New York is way out of my info zone, but I'm learning more...
New question:
This large transit system and its successors operated many articulated cars in both city and interurban service. The system's shops built the articulated interurbans from heavy cars bought used, and used both homebuilt and purchased articulateds in city service. Some of the city cars replaced the interurban cars in the last years of interurban service and were in turn replaced in part by cars that had replaced the cars the interurbans were contructed from!
Name the system and any successors. Bonus points for naming the source of the interurban cars.
By alll means ask the next question. Basically, since the IRT was in receivership, they had not paid taxes for some time, and the State and City took the value of the scrap steel as payment of back and current taxes. The IRT hoped most passengers would use 9th Avenue service, did increase it, but soon restored older headways, with only a slight increase in 9th Aveue serivce remaining. Some passnegers apparently did use the Broadway - 7th Avenue susbway with the interchage to the Woodlawn trains at 149th & the Concourse. Many Bronx passengers switched to the Concourse - 8th Avenue line, fulfilling the city's hopes. In the two years between the 6th Avenue elevated closing and the opening of the 6th Avenue subway, the M7 and M6 bus routes showed very high ridership and close headways for Manhattan passengers, including my parents and me. These were part of the GM-owned NY Omnibus system.
The line was mostly replaced (but not entirely) bay the sixth avenue subway (todays's A,C,E) at the south end, and B,D,F and M from 53d to 4th. One of the reasons given for condemnation was that the truss frames designed for steam operation in the 1880s had sagged and were in danger of collapse. During the last few years of operation the third rail had to be raised or lowered to account for cross-level problems. Unlike almost all other NY el structures, Sixth Avenue was made up of longitudinal trusses instead of girders. The only similar truss structure elsewhere in the US was the Jackson Park line of Chicago's South Ride Rapid Transit. Unlike 6th Aves through trusses with cross girders. SSRT's was set up as the more normal deck construction.
Prior to WWII, which was the first Major elevated rapid transit line abandonment in New York City, not just a small shuttle, but an abandonment that impacted many riders. What year, or be even more specific as to date if you can. What routes were effected. On what basis was the abandonment forced, what kind of transportation initially replaced it, where did its passengers go, and what eventually and when replaced it and is operating today. Just whose idea was this abandonment?
CA&E trailers were loaded regularly at the Laramie Ave. Freight house and driven to the CNS&M ramp at Montrose Avenue. Other than the lettering, they were identical to the CNS&M trailers. Their use declined after CNS&M changed the tie down system in the early 1930s.
Your question, Dave!
Well, the North Shore was famous for its piggyback operations, and the South Shore also had them, so the one with the trailers and no operations must be the Roarin Elgin, the CA&E. The three Insull Interurbans, an affiliation of sorts.
At least one of the line's affiliates was famous for piggyback operations, and the other one also had them. Freight operations on all of them lasted until well after WW II.
Happy holidays to all of you guys!
Same time zone as Illinois Terminal.
SACRAMENTO NORTHERN OR CENTRAL CALIFORNIA TRACTION
BOTH ESSENTIALY OWNED BY WP, WHO MAY HAVE ASSIGNED TRAILER OWNERSHIP TO ONE OR THE OTHER FOR ACCOUNTING PPURPOSES
Piedmont Northern
As far as I know, IT never had any piggyback operation in its electric years, but it didn't have any trailers either. The line I'm looking for was associated with other electric lines also known for freight operations.
Illnois Terminal
While I was digging around I also found that the Nickel Plate switched CERA boxcars belonging to Northern Ohio Traction & Light to a produce market in Cleveland.
This electric railroad, which was known for freight operations, owned several piggyback trailers, even though it never operated piggyback service.
rc is correct, as usual, and we now await his question
Looks like they only handled a few cars for a few miles. The radial couplers were designed to be fairly stiff, as traction operations often involved pushing them. IRR ran them in trains of over 10 cars on the Louisville and Fort Wayne lines.
rfpjohn I wonder if they had extensive special instructions for maximum tonnage trailing, lineup of consists, etc. Jackknifing such equipment is a real possibility.
