[PRCo] Re: Cleveland

[Dwight Long]

Herb

What was the perceived advantage of that somewhat circuitous rerouting of 
49?

Dwight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Herb Brannon" <hrbran at cavtel.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 2:16 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: Cleveland


>I worked in the Service, Rates & Planning Dept (SRP) as a Planning
> Assistant. SRP is the planning and testing arm of the Operations Division.
> The main planning area was called Long Range Planning and Development and
> was part of the Executive Management. Working in SRP was an interesting 
> and
> fun job. Not as much fun as operating the buses and cars but nonetheless
> not bad at all.
> One of the fun things I did was "vehicle to route testing".  When new
> routes or methods of operation were proposed it was the job of SRP to 
> check
> out the routing and the type vehicle selected to operate on the new route
> or service to make sure all clearances were OK, streets could be navigated
> without too much trouble, passenger pick-up areas were safe, etc. This
> testing also set the actual running times as opposed to the proposed
> running times given in the original written proposal.  When a routing was
> to be tested we would call the division which would be operating the
> service to set a date to begin testing. Local 85 of the ATU would be
> notified as would the Instruction Department. The date would be set and
> myself representing Service, Rates & Planning along with a Training
> Instructor from the Instruction Dept, a representative of the Amalgamated
> Transit Union, and the operator of the vehicle would start the proposed
> route from one end to the other then back again. We would all note safety
> concerns, traffic bottlenecks, parking problems, passenger
> boarding/alighting  concerns,  proposed bus/car stops and any thing else 
> we
> saw. Over the next few days the same group would "time" the route during 
> AM
> Peak, Base Day, and PM Peak periods. Everyone then met, discussed the 
> items
> and decided if the proposal was a yes or a no.
>
> Another thing I did was go to citizens groups to answer questions on new 
> or
> existing service. These were mostly church groups and they complained a
> lot. A much better audience I confronted were  the students at the Boyce
> Campus of Allegheny County Community College. Myself and another guy,
> (Arthur Carter) who began working in SRP when I did, went to ACC on 
> several
> occasions to talk with students on the new services PATransit was
> instituting to that campus.
>
> I worked on one streetcar routing change. That was sending the 
> 49-Arlington
> Warrington on a new Sunday/Holiday downtown loop. The normal 49 loop was
> Ft. Pitt, Grant, Liberty, Wood, Ft. Pitt. We tested and, for a short time,
> put into service Smithfield, 4th, Ross, Forbes, Grant, Liberty, Wood, Ft.
> Pitt. It lasted a few months until bus drivers coming inbound on Forbes
> claimed the streetcar sitting on Forbes near Grant caused a safety problem
> since they had to squeeze by between the curb and the trolley.
>
> There was lots and lots of  not so glamorous work such as checking new
> timetable master sheets for accuracy, checking maps for accuracy, being a
> "go-fer", running things back and forth between SRP and the operating
> divisions, etc.
>
> Like I said it was fun but not near as much fun as pressing down on the
> power pedal of a 1700 series PCC and feeling the car pick up speed on the
> right of way.
>
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Phillip Clark Campbell
> <pcc_sr at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> Mr.Brashear,
>> I should have written "Cleveland and CVSR are growing."
>> It is very impressive; considering the times and the
>> economy, it is even much more impressive.  Mr.Brannon's
>> enthusiasm is subtle but very clear.  It is nice to take part
>> in positive growth.  I wish Cleveland, CVSR and you
>> continued success Mr.Brannon.
>>
>> I was reading through old list emails.  You wrote you worked in the
>> Planning department of Pat.  Could you please detail some of
>> your experiences and the challenges you faced and how they
>> were resolved?
>>
>> Your writing recently is riveting, very well organized with very good
>> information.  You seem to have many good resources and use
>> them well.  Thank you for your efforts.  You seemed very quiet
>> when I was reading the
>>  archives.
>>
>>
>> Phil
>>
>>
>> My apologies Mr.Brashear.  Yahoo extends the quote area below;
>> I am not able to respond below your comment to follow your example.
>> There isa way to trick the computer but I forget what it is at this 
>> moment.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >________________________________
>> >
>> >
>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Phillip Clark Campbell
>> ><pcc_sr at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> This is a very impressive resume of the CVSR Mr.Brannon.  It is
>> >> very much in line with the current Cleveland transit system.  They 
>> >> seem
>> >> to not only counter trends in other cities where massive cutbacks are
>> >> the rule but Cleveland and Ohio are growing.  They seem to be
>> >> systems to emulate.
>> >
>> >From: Derrick Brashear <shadow at gmail.com>
>> >To: pittsburgh-railways at dementix.org
>> >Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 10:48 AM
>> >Subject: [PRCo] Re: East Broad Top Railroad won't run this summer | News
>> | CentreDaily.com
>> >
>> >Cleveland, yes. Ohio? Well, it seems like transit in Ohio is all the 3
>> >Cs (basically, the places I'd be willing to live)
>> >and the rest of it is "hey, can we put another road to some new
>> >suburban development?"
>> >
>> >--
>> >Derrick
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Herb Brannon
> In Cuyahoga Valley National Park
>
>
>