[PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.

Dwight Long dwightlong at verizon.net
Tue Dec 27 18:55:22 EST 2011 

Herb

This was on Rt 65, not Rt 49.

I don't recall that there was a route foreman there.  We did not usually 
have them on our trips.

Dwight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Herb Brannon" <hrbran at cavtel.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 6:25 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Nachods, Etc.


> He probably got into some trouble over that. He should have called 
> dispatch
> concerning the red signal before moving ahead. There was always a PRCo/PAT
> phone box on the poles at either end of the single track on Arlington Av.
> How did the Route Foreman correct the situation?
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 17:19, Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Herb Brannon
> In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
>
>
>

More information about the Pittsburgh-railways mailing list