CSSHEGEWISCH One of them was C&NW with "Sip-and-Snack" cars on its bi-level streamliners.
One of them was C&NW with "Sip-and-Snack" cars on its bi-level streamliners.
The other railroad had three cars rebuilt from regular diners for the particular food service on what was still one of its better trains.
Two midwestern systems with a long history of first class service had seriously reduced passenger service by 1970. One had two trains that still carried diners and sleepers, the other had none. For the day trains both carried less-than-full-service food options under names that (maybe) made them sound a little better than "basic food service". Name the railroads and their respective trademarked food services.
I mentioned that Phili had eight traction outfits, PTC, Red Arrow, P&W, LVT, Port Authority, Franklin Park, PRR, and Reading. Exceeded by New York, however, IRT, BMT, IND, H&M, Third Avenue, PRR, NYCentral, NYNH&H, LIRR. QBridge.
h7m
I believe the cars are at Brookville. Estimates for the conversion were too low considering the underbody modifications necessary to permit use of PCC trucks.
Except in the very heaviest of rains, whatever the technique in controling water intake seemed to work OK in the Boston Center-Entrancee cars.
Next question?
Boston's CE cars had the poles mounted on the ends, with hatches for the ropes in the middle over the conductor's station. Since the catchers were inside, some room had to be left for the trolley rope. Needless to say, it made for a mess on a rainy day, at least until you got into the subway.
At 69th St., Philadelphia & West Chester had thirty two broad gauge double ended center entrance cars, with the poles set "normally" on the roof. Several of these (including regauged 62 in Maine) have been preserved. In 1949 P&WCT successor Philadelphia Suburban Transportation bought 14 double-ended MU cars in PCC bodies but equipped with outside equalizer trucks and traditional non-PCC wheelsets.
There are two bodies of these stored somewhere which San Francisco has considered setting up as PCCs. It's not much of a stretch, the controls and motors are the same type used in true PCC cars.
Now, two more questions for you to answer: Why the heroic efforts to prevent roof leaks on the Boston CE cars and what was different and what was similar in Philadelophia at 69th Street? (Mostly rush hours in two-car trains) Also replaced by cars ----with PCC-like bodies but not PCCs? (Although I still have some hope that two will become true PCCs eventually.)
Then next question, please.
Oh, sure. The Boston Center-entrance cars in the 6000 series (Kuhlman 1919) needed a conductor since the motorman was buried in the front of the car. BER (later MTA) ran them in trains of up to three cars. They were replaced by MU PCCs. 6131 and 6270 are at Seashore Trolley Museum in Maine, 6131 under restoration with steel on hand to rebuild 6270's underframe. They were mostly used on center reservation routes (includng today's B, C and E Green line T routes.)
The missing one would be New Haven Ct, where the Connecticut Co. used open cars to handle traffic for Yale home football games at the Yale Bowl through the 1947 season. Seashore has four of them, two in the operating fleet (303 and 838). We have pictures of some of them with more than 150 on board, on seats (15 bench), running boards and the roof. The conductor's job was helped a bit by Conn. Co's use of street collectors at Union Station and the Yale Bowl.
The Catonsville line had been converted to broad-gauge before WWII and was interoperable with the rest of the system. When I rode it in 1947, age 15, with John Stern and Bill Watson, it was one-man. The two-man train operation was the Sparrows Point line, but you did get the right city and by implication, car type (semi-convertable) so I will let you have that one free and clear.
And you got Fairmont Park, an isolated Phili-gauge totally two-man opeh-car operation, except during inclement weather, when the one closed car they had provided a basic service for the few that rode.
Remember a car type that can be ridden today on an existsing trolley musuen next to a mothballed steam railroad and you will correct your error concerning the third system. You cannot ride it in a train today, just as a single car, but it usually did run in two-car trains and ran rush-hour only. The system took delivery of post-war mu one-man cars that replaced most of these.
You mentioned Boston, and I think you should know the car type and its use, so go ahead.
You missed one city. It used a two-man-required car only for an Autumn repeated special event, with the cars carrying huge loads, possibly preventing the collection of all fares. The conductor's job woiuld be considered an occupational hazard today with far more auto traffic. This was basically a low-speed non-stop operation between RR station and attraction, all on city streets.
Several operating museums have the cars, and I operated one frequently.
The cities are easy - Boston, Philadelphia and Baltimore. Baltimore is the one that restarted trolley (OK, light rail) service after its loss some decades ago.
The tough problem is verifying which lines were two-man. Not surprisingly, a lot of that info is buried in books and not (yet) readily accesible on the internet. Here goes an attempt.
Around Boston the Eastern Mass Street Railway had some lines that were oriented toward beaches. A couple of them crossed movable bridges and those may have required conductors.
