The other places that had red cars that I can think of are Los Angeles, the Pacific Electric and Pittsburgh. I don't think PE had that many PCC' s. That leaves Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh cars 1000-1699 (except for 1600) all had the roof hatch. Pittsburgh's first PCC, which was the first production PCC ever, was numbered 100 (later M11) and did not have the roof hatch. Nor did 1600, which was essentially identical to the postwar 1700-1799 except for some wartime shortcuts. The 1500 series was only 65 cars instead of Pittsburgh's usual 100 car order. All built by St. Louis Car, split 75/25 between Westinghouse and GE electrical equipment.
Pittsburgh had the second largest fleet of bought-new PCCs after Chicago. Chicago had 83 prewar and 600 postwar, Pittsburgh had 565 prewar/wartime and 101 postwar (including 1600). Toronto may have ended up with more total since it bought out a bunch of U.S. fleets. 570 of Chicago's postwar cars contributed parts to CTA's fleet of PCC L cars.
I have the exact number for Toronto and will post it. Remember it about 730, of which about 550 were new. Some postwar new and one of the two goups of ex-Cleveland were made mu, after delivery and operation without mu control.
Retiring of PCCs in Toronto began after the opening of the Bloor-Danforth subway line.
IGN, you're up.
Lima is noted for the many Shay locomotives the produced over the years.
Many Shays built were not built to run on steel rails. What were they built to run on and what were the modifications?(Not simply a different gauge)
Rgds IGN
Some Shays (and Climaxes and Heislers) were built to operate on tram roads, where the "rails" were squared off timbers. The usual setup for this involved wide, double-flanged wheels. Switches were set up like stub switches. A variation on this was the "pole" road, using round logs as rails. I don't recall seeing any pictures of Shays set up for pole roads (though I know they existed), but I have seen pictures of a bunch of Class A Climaxes set up that way.
Poking around the web I'd found this a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.shaylocomotives.com/trucks/trk-11.jpg
There are other pics of logging Shay' s (and a Heisler) on log rails on the internet. I'd heard of them and saw a collection online of the pics. It was kind of a unique adaptation. I would guess motor trucks of various sorts replaced the lot very quickly. Some of the characters involved in surface (ie on solid ground not water) transportation of logs had all sorts of interesting stories. Some of these stories made it into print at the time.
I guess I put a too easy question out.
rcdyre your question.
The IGN
My Grandfather worked on a pole road in the Puget Sound area around 1910. Many of the companies that tried pole or tram rails either left the business or converted to more conventional rails. Motor trucks didn't get involved until fairly late.
There was a fairly well-known lumber railroad operation that used electric locomotives with special pickup arrangements. The company also used early diesels. Need the lumber company name and the state it operated in.
rcdryeNeed the lumber company name and the state it operated in.
Is that Minnesota, where it was organized, or California where the railroad and the principal operations were?
A perhaps interesting note:
"y the mid-1950's Fruit Growers [who acquired the line and technically as a result also answer the question] no longer needed the electrified logging railroad ... as they were pretty well cut out of that area. Most harvesting activity was taking place far to the north of [the area the railroad served], and the 82,000 acre Burney tract was one of the last (and largest) un-tapped stands left. Fruit Growers surveyed a railroad line that, if built, would have run from Poison Lake on the WP's highline ... to Burney, and the line would have been electrified. However, the sudden introduction of cardboard boxes into the citrus shipping business ended the need for Fruit Growers to build to Burney, and instead the harvesting rights were sold to the McCloud River Lumber Company, who in turned loaned money to the McCloud River Railroad to complete the new line to Burney in 1955."
I find this an interesting assertion, because I'd almost automatically think that with its early interest in and knowledge of diesel power, that would be the favored power for a new line.
California is the correct state - need the lumber company name...
If I were to sing about "the grief you are causing to me" ... I would get to the important part of its name by and by.
A famous mythological figure featured prominently in their advertising.
And for those interested in early hundred-tonners with 55-mph gearing:
This engine had a 'life' after logging service. Where did she go, what was her number there (and details of any 'sisters'), and what happened to her?
RMEThis engine had a 'life' after logging service. Where did she go, what was her number there (and details of any 'sisters'), and what happened to her? Add Quote to you
It went to American Rolling Mills (as E-103) in 1940, joining 100-ton sister E-101. ARM also had 5 60-ton units (541-545?). E-103 was reported scrapped in 1962.
Good job!
In a series of trackage rights grants, these two related lines, A and B, were able to abandon several long stretches of flood-prone trackage including long pile trestles. One of the two railroads got rights to a section of a third railroad (C) to connect its two pieces in what ended up being a switchback route. The original junctions of the two railroads retained ball signals even after the cutbacks, one of the junctions being named after the original destination of B's line.
