This Chicago streetcar line, which was one of the last to run with non-PCC equipment, had clearance restrictions that resulted in several series of replacement buses being ordered with narrow bodies specifically for this line. The bus line has since been discontinued. Name the line and describe the clearance issue.
[quote user="Miningman"]
Toronto- Yonge Street Line for sure and then Bloor/ Dundas Line. Both lines became subways, had heavyweights and then second hand PCC's.
[/quote above]
PCCs, both second hand and new, did operate on Young during nights and weekends, periods of low traffic when motor-trailer combinations were not required and PCCs could be borrowed from other lines.
Bloor-Danforth did not have motor-trailer operation as far as I know. Young was the only operation, once all the wood equipment was replaced except for some still used during rush hours during WWII. Howere, as traffic grew, two-car PCC mu operation became the normal for rush hours on Bloor-Danforth. This was after the Young subway was open. PCCs never operated mu on Young.
Brooklyn had motor-trailer operation in the 1920's with 4500-series four-motor convertables (like 4573 at Shore Line Trolley), run by two men, pulling 5000-series center-door lightweight steel trailers. The 5000's were then motorized, had rather weird front doors cut into their front-right corners, and made into one-man cars. This was done around 1930.
Cannot think of any other examples at this time. So, RC, please ask the next question.
daveklepperAnd one with a very tenuous connection with PCCs. Motors and trailers both with Peter-Witt door configuration, unusual.
That, of course, was Louisville.
RC: You are correct, mainly in Revere Beach and Suffolk Downs services. The trailers and 4s that is. The CE mu three-car trains were the mainsays of Beacon and Commonwealth during WWII. PCCs cam on in dribs and drabs.
But name some other cities. One where you know the operation was replaced by a subway. And one where heavyweight partly wood cars were built way into the lightwieght steel era, with the trailers out before WWII, but some motors lasting until second-hand PCCs arrived.
And one with a very tenuous connection with PCCs. Motors and trailers both with Peter-Witt door configuration, unusual.
Boston ran center-entrance trailers behind type 4 streetcars though WWII. Boston also had powered Center-Entrance Cars that could train up to three cars. The CEs had a mix of GE PC5 cam control and a special version of the Westinghouse unit switch, the ABPC.
Alexandria?
Didn't Salem, Oregon have trailers in the early 1890s?
Need hints?
Or need another question?
Adding to Cleveland, which did continue some motor-trailer operation thru WWII, name the other North American motor-trailer streetcar (not interurban or rapid transit) operators and where and how used thru WWII.
PRR served Cleveland with the morning and evening "Steelers" to Pittsburgh in competition with the Erie/P&LE' "Sttel Kings". Sleepers were handled to New York as well up to 1958. There was also an Alliance-Cleveland local used as a commuter train by my late father-in-law. The station at 55th and Euclid was originally at ground level, with major Cleveland Railway lines on both Euclid and 55th. It was raised above street level in the early 1920s. PRR's line towards the lakefront joined the NYC grade at around 18th st., passing its lakefront station closed in the late 1920s to head for the ore docks along the Cuyahoga. The line is in use today as NS's Pittsburgh Line, used by Amtrak's Capitol Limited, which does not, of course, stop at 55th st. Traffic to the PRR station was heavy enough even before the lakefront station was closed to reguire CTS to use trailers and later articulated cars on Euclid.
Could be the New York Central System in Buffalo, except that the station was not later raised over and there were about 18 trains a day in the 50's. not four. But it does apply to the New York Central System - Michigan Central in Detroit, except for raise over bit and if you count four trains as four round trips rather than two round trips. The Southern had the situation with the Peachtree Station in Atlanta, but that was later than the 50s. And the Southern is not really an eastern railroad. Ah, the Pennsy service to Cleveland!
This large eastern railroad served a major city with four trains a day through most of the 1950s, including Pullman and parlor service. Although the railroad had track that ran very close to the center of the city, it chose not to join in the use of a union station, preferring to keep its own station about two miles out of the city center located on, and later raised over, a major intersection. Patrons were expected to use city transit if they wanted to go downtown.
I'll post a new question tomorrow morning. I just need to do some fact chaecking first.
rcdrye Then Chattanooga.
Then Chattanooga.
Three trains came in westbound from the Knoxville Division; two came in northbound from the Atlanta Division; two came in southbound from the CNO&TP--and all moved south to the station.
