tue Dec 27 16:59:56 EST 2011 

I didn't say it wouldn't.......I think Dwight said that.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 16:51, Derrick Brashear <shadow at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Derrick
>
> On Dec 27, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > Herb
> >
> > I have photos of it.  However, they are on slides and I would have to dig
> > them out and scan them.  And then Ecartis would not let me send them with
> > the email.
> >
>
> Ecartis won't pass it through, but at no point does it preclude you from
> sending anything.
>
> Yes, I'm a nitpicker
>
> > If this is of importance to you, I'll try to find the relevant slides and
> > send a scan to you directly rather than through Dementix.  Let me know.
> >
> > Best of my memory is that it was hard by the cemetery.
> >
> > Dwight
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Herb Brannon" <hrbran at cavtel.net>
> > To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 1:04 PM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.
> >
> >
> >> Dwight,
> >> Do you remember how far down the hill that meet occurred?
> >> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 18:00, Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Phil
> >>>
> >>> Can't comment on the New Arlington Avenue incident, but back in the
> 60s I
> >>> was on an enthusiast tour which included Rt 65.  We were proceeding
> north
> >>> and received a clear aspect on the Nachod.  The southbound service car
> >>> got
> >>> a
> >>> red aspect but ran it, as the operator knew he was the only car on the
> >>> line
> >>> on Sunday!  His explanation related to the general unreliability of
> >>> Nachods.
> >>>
> >>> Fortunately the near "cornfield meet" was on a stretch where there was
> >>> good
> >>> visibility.  Ironically it occurred adjacent to the local graveyard!
> >>>
> >>> Dwight
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Phillip Clark Campbell" <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> >>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
> >>> Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 4:35 AM
> >>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Thank you, Mr.Josephson; nice description. It is easy to
> >>>> associate signalling with interurbans but nachods were
> >>>> extensively used on the city system as well weren't they.
> >>>> Two that spring to mind immediately are the 49 and 65 lines.
> >>>> The latter was predominantly bi-directional single track with
> >>>> passing sidings. The 49 had significant single track--on Climax
> >>>> between the loop and Beltzhoover as well as the long stretch
> >>>> on New Arlington. All this was controlled with Nachods.
> >>>> Mr.Brannon has written about experience with Nachods here.
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp140.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/bvp141.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> Other South Hills lines using Nachods include several different
> >>>> sections of the 40, the single track at the loop on the 39, and even
> >>>> the 38A.
> >>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp111.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> The 1 & 5 lines used single track at their junction as double track
> >>>> would not fit; then the outer portion of the 5 was single with a
> siding
> >>>> and loop, all Nachod controlled. The 4-line used single track and a
> >>>>
> >>>> siding to the outer loop.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The 2 & 3 both had single track at their respective loops. The nearby
> >>>> 94 also had single track and a siding at the outer end to the loop.
> >>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp076.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> The intersection of California and Brighton Place was single track
> >>>> because of narrow streets. The 6, 7, 10, 13, and 14 all used this
> >>>>
> >>>> location controlled by Nachods. The 6-line also had single track to
> >>>> the outer loop--almost a repeating theme isn't it--but the 6-lacks
> >>>> a siding.
> >>>>
> >>>> The 18, 19, 20 were double track but non-clearance on some curves.
> >>>> These "may" have included Nachods. Many non-clearance curves
> >>>> are simply line of sight on a simple turn but where the devil strip
> >>>> narrowed for a distance nachods were possible. While turns were
> >>>> double track the devil strip was significantly reduced on the 64 and
> 67
> >>>> in many places, some using nachods. The 67 also had a small
> >>>> portion of single track outbound of Rankin.
> >>>>
> >>>> Neville Island had extensive single track and not a few sidings with
> >>>> Nachods. The outer end of the 23 before crossing the Ohio was
> >>>> single track prw.
> >>>>
> >>>> The 27 and 28 used Nachods on the famous "S" turn under the PRR
> >>>> while the outer end of the 28 was purely single track with 2 sidings
> >>>> and a loop once PCC service began. I assume the intersection of
> >>>> Steuben and Noble was Nachod controlled.
> >>>>
> >>>> The 55 used Nachods to control the single track in the flood control
> >>>> zone near E.Pgh didn't it. The 58 had a significant section of single
> >>>> track with multiple curves. The much liked Trafford was single track
> >>>> with 5 sidings--one rather long across the trestle--and a loop. This
> >>>> was nachod controlled. Near the end many of the sidings were not
> >>>> functional but one assumes it was still Nachod controlled. While
> >>>> only a single franchise car operated a trip or two each day other
> >>>> equipment like charters could be on the line so signalling is needed.
> >>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp196.htm
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The 68-line had a portion of multiple curve single track in Duquesne.
> >>>> http://www.davesrailpix.com/pitts/htm/wvp078.htm
> >>>>
> >>>> Plummer and 47th used a single track intersection from the Car House
> >>>> to double track on both streets probably nachod controlled.
> >>>>
> >>>> Both the Donora and Washington local lines had considerable single
> >>>> track controlled by nachods, much not shared by the interurbans.
> >>>>
> >>>> Somewhere on the internet is a photo of two opposing cars meeting on
> >>>> New Arlington. Car 1684 was one; it was on a charter in Pat days. Only
> >>>> one revenue car was needed for service who apparently thought the
> >>>> red signal was a failure so he proceeded. The photo is labeled wrong
> >>>> indicating 1684 as the service car. I can't find it; maybe someone has
> >>>> that photo or knows its location.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please add to, clarify, or correct the above. It is interesting to
> note
> >>>> all
> >>>> this nachod controlled territory.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Phil
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ________________________________
> >>>> From: Ken and Tracie <ktjosephson at embarqmail.com>
> >>>> To: SCOTT GREIG <m1903a1 at sbcglobal.net>
> >>>> Cc: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> >>>> Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2011 12:53 PM
> >>>> Subject: [PRCo] Nachods, Etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Scott,
> >>>> Here's that signaling chapter from the 1920s technical book I
> >>>> mentioned.
> >>>> I'm
> >>>> "cc'ing" these quick scans to the Pittsburgh Faithful as the PRCo
> >>>> interurbans used Nachods on some stretches and West Penn used a manual
> >>>> signaling system in places.
> >>>>
> >>>> Merry Christmas,
> >>>>
> >>>> K.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 92k (95141 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals001.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 317k (324695 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals002.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 162k (165933 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals003.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 218k (223272 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals004.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 163k (167617 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals005.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 212k (217237 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals006.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 175k (179326 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals007.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> >>>> -- Type: image/jpeg
> >>>> -- Size: 188k (192676 bytes)
> >>>> -- URL :
> >>>> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/signals008.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Herb Brannon
> >> In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Herb Brannon
In Cuyahoga Valley National Park

More information about the Pittsburgh-railways mailing list