I wonder if they had extensive special instructions for maximum tonnage trailing, lineup of consists, etc. Jackknifing such equipment is a real possibility.
Monon handled Indiana RR CERA box trailers with radial couplers from an interchange (on the former Terre Haute Indianapolis and Eastern) near Greencastle IN to a cement plant a few miles away. IRR also received standard freight cars in interchange at that location, so Monon often took or left mixed strings. See page 51 of CERA bulletin 128 "Indiana Railroad the Magic Interurban" for a photo. IRR handled a fair amount of railroad interchange at various locations, mostly coal, but the Greencastle interchange ran to box cars.
Most interurbans had freight operations that in most cases did include movement of standard railroad freight cars over some of the interurbans' tracks. Obvious exceptions were interubans using other than standard gauge, but even there, some cases of a third rail for freight existed. In most cases, there were limitations because of city ordenances or tight curves or restricted clearances where regular freight cars could not be handled. Many interubans had their own freight cars with pivoting couplers that could be handled on the tightest curves, and these were interchaged between interuban lines for through interline service, often with the power going through as well. But I know of only one case where a class I railroad handled interuban feight trailers with radial coupleres with the Clas I's power, sometimes coupled to standard railroad freightcars. Who, where, and what?
Correct - except that Toronto gauge is 4' 10 7/8" (1495 mm). This odd gauge allowed wagons without wheel flanges to ride in the flangeway on tram rail, and dates back to horsecars in 1861. Canadian railways used 5' 6" as their "standard" between 1851 and 1873.
Louisville used the fairly common "Pennsylvania" gauge, with some three rail track to accomodate interurbans. Columbus and Cincinnati Ohio also had broad gauge lines, with some mixed gauge.
PCCs ordered by Louisville, KY, Transit, for broad-gauge operationl, about 5ft,2-1/2in, sold to Cleveland for standard gauge, replaced with shrinking streetcar operations by 4000-series Peter-Witt cars (where not replaced by buses) when sold to Toronto with 4ft,10-1/2in gauge.
This order of streetcars which was built for a city where they never operated, was replaced in service by older cars when sold to yet a third city, and changed track gauge each time they were sold. Cities and track gauges.
rcdyre: I got thinking about logical places for a coal hauling interurban to operate, then I remembered a Trains article about the P&LE from quite a few years ago, which had a nice map of the region, including the Y&S.
As I still have a question percolating in the other Classic Trains section, why don't you field the next one.
rfpjohnI think you are refering to the Youngstown and Southern, which I believe was owned by the same coal company as the Montour Railroad. The coal was supplied to mills in Youngstown, Ohio.
I'll accept that as the answer. The Y&S was acquired by Pittsburgh Coal (which also owned the Montour RR) to connect with their Pittburgh Lisbon and Western. PCC also had a private railroad from the PL&W to the Ohio River, getting them a .60/ton rate compared to a P&LE or PRR .85/ton. The ICC went back and forth on the Y&S's exemption as an interurban, eventually ruling against PCC on the rate. The exemption status ended up playing a role in several later decisions, including barring P&N from connecting its separated divisions.
Y&S ran suburban service from Youngstown until 1948, trolley freight until 1953. A bit of it survived as an industrial line for many years after that.
I think you are refering to the Youngstown and Southern, which I believe was owned by the same coal company as the Montour Railroad. The coal was supplied to mills in Youngstown, Ohio.
The coal was used to make steel. The coal company also had a private railroad built as part of the project. The P&N's attempt to bridge its two divisions was a casualt of the ICC's decision. H&F was part of Potomac Edison's empire, not a coal company's.
I'm going to go with the Peidmont and Northern down in the Carolinas. Strong ties to the Duke family.
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