Leaving the station, the two trains that came from the Atlanta Division moved north to Citico Jct. and then to the CNO&TP.
One of the trains from Bristol and a train that originated in Chattanooga moved south to Wauhatchie, where they became westbound for the Memphis Division after traversing a foreign road (they may have been NB on the foreign road; I did not pull its ETT from my collection).
The other two trains from Bristol moved south to Wauhatchie, and continued south on the AGS.
The two trains that came as SB on the CNO&TP ran north to Ooltewah, and became SB again on the Atlanta DIvision.
In most instances, each train had a distinctive number while on the terminal tracks; the CNO&TP trains preserved their CNO&TP numbers to and from the station. The trains to and from the Knoxville Division simply had a"1" or "3" placed in front of the Knoxville Division numbers (Knoxville #17 became 117, etc.; #317 left the station and became AGS 17 at Wauhatchie) The Atlanta trains were given numbers in the 200 series. The trains to and from the Memphis Division were given 400 numbers--#445 became #45.
Johnny
Not Broad Street in Richmond. Remember, you have five divisions of one road coming to the city.
DeggestyWhat is the other terminal, which had WB trains, NB trains and SB trains moving in the same direction on a section of track?
Richmond Broad Street?
rcdrye That only leaves the Seaboard (the other user of Terminal Station). I don't have good enough maps to know exactly how the SAL got to Terminal Station.
That only leaves the Seaboard (the other user of Terminal Station). I don't have good enough maps to know exactly how the SAL got to Terminal Station.
From the SPV map of Atlanta, the Atlanta TT, and the SAL Atlanta Sub TT (4/48) , the SAL left its main just below Long John, to what the SAL called W&A Junction, and Southern called Tower #2 (on the H line), and from there to the station. Coming in from Birmingham, it passed its Howell Yard, proceeded to W&A Junction and thence to the connection with the Southern's H line. thus the SAL trains that ran through Atlanta to Birmingham operated under two different numbers (one SB and one NB) between the station and Tower #2.
SAL's operation through Atlanta was E-W. SAL #5 (Cotton Blossom) arrived at the station as SB #53, and left the station as NB #154.
What is the other terminal, which had WB trains, NB trains and SB trains moving in the same direction on a section of track?
Deggesty You have it right for the Southern's divisions that used the Atlanta Terminal Division. I did fail to mention the Charlotte Division, the trains of which came into Atlanta on the Atlanta Terminal Division; there was no confusion with them, since the Charlotte Division was a North-South operation. The Charlotte Division and Atlanta Division were both operated South-North, and the Birmingham Division was operated East-West. I wish I had an Atlanta Terminal ETT in effect when the Southerner was being operated with a backup move from the station to Birmont when SB and from Birmont to the station when NB, for it then used the mainline between Birmont and its junction with the H line (Chattanooga-Brunswick)--as Amtrak's Crescent does now. Sometime in 1958, the backup move was eliminated, and the seats in the coaches were turned and the engine run around the train during its stop in Atlanta. However, you missed the foreign road that was in the ETT. The CG came into Atlanta on both its own track and on the A℘ the track between Atlanta and East Point was shared. The CG also had trackage rights for its Atlanta-Columbus trains over the A&WP between East Point and Newnan.
You have it right for the Southern's divisions that used the Atlanta Terminal Division. I did fail to mention the Charlotte Division, the trains of which came into Atlanta on the Atlanta Terminal Division; there was no confusion with them, since the Charlotte Division was a North-South operation. The Charlotte Division and Atlanta Division were both operated South-North, and the Birmingham Division was operated East-West.
I wish I had an Atlanta Terminal ETT in effect when the Southerner was being operated with a backup move from the station to Birmont when SB and from Birmont to the station when NB, for it then used the mainline between Birmont and its junction with the H line (Chattanooga-Brunswick)--as Amtrak's Crescent does now. Sometime in 1958, the backup move was eliminated, and the seats in the coaches were turned and the engine run around the train during its stop in Atlanta.
However, you missed the foreign road that was in the ETT.
The CG came into Atlanta on both its own track and on the A℘ the track between Atlanta and East Point was shared. The CG also had trackage rights for its Atlanta-Columbus trains over the A&WP between East Point and Newnan.
I'm going with Birmingham and Atlanta on the Southern Railway System. I think the A&WP (West Point Route) used the Central of Georgia to get out of Atlanta.
I'll start over.
