[PRCo] Re: Question about 69 Squirrel Hill Route

[John Swindler]

 Concur, Herb, from rider perspective.  That's why would catch a 4th Ave. short-turn 42/38 if going home from school during the rush hour, even if it meant a mile walk from Clearview.  The reason was the Liberty Tubes.  Otherwise, would study in library until about 9 p.m. to catch a 41A bus that left me with a 1.5 block walk. This was 1968-70.   The rail routes have stayed around 25,000 per day ridership over past four decades.  It's the bus system that has lost half its customers.  Even senior citizen ridership was declining past 6-7 years, and they ride for free.   Another observation over the years has been:  it's amazing how many Americans enjoy sitting in rush hour traffic.     > From: hrbran at cavtel.net
> Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 09:04:36 -0400
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Question about 69 Squirrel Hill Route
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> 
> Notwithstanding the slower operating speeds on 35/36/37 during the
> 1970s/early 80s, it was still much faster and less stressful (and after the
> so-called Arab Oil Embargo, probably less expensive) than the bumper to
> bumper lines of autos on Washington Road, Saw Mill Run Blvd, Banksville
> Road and the Parkway West during the peak periods. Don't forget the dreaded
> trip through either the Liberty or Fort Pitt Tunnels and the bridges across
> the Mon River.
> People were riding the PCCs then and they are still riding today. I was on
> a two-car train from Wood Street to Castle Shannon a few weeks ago and it
> was packed. I stood all the way to Shannon and there were still standees
> after I left. The big difference between then and now was that back then
> the service was being expanded and was very frequent. Top PATransit
> management was always ready to step up, back then, to ease transport
> problems (such as the Arab Oil Embargo, the reconstruction of the Liberty
> Tunnels, various bridge reconstruction projects, parking-lot-attendant
> strikes, and the like) by providing alternate services to help keep things
> moving. Today they keep cutting service and are not responsive to the
> customers and seem not to want to gain any additional customers. They sure
> are responsive to a bunch of lame-brained political types, however.
> 
> Pittsburgh has waited far, far too long to provide dedicated funding for
> public transit.
> 
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Herb
> >
> > I was told, but did not verify this myself, that the fastest operation on
> > PRC, INCLUDING THE INTERURBANS, was the owl car that operated on East Ohio
> > Avenue.  Power was up, track good, and little if any competing traffic.
> >
> > The problems you cite on the interurbans were true even with the
> > "interurban" 1700s, and far worse with B2 equipped cars.  It was not really
> > pleasant at all to ride in the back of the car because of the violent
> > fishtailing.
> >
> > If PRC had had any faith in the interurban lines as a long term
> > proposition,
> > they could have and should have bought single end version of PSTC "St
> > Looey"
> > cars.  While that would not have totally solved the problem of deferred
> > track maintenance, it would have gone a long way toward better riding--not
> > to mention higher speeds!
> >
> > Dwight
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Herb Brannon" <hrbran at cavtel.net>
> > To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 9:22 PM
> > Subject: [PRCo] Re: Question about 69 Squirrel Hill Route
> >
> >
> > > John,
> > > The "fable" you speak of concerning the speed of PCCs 1700-1725 was alive
> > > and well when I was operating at SHJct. In fact, the guys who were former
> > > PRCo operators and who worked strictly on the "Interurban Division"
> > always
> > > claimed that 1700-1725 could operate faster than any of the city type
> > > PCCs.
> > > The only thing that I ever noted was that in a city-type PCC, operating
> > on
> > > the 35/36/37 private right-of-way, slower speed was required to keep the
> > > passengers in their seats and the car on the rails. The city cars would
> > > bounce and sway to the point of frightening the passengers if operated
> > too
> > > fast on the open track. It was probably next to impossible in the
> > > 1970s/early-80s to compare the two car types do to the rail conditions.
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 9:00 PM, John Swindler
> > > <j_swindler at hotmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>  As they say, 20/20 hindsight is perfect.  This seems to be arguing
> > about
> > >> how JB interpreted what he was told and how he put it on paper.
> >  Besides,
> > >> Electric Railroads was a railfan publication - it wasn't a thesis.
> > >> That's
> > >> not to say that Electric Railroads didn't have some good stuff over the
> > >> years.   But what's not in the Electric Railroads issue was any
> > >> commentary
> > >> on the original cars assigned to Charleroi service.  No one read the
> > >> local
> > >> paper to note the accident reports around 1906-08 in Mon Valley.