Philadelphia had the Fairmount Park trolley, with open cars, which would require a conductor (5'2 1/2"?). Lehigh Valley Transit was still running over the (third rail) P&W to get to 69th St. Most P&W equipement was set up for one-man operation, but conductors may have been required for the move from the Norristown station to the Ice Rink, where the P&W and LVT exchanged crews.
In Baltimore the #8 Catonsville line (standard gauge, most Baltmore lines were 5'4 1/2") was on the outside edge of the system and did most of its business on weekends. The double-ended semi-convertibles used there most likely were two-man.
What more hints do you need? Admittadly one of the systems or lines or whatever you call it was relatively obscure, with leasure time pasengers, in the city with two of the answers, not one, the ciiy wih eight different providers of electric railway service in two gauges, one entering on trackage rights, six using 550-600 volt power, four using passenger equipment equipped with trolley poles, and three, not two, using trolley poles wihin the city.
And only one of the sysems, the one with heroic protection against roof leaks, was not connected, passenger-wise, to the others by 11000V AC catenary.
Five systems, four cities, WWII two-man cars. Three cities with light rail today.
One of the lines used an old type of car not usually thought of as equipped for MU. But most of this large system's 2-man cars were MU, and much the RoW was provate, high-speed, and had block signals. Single PCCs took over as the system contracted and ridership diminished. None have survived in museums, but I believe one of one-man versions, not MU, has survived, and there is at least one similar to it from elsewhere at anothr musuem. During WWI and WWII this was the heaviest line on the system but was not the last to survive.
Two others shared the same general body design as far as door pacement, but were very different in construction. Also MU. Despite system contraction, lines that used these cars still operate today with very different equipment. Survivors are in operating museums.
The other two were leasure time transportation using a type of car common in musuems but obsolete for normal transportation even during WWII. Neither system exists today. One had its ridership peaks in the summer and was the main car-type for the single-line system. The other was used only in the Autumn for a repeated special event, carried huge crowds, and more normal and somewhat less obsolete cars handled the regular traffic on a slowly contracting large system. Neither MU.
Well, one upon thinking about it, may have hqd zero or minimum auro[lane sharing, and even that would not actually be a street with buildings on one or both sides, but all five used trolley poles and single-wire overheqd. Two were operations for leasure-time activity and definitely not commuting between home and office or factory. Two entirely or partially seved the same city, although a third system would have to be used between them, even though they were of the same gquge. One had to have heroic easures to control roof leaks and an exqmple or examples are at a trolley-museum. Three of the cities have light rail today, but only two grew from legacy systems, with the other seeing rail put down after it being lifted 45-50 years earlier. All operations were in cities linked by the NEC.
In the immediate Post-WWII period there were five under-trolley-wire-with-some-street-running East-Coast city operations that required conductors. What were they and give as much information about them as you can.
St. Louis' streetcars ran on 4'10" gauge, inherited from horse cars, and also used by cable cars.
Seventy of St. Louis' PCCs went to San Francisco, some remaining in storage, but none in the Market Street Railway fleet.
St. Louis. The transit system. The city also saw standard-guage PCC's of Illinois Terminal for their Granit City service.
Many cities had odd streetcar track gauges as a relic of earlier horsecar or cable lines. This U.S. city had streetcars into the 1960s, operating on a not-quite-standard gauge. Many of the city's PCC cars had long careers on other systems.
Wairing for your question.
daveklepper Ask the next question, please. Note from Cleveland to Toronto, gauge change again, wide, but not as wide as Louisville.
Ask the next question, please. Note from Cleveland to Toronto, gauge change again, wide, but not as wide as Louisville.
Ahh. the famous Louisville PCCs. 25 cars Ordered from St. Louis Car in 1946 (on broad gauge trucks) to replace the Peter Witts, they were never used in Louisville. Regauged to standard and carried to Cleveland (probably on the Big Four) they served in Cleveland for only six years. In 1952 all of Cleveland's PCCs (including Cleveland's original 50 Pullmans) were sold to Toronto, where many remained in service until the 1980s.
San Francisco's Market Street Railway's car 1062 was painted for Louisville at one time, but it has since been repainted to honor Pittsburgh Railways.
I was referering to the PCC's the "strange event" referred in the original posting or the first hints. You know the story. Would you like to tell it or prefer that I do?
I know Louisville & Interurban had some standard gauge cars that shared track with Louisville Railways. Based on sketchy info in the CERA book I think some of the cars used by New Albany & Louisville before they started leasing the Peter Witts may have come from Louisville & Interurban. There may have been some dual-gauge track in New Albany, but the CERA book doesn't cover it, suggesting that the bridge trains operated on different track from the local streetcars.
Please feel free to enhance. I would love to fill in the blanks or correct my guesswork.
One thing of note - the IPS/PSofI cars used for suburban service via Jeffersonville before 1932 were set up for train operation. Indiana Railroad refurbished them in 1934 for service in Terre Haute, where they were very popular as "brand new" cars. IRR moved them from Anderson Shops to Terre Haute as three car trains, but they were never used in MU again - retired in the 1938 sale of the Terre Haute streetcar system. In the complicated world of the IRR, the Terre Haute system was also a PSofI property.