A certain railroad in the South operated two terminal divisions which had trains that were primarily east-west or north-south operating in other geographic directions within the limits of two terminal divisions.
Both terminal divisions were operated North-South, though one was actually primarily East-West in its geographic location..
On one of these terminal divisions, trains from two divisions entered at the North end of the terminal tracks; three were Westward trains from one division, and two were Northward trains from another division; they all went to the station, moving South. Of these trains, one that had entered Westward from the first division left the station as a Southward train on the terminal tracks until it entered a third division, whereupon it again became a Westward train. The other two from the first division left the terminal as South trains--and remained South trains when. they left the terminal tracks and entered a fourth division--at the same point at which the single train left the terminal division. When the two trains that came in to the terminal as Northward trains (and then became Southward trains) left the station, they moved as Northward trains to their junction with a fourth division--and continued as Northward trains to their destination.
I do not have a Terminal ETT for the other division latr than 1935, so I cannot give the situation as it was from about 1940 to 1968. However, the situation in 1935 was essentially the same as it became in 1968, except for the number of trains moving through tthe terminal.
Trains from two divisions entered the terminal at the same point and moved Southward to the station; they were southbound from one division and eastbound from the other division, and were Southward trains within the terminal division.
A foreign road also used the terminal tracks to reach the station--and the tenant road operated its trains here as East-West trains--but, course they were North-South trains while on the terminal tracks. Since they had to change direction at the station, a train that was Westward on it own track would come in as a Southward train--and leave the station as a Northward train, becoming again a Westward train after regaining its own company's track..
Name the road that operated these terminal divisions, the foreign road mentioned, and the two cities. For extra feeling-good, name another foreign road that was used by one train immediately after it left the terminal division of the road that operated the two terminal divisions
One of the terminals served five divisions of the system; the other served four divisions of the system--and two divisions of the tenant road,
While we are on the subject of directional travel, I know of two places in the South (both on the same railroad) which had northbound and westbound trains moving in the same geographical direction
One of them had two trains that were shown with one number each (for each direction) in the public TT--but traveled in two directions in the terminal. The other also had a tenant road for part of the entry into the station.
What are the two locations, and how were the trains differentiated so everybody involved what train was where?
Johnny and Rob:
Yes the Duluth trains were "pool" trains. The answer is quite simple. Trains doing toward Duluth and Superior were considered "east" and trains away from Duluth and Superior were considered "west". Now the Hinckley Sub is north and south.
Next question?
Ed Burns
Were those trains part of the St. Paul-Duluth pool with the Soo Line?
Ed, I really have no idea. I do know that when a foreign road uses another road via trackage rights, its trains are identified as foreign, and will be given numbers that do not duplicate the owning road's numbers. And, if a road that has trains from more than one divison using the same tracks at a location, there may well be a terminal ETT that shows all trains with both terminal numbers as well as the division numbers--especially if the divisions have different directions of operation..
I was simply looking at the SPV maps of the area, and deducing the answer from what I saw.
Johnny:
You have part of the answer, but I am looking for specific reasons. The NP St. Paul Division timetable showed NP numbers for those trains. Another example was GN 7 from Northtown to St. Cloud was NP 77.
Keep studying and have fun.
NP Eddie ALL: The main idea in this forum is for people to research and discuss obsecure items. I enjoy meeting new found railfans. My questions are: The GN used NP rails from Northtown to Coon Creek. A GN train from Northtown to Coon Creek was carded as westbound to the Creek and then became eastbound once on GN tracks. Why? Similarily on the NP Skally line, a train running from White Bear Lake to St. Paul was westbound and from St. Paul to White Bear Lake and points north was eastbound. Why? Do your research and have fun doing it. Ed Burns Happily retired NP-BN-BNSF from Northtown.
ALL:
The main idea in this forum is for people to research and discuss obsecure items. I enjoy meeting new found railfans.
My questions are:
The GN used NP rails from Northtown to Coon Creek. A GN train from Northtown to Coon Creek was carded as westbound to the Creek and then became eastbound once on GN tracks. Why? Similarily on the NP Skally line, a train running from White Bear Lake to St. Paul was westbound and from St. Paul to White Bear Lake and points north was eastbound. Why?
Do your research and have fun doing it.
Happily retired NP-BN-BNSF from Northtown.
For the second part, apparently NP considered the line towards the Twin Ports to be an east-west line, even though the actual direction was more north than east.
These are what they look like from the SPV maps.
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