> > >> Another
> > >> fable was the alleged higher speed of the interurban PCC cars.    >
> > >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Question about 69 Squirrel Hill Route
> > >> > From: fwschneider at comcast.net
> > >> > Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 20:16:28 -0400
> > >> > To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> > >> >
> > >> > Karl Hittle was in engineering.   But I think your point is well taken
> > >> from another perspective.   The writers probably gave credit to those
> > >> Karl
> > >> because they provided a roster.  Karl was always very helpful in that
> > >> connection.  He ran tons of paper through the copier making
> > reproductions
> > >> of drawings for me when I was a teenager.  He was wonderfully supportive
> > >> of
> > >> the fans.   But crediting him does not say or even imply that Hittle or
> > >> his
> > >> boss Howard Bierwith actually reviewed the text to see if any gremlins
> > >> snuck in.
> > >> >
> > >> > Remember the comment about reducing unsprung weight that Tom Parkinson
> > >> made.   There really isn't much on a PCC truck below the springs except
> > >> wheels, axles, axle housings, journal bearings, pinions, ring gears and
> > >> the
> > >> portion of drive shaft weight carried on the axle housings.
> > >> >
> > >> > You would not want to increase the weight of the bolster because it
> > >> hangs on swing links.   Increasing that weight would cause more lurching
> > >> on
> > >> curves.
> > >> >
> > >> > You cannot readily change the weight of the motors ... they are about
> > >> 695 pounds a piece from the factory.   Westinghouse made those.   Not
> > >> Pittsburgh Railways.
> > >> >
> > >> > That leave only the brake beams, the frame tubes (filling them with
> > >> lead?) and the cross members, all of which came from the factory in one
> > >> design.
> > >> >
> > >> > It really doesn't make sense.
> > >> >
> > >> > There is a tremendous amount of material that floated around the
> > >> Pittsburgh Electric Railway Club that didn't make sense .... a lot of
> > >> hearsay that Ed Lybarger has attempted to verify and has never been able
> > >> to.   Examples include the supposed line up of 830s stuck in a snow
> > storm
> > >> in Greensburg on the Irwin line ... I remember Ed saying to me something
> > >> to
> > >> the effect that, 'If that happened, would it not have been in the
> > >> newspaper?   He checked the Greensburg newspaper ... whose staffers
> > could
> > >> have looked out their windows and seen them ... nothing mentioned.  That
> > >> is
> > >> one of many examples.   I think a lot of the stories probably began with
> > >> motormen who just wanted to see how far some of the crap would spread if
> > >> they started it!  You know how that works ... these trolley jollies are
> > >> crazy ... let's see if we can put one over on them.   :<)
> > >> >
> > >> > I think, like a lot of the political things we see on the internet
> > that
> > >> once started have a life of their own, this story about the extra weight
> > >> built into the trucks is probably another one of those stories that has,
> > >> over time, achieved a life all its own and even if disproved, it would
> > >> never go away.
> > >> >
> > >> > Brown was the president (for sometime at least) of the Pittsburgh
> > >> Electric Railway Club.  I think he had an EE degree.  He worked for
> > Union
> > >> Switch and Signal and later for the Pennsylvania Railroad in signals and
> > >> communications; I think it was Penn Central when he retired.     When I
> > >> first met him, he lived at 341 Stanford Avenue in West View ... that was
> > >> when the club's members bought 832, M1, 3756 and moved them out to
> > Arden.
> > >> Later, when he was with the railroad, he was living near Paoli.   He
> > also
> > >> installed the first train phones on the Strasburg locomotives.   He now
> > >> resides on the Washington interurban right of way near Donaldson's
> > >> Crossroads, Washington County, in Forest Lawn Cemetery.
> > >> >
> > >> > Bartley lived in Ben Avon.  I only met him once as a 13-year-old.
> > >>  Bought some photos from him as late as my college years.   Have no clue
> > >> what he did.
> > >> >
> > >> > Dengler was a letter carrier obsessed with photographing every car
> > that
> > >> Pittsburgh Railways ever owned ... up front, close and personal.    He
> > >> often would take a whole roll of one car if he thought he could sell
> > >> them.
> > >>   He died before Brownie.
> > >> >
> > >> > Edward S. Miller was a delightful chap who lived in Pittston, about
> > >> midway between Wilkes-Barre and Scranton.  He left home upon graduation
> > >> from high school and worked for Con Ed in a power plant in Long Island
> > >> until the military drafted him.  He was in the transportation corps, U.
> > >> S.
> > >> Army, in England in World War II.  His mom remarried and he got the heck
> > >> out of Pittston.  His old buddy Mike Lavelle was a motorman for Capital
> > >> Transit so he moved down there.   Step father died so he moved back home
> > >> about 1952 to take care of mother and worked for a variety of companies.
> > >> A couple of years ago, Ed was getting ready for church and fell ... a
> > >> neighbor broke in and got him to the hospital.  Ed was one of those
> > >> people
> > >> who would do anything for anybody ... loved people.  He was the Catholic
> > >> who attended mass every day they had one.    He celebrated his 90th
> > >> birthday in a nursing home but was never the same.   Ed was one of those
> > >> people best described as the salt of the earth.  !
