[PRCo] Re: Monomotor

[John Swindler]

You should take a ride on one of the SEPTA K-cars.  I have to keep trying to remind myself that they are 30 years old - almost as old as the PCC cars referenced in the attached article.  
 
Another well-built car from that era are the Kawasaki cars on the Broad St. subway.  SEPTA recently completed replacement of their original GE cam controllers.  As with LRVs, SEPTA has not request government funds to replace.
 
 
 

 

> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:05:45 -0800
> From: pcc_sr at yahoo.com
> Subject: [PRCo] Monomotor
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org; dwightlong at verizon.net
> CC: ge13031 at yahoo.com; billvigrass at verizon.net; oerm196 at yahoo.com; hassel8 at comcast.net; jackmay135 at gmail.com; pfuhler at msn.com; tracksofnyc at gmail.com; artwheeler at trolleybuses.net
> 
> Mr.Jackson,
> 
> Do you have any information about monomotor reliability for the Boeing
> cars used in San Francisco and Boston?  What about the Canadian car?
> The original TTC single-unit was also monomotor; I do not know about
> the articulated unit.
> 
> Are the Philly units monomotor?  Regardless the record is stellar isn't it.
> Do you have any information which compares current equipment
> reliability with the former PCCs in Philly?
> 
> 
> It's refreshing for suspicions to come to light.  "We don't make routine
> inspections" must be part of Pittsburgh operating conditions.  It seems
> that such 'attitudes' can be quite common in many industries unfortunately.
> 
> Do you see a clear trend to adopting any particular equipment for so-called
> "streetcar" use?  What equipment appears to be most reliable for the urban
> light rail car?
> 
>  
> Phil
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: "rejmhj at netzero.com" <rejmhj at netzero.com>
> To: dwightlong at verizon.net 
> Cc: ge13031 at yahoo.com; billvigrass at verizon.net; oerm196 at yahoo.com; hassel8 at comcast.net; jackmay135 at gmail.com; pfuhler at msn.com; tracksofnyc at gmail.com; fwschneider at comcast.net; artwheeler at trolleybuses.net; pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org 
> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 10:54 AM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 1893 version of a PCC truck
> 
> Yes, the Siemens cars were standard design with DC monomotors.  My conversations with Siemens folks - who were very unhappy campers - was that wheel size difference limits were not being observed.  PAT brought in a consultant and its report was in my opinion all over the map, and PAT people I have met say monomotor was an unworkable design for Pittsburgh conditions.  My suspicion remains that most of what took place was intended as cover-up on the PAT side.  Anyway, a lot was spent on converting the cars to motor per axle as part of the mid-life updating process.  The entire Pittsburgh project stands as a case-in-point as to why quite a few of our public transit and commuter rail agencies should never be given anything but Monopoly money.
> The Philly fleet is now 30 years old, no car has ever been scrapped and no car has ever left the property other than several wreck-repair jobs - there is always a car or two in the backshop getting traffic accident repairs; the fleet has received a number of hardware and electronic changes in-house to solve obsolescence and parts supply issues, and it is still working reliably in perhaps the most demanding service in the country, (single car subway operation on less than one-minute headways, lots of street operation in all kinds of weather, track conditions that any European would take out of service instantly, etc.), and it is now operating with a moving-block CBTC signal system.  And no fleet replacement is currently under consideration.
> Russ J.
> 
> 
 		 	   		  

-- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
-- Type: application/msword
-- Size: 161k (164864 bytes)
-- URL : http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/1981%20Phil%20Inquirer-SEPTA%20accident.doc