OK. Thanks for checking the book. So the dual-gauge track was in Louisville itself. You did mention trailers, so that covers the two car types.
But do you wish me to discuss how Louisvile Transit was involved in cars that had gauge changed or would you like to do so?
And by all means ask the next question. Thanks
The problem with anything about the Indiana Railroad is that it wasn't a merger, it was in many ways simply a gentlemen's agreement. The lines between Indianapolis and Louiville were former Interstate Public Service, including the Indianapolis, Columbus and Seymour, which was leased by IPS. IPS became Public Service of Indiana in 1931. Local operations in Jeffersonville and New Albany remained PSofI, though operated under the Indiana Railroad name.
I framed my answeres from the CERA Indiana Railroad book. IPS/PSI owned and ran local streetcars in both Jeffersonville and New Albany. Standard gauge cars ran on the Big Four bridge, including suburban cars. The Jeffersonville suburban operation and local streetcars ended in 1932, with the through passenger and freight service (and dual gauge track in Louisville) lasting until 1938, when the IRR cut service back to Seymour. IRR cars to Louisville picked up/dropped off a second crew member in Jeffersonville as required by the trackage rights agreement with the Big Four.
The New Albany & Louisville'soperation over the K&IT bridge on the dual-gauge gantlet with Leased Louisville Railways Peter Witt cars (and trailers) lasted until after World War II, operated by New Albany Transit, which became Home Transit. The local New Albany streetcars were sold to the same company and ran into the late 1930s, after which they were replaced by busses.
ACF had a plant in Jeffersonville which had track connection with the IPS/PSI. Many streetcars and interurbans, including many of the High Speeds, were delivered there.
The Indianapolis-Seymour stretch remained in service from January-September 1941 to fulfill some franchise requirement of the underlying IC&S. The wreck in September 1941 resulted in suspension of service, which never restarted.
I'll have to check my sources. My CERA Indiana RR book is not at the Yeshiva. There is some disconnection between your statements and my memory of the history in that book. Do you have access to that book and can you check what it says about what you wrote? Aside from the bridge question, where i have doubts but no firm knowledge, I'm quite certain that for a time Indiana Rairoad operated the local New Albany streetcars, although Public Service or another power company owned the trackage. And please finish the answer: Describe the difference betwern ther two versions of Peter Witts that the Daisy Line (Louisville and New Albany) aquired from Louisville Railways and returned to Louisville Transit. And in what way was Louisville Transit involved with cars whose gauge was changed?
And then ask the next question.
The broad gauge tracks were not on the Big Four Bridge, though Indiana Railroad's service to Louisville ran there. The Louisville railways cars ran to New Albany directly over the Kentucky and Indiana Terminal bridge. Home Transit, which bought the route in 1934, also acquired Public Service Company of Indiana's local New Albany trackage along with several standard gauge streetcars, including some Birneys and a pair of curved-side lightweights.
Indiana Railroad's cars used in local service from Louisville to Jeffersonville went to Terre Haute, where they lasted to the end of streetcar service in 1939.
The track on the K&IT bridge was a gantlet, not dual-gauge.
Kind of sounds like Louisville, where the broad gauge Peter Witts crossed the same bridge used by (standard gauge) Indiana RR, the bridge being owned by NYC's CCC&StL and known as the Big Four Bridge. IRR used dual-gauge track to get to Louisville's Interurban Terminal. Louiville Peter Witts ran over the bridge until 1947.
At one time Indiana RR had standard gauge streetcar service in Jeffersonville and New Albany, using Birneys among other types. The streetcar service was dropped after the 1937 flood.
IRR service to Louisville ended in January 1941, though a remnant of the IRR between Indianapolis and Seymour was operated by Indiana Service Corp from January to September, until it was shut down following a collision between an IRR High Speed and the line car.
After the PC merger, PC moved all traffic to Louisville to the 14th St. Bridge used by the former PRR. Unused after 1968, it was converted into a pedestrian walkway as part of the Louisville Riverfront Park in 2013.
Up to sometime in 1939 or 1940, two interurban lines, one standard guage and one broad gauge, operated across the bridge. At one end, the broad-gauge interurban line ran on streetcar traciks with streetcars of the same types that the interurban had purchased from them. There. the standard- gauge did have some of its own tracks and some shared at one time with other standard-gauge interurbans and also a freight house. At the other end, the standard-gauge streetcar system had a small standard-gauge local streetcar system, that itself did not cross the bridge, and used Birneys. When the interurban left the area, retracting to a point north-north-west, where it continued to Januaey 1941 or later that summer, depending how you figure it. locals bought the town system, and it survived through WWII.
Both interurbans had to have an extra crew-member as a flag-man in case stopped on the bridge.
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