[PRCo] Re: Route 40 1700's

[Phillip Clark Campbell]

Mr.Rathke,


The apparent ban on 1200s and 1700s on the 40 was by Prc, wasn't it.
This ban evaporated with the RR charter in 1958 when each series
PCC was sent up there.  I am searching for more information to make
this clear as I saw this discussed in the archives previously.

All rules and regulations and ordinances and laws are enforced stringently
when introduced.  Time see such enforcement relax and even forgotten;
sometimes the need for the law evaporates yet the law remains.  How many
times have towns found bans on securing the horse in front of a saloon on
Sunday, even when bans on horses had been in place for decades?

Pat is a whole other organization.  Lower level employees would proceed
as they had under Prc but upper management was drastically different
wasn't it.  Their policies were not at all favorable to rail; they balk at rail
to this day don't they.

We have to compare apples and apples, not Prc and Pat.

I spent the better part of the last couple days searching the archives for this
information.  What I found is a retelling of the story; I can't seem to find the
original document.  This document was quite plain:  engineering and the
shop banned the 12s and 17s from the 40-line (most likely the 21-line as
well.)

The RR convention of 1958 apparently changed that; a car of each series
was used for a charter onto Grandview Avenue.  Whether or not this was
considered 'successful' in testing these two series is unknown but it is
possible the ban was relaxed.  This archive post only mentions the 12s;
I found the one mentioning the 17s but can't find the Url:
http://lists.dementix.org/mlist/pittsburgh-railways/1999-10/msg00009.html

I am still searching for more information; this has been discussed many
times.

I also found some information on drum brakes:

http://lists.dementix.org/mlist/pittsburgh-railways/2004-03/msg00116.html

http://lists.dementix.org/mlist/pittsburgh-railways/2004-03/msg00167.html

I am still searching for more information.



>From pg-5 of the 1952 treatise on the interubans is this quote:

"The new route [Washington Interurban] was truly a high-speed
electric line, the greater portion being fenced P/R/W ...."

Any number of times I read how RRs and Interurbans were 'fenced.'
One might deduce that rules, regulations, ordinances, laws
governing same saw such building; after all, everyone here knows
that rwys would not spend a nickel if they weren't so required.  Rwys
tended to pinch the nickel so hard the buffalo would bellow.

How much of this fencing was evident in the 1940s and at the time
the Interurbans ended?  It was installed but not often maintained
and apparently far more rarely enforced wasn't it.

 
Phil



________________________________
 From: Bob Rathke <bobrathke at comcast.net>
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org 
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2012 1:16 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Route 40 1700's
 
1700's were sometimes seen on route 40, at least in that route's last year.  
Attached is a photo I took of 1784 in regular service  - 
on Fingal St. on Aug. 19, 1966.   


Bob