In the longest lasting configuration railroad A split to the west and north, with railroad A crossing B's line west and joining B's line north at a second junction near the split. In a small city nearby, ownership changed when B ran on A to the end of A's branch, where B had a switchback connection to C. A few miles up C, B regained its own line which had been abandoned between there and the small city. One of the two ball signals involved in this picturesque operation is still there, and some of the trackage remains, but the only really active line today is the successor to C.
The original railroads are probably the Rutland, Centrql Vermont, qnd Delaware and Hudson.
Move little further northeast. None of the lines you listed was involved, though railroad C is related to one of them. Both of the other lines had predecessors that made it to Canada, too.
The Grand Trunk is related to the Central Vermont, so that is one. Another must be the Bangor and Aroostick (Sp) and so I assume the third is the Maine Central.
You have two of the three railroads involved, but you've gone too far east. Most of this zig-zag route was within a couple of miles of a river that forms a state boundary.
Instead of Maine Central, St. Johnsbury and Lake Champlain?
Maine Central is the third. Now you have Boston and Maine (A), Maine Central (B) and Grand Trunk (C). Now construct the zig-zag route with two ball signals between the two endpoints.
Don't have the material at hand to do the research and lack the time to Google, so somebocy else can pick up thses pieces and be credited with the right answer.
Here's the start for the rest of you - the B&M line heads northeast from Wells River VT/Woodsville NH.
Since Dave was at least in the right neighborhood, I'll turn it over to him.
Boston and Maine's Groveton NH branch left the line to Berlin NH at Whitefield. It crossed the MEC's Beecher Falls (VT) branch at Waumbek Jct. The MEC line left the Mountain Deivision at Quebec Jct., the name a legacy of the Beecher Falls branch extending over the border to Stansfield QC. In the 1920s, after some flooding wiped out part of the B&M line from Waumbek Jct to Lancaster, and part of the MEC's line from Lancaster to North Stratford, the B&M, MEC and Grand Trunk agreed to swap rights or extend new ones. B&M trains to Groveton operated over the MEC from Waumbek Jct. to Lancaster, MEC Beechers Falls trains operated over B&M from Lancaster to Groveton where they made a switchback connection to the Grand Trunk to get to North Stratford, where they resumed their own tracks. Surprisingly, almost all of this is still in service except for a short stretch from Columbia NH to Beecher Falls VT. - unlike the B&M line south of Whitefield, which is a trail.
Here's a map: http://www.nhrra.org/resources/map.htm
Which was the last streamliner to Miami that carried a real closed observation car, which train and which rialroad.
The obsrvation car was a reguolar loiunge-snack-observation car as typial of many streamliners. But duirng the winter season, anothe lounge car could often be seen on this train, year round on a different streamliner, and these lounge cars, peculiar to this railroad (and thorugh-service conntecitons) and only to two particular trians, were unjique in North Amverica at time. Give as much information on both trains as you can, as well as the unique lounge cars.
In 1966, the Silver Meteor still carried a tavern-lounge observation car on the year, year-round (I rode in one, out of Miami, in 1970).
5 double bedroom-buffet lounge cars (Miami Beach, Palm Beach, and Hollywood Beach) had, as I recall, windows overhead in the lounge section.
Johnny
Right on both counts. Regarding 1966, so did I, north from Jacksonville. It was the only Florida train with one, and coach passengers were allowed to use it. Indeed, sleepers were forward on the Silver Meteor, and sometimes one of the five you menjtioned served as the Pullman passengers' exclusive lounge, forward of the diner. But one of the five was a regular on each Silver Star.consist. Occasionally, one of them may have shown up on a Silver Comet to Atlanta and Birmingham, but I don't know about that. Your question.
As to the location of the cars in SAL's Florida Silver Fleet, I have the impression that it was standard practice to locate the sleepers at the front, and the coaches at the rear--except for the St. Petersburg cars, which were more or less in the middle, so as to reduce the switching necessary in Wildwood.
Back to the Southern in 1945 (Oh, no! can't he get away from that road in that year?)
New question: The Asheville Special carried, southbound, one NY-Asheville sleeper and two Washington-Asheville sleepers. These cars went north on the Asheville Special--which also picked up, in Greensboro, a Winston-Salem to New York sleeper that came into Greensboro on #8. Why did the Asheville Special not pick this car up in Winston-Salem?
My guess would be that a bunch of switching was already required at Greensboro. Assuming #8 was an earlier departure, it might have given the Winston-Salem patrons a better chance to get dinner in the diner.
No, that's not it. There was little switching done in Greensboro for this train; the cars from Asheville and Winston-Salem were added to the Aiken-Augusta Special (#32), which had its own diner, and carried the coaches from August and all of the sleepers up to Washington.
No, that's not it. Except for adding the sleeper from Winston-Salem, there was no switching done in Greensboro.
Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!
Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter