[PRCo] Re: 23-Sewickley & PRC assignments....

[Dwight Long]

Ed

I agree with your logic, but would that not apply doubled in spades to 
running Rt. 23 out of Tunnel Car House?

So the question still remains as to why this simple expedient was not done 
at a much earlier date?

Now go enjoy sunny Fla.!

Dwight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Edward H. Lybarger" <trams2 at comcast.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 4:57 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: 23-Sewickley & PRC assignments....


> Attached is PRC Track Sketch 49-019, which I copied (unfortunately 
> title-less) this morning.  It indeed covers this job, and indicates that 
> the work was closed on the books May 14, 1949.  Since they would have had 
> a major street dug up, I doubt they would have dawdled, and it would have 
> been a Spring 1949 thing.
> Has anyone given a thought to its purpose being easy access from Tunnel to 
> Ingram so they could move cars for scrap there more expeditiously?  We 
> don't have access to the books to know its cost, but it was quick and 
> dirty and would probably have cost a lot less than the platform time of a 
> multitude of operators who had to go downtown to turn around.
>
> Ed
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org 
> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementix.org] On Behalf Of Dwight 
> Long
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 1:32 PM
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 23-Sewickley & PRC assignments....
>
> Phil
>
> Most interesting.
>
> Recall that my contentions were in the first place based upon using the 
> direct route from the tunnel to the Point Bridge on West Carson as I was 
> unaware that the curves at the end of the tunnel were apparently not there 
> in the 30s or early 40s (why not is a whole other question).  Secondly, I 
> bifurcated my response between AM and PM feed ons-feed offs.  AM cars 
> would go to the Sewickley (or Graham or Fleming Park) loops when feeding 
> on while PM cars would go to the downtown loop.  For the PM cars, even 
> with the detour around the Union Station route via Grant and Liberty, the 
> distance is shorter than from Ingram.  For AM feed on cars, Ingram is 
> clearly the better choice from a stem time point of view.  So, I guess, 
> taking both into consideration it would have been pretty much equal. 
> Except that operationally the route from Tunnel, except for the tunnel 
> itself, is essentially flat.  If you have ever ridden route 31, you would 
> know that it is a succession of hills and curves. !
>  Balance tipped perhaps to Tunnel by this?
>
> Iââ,¬â"¢m virtually sure that the reason the Union Station route was used 
> was for capacity reasons.  Even in latter days of greatly reduced service, 
> Smithfield Street was choked with trams.  Right up until PAT, PRC turned a 
> number of rush hour cars at 4th Avenue (to Grant) to alleviate this 
> problem.  Grant Street was less used and thus better able to accept the 
> Rt. 23 feed-ons. Further, since they were feed-ons and not regular route 
> cars, running them on the less-central route on Grant would not 
> inconvenience riders, who would normally be boarding at the lower end of 
> the Triangle.
>
> Still, I would think the reduction in stem time by installing the curves 
> at the end of the tunnel would have more than justified the cost of 
> construction at a very early dateââ,¬â?but that assumes long-term plans 
> to operate Rt. 23 out of Tunnel Car House.  It may have been that this was 
> when instituted viewed as just a temporary measure which would not last 
> long enough to install the needed curves, and then it lasted, and lasted, 
> and lasted.  Not an uncommon thing, eh?
>
> Dwight
>
> From: Phillip Clark Campbell
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 February, 2012 11:26
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 23-Sewickley & PRC assignments....
> Mr.Long,
>
>
> Yes!  Those turns are the latter 1940s, 'very late' in the game isn't it.
>
>
> I found a "Trolley Guide," Mr.Long, so I set aside my original thoughts.
> The calendar is 2nd-half-1937 and all-1938.  The downtown loop for the 
> 23-line, "at this date," is the typical West End loop on Penn, Stanwix, 
> Liberty, Fancourt, and back to Penn isn't it.  According to Google's map 
> it is 2.2-miles from Ingram to Corliss and W.Carson.
> In pre-dawn AM the majority would turn toward Sewickley with a couple 
> heading downtown to establish service.  A car coming from Tunnel travels 
> at least twice the distance to Corliss and Carson doesn't it.  This car 
> needs to at least loop downtown like Smithfield, 3rd, Wood, Ft.Pitt, 
> Smithfield and out W. Carson.  If the pull-outs from Tunnel go directly to 
> the downtown West End loop via Grant and Liberty it adds extra time to get 
> to Corliss; 15-min extra as a guesstimate and 10-cars make for an extra 
> 2-hours daily just for this one move.
> I am not trying to be exact but this significantly increases costs.
>
>
> This "answer" then begs more questions doesn't it.  Why would Prc use 
