[PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.

Dwight Long dwightlong at verizon.net
Tue Dec 27 17:19:56 EST 2011 

Herb

In this instance it is not necessary to know that information, because the 
operator of the service car readily admitted that the Nachod displayed a red 
aspect.  Because he was the only car on the line (he thought), he assumed 
the signal was faulty and ran the red.

There was no fault with the signal system that day.

Dwight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Herb Brannon" <hrbran at cavtel.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 4:46 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.


> By knowing which car had traveled the furthest on the single track it can
> be determined if one did, indeed, run a red signal, or if the signal 
> system
> failed.
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 16:09, 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.
>>
>> 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