> > >>   !
> > >> >  They didn't come any nicer.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On May 6, 2012, at 6:18 PM, Herb Brannon wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Too bad none of the contributors to that article weren't either
> > >> Maintenance
> > >> > > Employees or PRCo Engineers (P.E. type).  Maybe then they would have
> > >> > > spelled out what they meant by, "....had some weight applied...".
> > >> > > On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Phillip Clark Campbell <
> > >> pcc_sr at yahoo.com>wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> John Baxter wrote the "Electric Railroads" 1952 article about
> > >> > >> the Prc interurbans.  This is 12-letter-sized pages.  Contributing
> > >> > >> to the article were 3-reporters from the "Washington [Pa.]
> > >> > >> Reporter."
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Newton E. Tucker, Albert R. Dauk, William A. Keller, and
> > >> > >> Karl H. Hittle from Prc were contributors along with
> > >> > >> Kempton F. McNutt of the Philadelphia Co. and
> > >> > >> Herman P. Hewitt, retired Washington operator with
> > >> > >> 46-years of local and interurban service.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Photo credits include Robert H. Brown, Charles J. Dengler,
> > >> > >> Edward S. Miller, and Harry C. Bartley.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> The following is page-6, top right above the map.  This reveals
> > >> > >> more than I remembered and is most interesting.  I am sure many
> > >> > >> here have this article don't they; please verify the "facts" as
> > they
> > >> > >> are quoted below:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> "In January 1946, local PCC car 1613 from Craft Ave. car house,
> > >> > >> with some minor body changes (fender replaced by pilot, trolley
> > >> > >> retreiver lowered, rear window opened, fare box replaced by Ohmer
> > >> > >> register, etc.) had some weight applied to its trucks and became
> > >> > >> the first experimental PCC interurban car.  The next month special
> > >> > >> St.Louis-built trucks, which had earlier been applied to PCC car
> > >> > >> 1278 for use on Rt. 37-Shannon, were rebuilt and applied to 1613.
> > >> > >> Later 10 special trucks [sets] were bought and applied to various
> > >> > >> PCC cars (as indicated by the accompanying roster) for
> > >> > >> interurban service.  Placed on the Washington route, they served
> > >> > >> as guinea pigs for various components later ordered for the
> > >> > >> 1700--1724 series of PCCs delivered in 1949 expressly for
> > >> > >> interurban use."
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> "All cars in service on interurban routes are provided with extra
> > >> > >> equipment as follows: extra trolley pole mounted on roof, fire
> > >> > >> extinguisher, flashlight, trolley wire pickup, glass covered took
> > >> > >> kit including axe, wrenches, sledge, etc."
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> The above is what I have written previously on the topic
> > >> > >> relative to 1613 entering interurban service with B2 trucks.  New
> > >> > >> information indicates car 1613 first used the experimental B3
> > >> > >> trucks in revenue service Feb-1946 doesn't it.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >>
> > http://lists.dementix.org/mlist/pittsburgh-railways/2012-05/msg00048.html
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> The complete interurban roster (mentioned above) is not included.
> > >> > >> Please refer to your copies of this article.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Phil
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> ________________________________
> > >> > >> From: TEP <tompark at telus.net>
> > >> > >> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
> > >> > >> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 6:29 PM
> > >> > >> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Question about 69 Squirrel Hill Route
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Sounds odd to me as we are always trying to minimise the unsprung
> > >> truck
> > >> > >> weight -- up to the point where the truck is unstable or has
> > >> wheel-lift
> > >> > >> that
> > >> > >> could cause a derailment. Possibly this is why, a truck designed
> > for
> > >> slower
> > >> > >> speeds on street track, needed better stability for higher speeds
> > on
> > >> "T"
> > >> > >> railtrack. Lighter trucks mean less wheel and rail wear and
> > slightly
> > >> lower
> > >> > >> power consumption.
> > >> > >> Tom Parkinson P.Eng, Vancouver BC Canada 604-733-5430, fax
> > >> 604-733-5437
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> On 04/05/2012 12:52, Fred Schneider wrote: Or does heavier simply
> > >> > >> mean
> > >> > >> super
> > >> > >> resilient wheels instead of the regular design? There really isn't
> > >> > >> an
> > >> easy
> > >> > >> way to add weight to a B2 truck unless you were to weld weight to
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> bolsteror fill the frame tubes with something like concrete. I'm
> > >> skeptical.
> > >> > >> Istill want someone to tell me how it was done rather than simply
> > >> tell me
> > >> > >> thetrucks were heavier. Phillip, where did you get this information
> > >> that
> > >> > >> weight was
> > >> > >> added to them? On May 4, 2012, at 3:37 PM, Derrick Brashear
> > >> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > Herb Brannon
> > >> > > In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Herb Brannon
> > > In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Herb Brannon
> In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
> 
> 
>