> Grant and Liberty to the West End loop at Stanwix and Fancourt?
> Smithfield is much shorter isn't it.  The information provided by 
> Mr.Schneider suggests Tunnel operated the 23 // 25 lines from 1934 into 
> the mid-1940s.  Why would the double-track turn from Tunnel to W.Carson be 
> built at the very end of Tunnel operation of the 23 and most likely after 
> it ended?
>
> Is it possible the downtown loop for the 23/25 lines did change to 
> Smithfield, Grant, Liberty, Wood, Smithfield to W.Carson for a time?
> This is very possible but would also cause public confusion.  This route 
> would greatly reduce overhead for operation from Tunnel wouldn't it. 
> Mr.Dengler's picture 'hints' at this doesn't it; but any car on the street 
> is "in-service" unless disabled.  The one picture of 3756 on the 23 at 
> Grant and Liberty with passengers in 1944 is interesting.
>
> It seems logical to assume Tunnel equipment needs increased with the 23/25 
> lines.  Did this force other routes out of tunnel and where would they go?
>
>
> This guide lists the 12-line as operating to and from downtown.  It is 
> obvious Prc responds to demand.  Lower demand may see it reduced to 
> outer-end shuttle; if demand increases then it is run full-length.
> The 21-line is defined with a North side loop as we know.
>
> This booklet is 3"X5.5", 60-pgs, less than half about transit, the rest 
> about "medicine."
>
>
>
> Phil
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net>
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 11:57 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Making sense of the PRC assignments....
>
>
> Phil
>
> I'll have to take your word for it.
>
> So you are saying that the curves between the tunnel and West Carson were
> actually built some time in the PCC era?  Meaning anything going between 
> the
> West End group and the rest of the system had to transit the Golden
> Triangle, prior to their installation?  This was before my time if it
> existed.  Sounds beastly inconvenient to me, especially if one wished to 
> run
> cars on Rt. 23 out of Tunnel Car House.  But, it could be done, and other
> than the congestion factor in the Triangle, would still be a more 
> favorable
> barn than Ingram to feed cars onto the line--but not for taking them off, 
> in
> the afternoon, and the reverse in the morning.
>
> Dwight
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Phillip Clark Campbell" <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>
> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 9:06 PM
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Making sense of the PRC assignments....
>
>
>> Mr.Long,
>> The 50-line was based at Craft. The first curve from tunnel to E.Carson
>> is there; the 2nd curve wasn't built until the 2-curves from W.Carson
>> were built.
>>
>> I am attaching a picture of 1201 again to this email. You shall NOT
>> receive
>> the picture itself; the mail program provides a Url at the very bottom of
>> this email. Click on it to see the picture.
>>
>> Please note total absence of tracks to and from W.Carson.
>> Look at the car stop sign immediately above 1201. In the same span is
>> the frog to turn to E.Carson. It is a little difficult to see the track
>> but it
>> is
> there.
>>
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net>
>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
>> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 8:47 PM
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Making sense of the PRC assignments....
>>
>> Phil (sent from my portable computer)
>>
>> AIR, there were double curves between East Carson and the tunnel. 
>> However,
>> I don't have my maps with me here so I can't verify that. But if not, how
>> would cars coming off route on 50 get to the car house?
>>
>> I'll take another look at the map later, but I think you are right about
>> the
>> lack of a straight through track on Carson. There would be no need
> for it.
>> I think I made an error there--with respect to calling it a Grand Union.
>>
>> With respect to cars signed 23 on any part of the South Hills downtown
>> loops, that fact is not dispositive. 23 may or may not have been rerouted
>> to use one of the South Hills loops. I know nothing of this, but that 
>> does
>> not mean it did not happen. In my day it always used the West End 
>> downtown
>> loop. Assuming the base cars always did so, the cars to which you 
>> referred
>> could just be feed on or feed off runs and not base trips.
>>
>> We would need access to route guides or old timetables from Way Back to
>> sort
>> all this out. And it all assumes that the curves between the tunnel and
>> West Carson are some latter day installation. In my day they were always
>> there, and their use would be the logical way to feed cars based at 
>> Tunnel
>> Car House on and off Rt.
> 23.
>>
>> Dwight
>
>
>
>
> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
> -- Type: image/jpeg
> -- Size: 631k (647130 bytes)
> -- URL : 
> http://lists.dementix.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/Track%20Sketch%2049-019%20Carson%20at%20Smithfield.jpg
>
>
>