Overmod There is a common wives' tale that Carnegie's 'simplified spelling' craze and Theodore Roosevelt are responsible for the period where the 'h' was sometimes omitted. It's Mendenhall's and Harrison's Board on Geographical Names (from 1890) that "officially" simplified the names of all American cities with 'burgh' to 'burg'. It's in the period this was active that names like 'Pittsburg Junction' got established, and interestingly, never reversed.
I was under the assumption that Col Robert McCormick and the Chicago Tribune were the primary promoters of "simplified spelling". You could still occasionally find it in the Trib into the 1960's.
BaltACDAll things considered - one cannot truly understand the considerations that were in play when decisions were made well over half a century ago. While we can see the results as they played out over time, we don't know the 'forward looking' assumptions the decision makers used in making their decisions.
Samuel Johnstonwest of Pittsburgh [there IS an "h" at the end!)
Depends on when. The official city organization papers in 1816 have no 'h' at the end!
There is a common wives' tale that Carnegie's 'simplified spelling' craze and Theodore Roosevelt are responsible for the period where the 'h' was sometimes omitted. It's Mendenhall's and Harrison's Board on Geographical Names (from 1890) that "officially" simplified the names of all American cities with 'burgh' to 'burg'. It's in the period this was active that names like 'Pittsburg Junction' got established, and interestingly, never reversed.
(I have always suspected that the "Queensboro" of the 59th St. Bridge comes from the same cause.)
OK--I'll do it now. Define Terms. There's the Panhandle west to Steubenville from Pittsburgh; deceptively short compared to following the Ohio River as the Erie & Pittsburgh line did--also PRR. Then there is Steubenville west to Columbus and so on. The Pandandle proper to Steubenville had curves and grades--a stiff eastbound grade out of Weirton Jct (Hanlin Hill) which my Dad told me was a helper district plus the Dinsmore/Bertha/NumberFour Tunnel with clearance problems at its top. That tunnel was by-passed (NOT daylighted!) 1949-50 in a clearance project that involved several other tunnels Pitttsburgh-Columbus. Also the bridge over the Ohio at Steubenville was single-track until today's massive two-track continuous truss was built around it in 1926. (My Dad, now 102, remembers the celebration for its completion; he and I are descended from the Hanlin of Hanlin Hill.) Remember too traffic was different in former times and places along the line once contributed much more traffic. Weirton Steel didn't happen until 1909; before then Hollidays Cove was maybe 500 people. A good investment for you all is a set of SPV Atlases for the US; ironic that a British publisher puts out the best maps of the US rail system with very few errors. It will set you back $450 or so but it's useful, or just buy the parts you really need; since my mileage-collecting is in the Northeast I can do with extras of just a few of 'em. Oh, the canalization/channelizing of the Ohio River wasn't completed until 1929; there's a photo of the Wheeling suspension bridge in the summer of 1903 with the Ohio about 30 feet wide at most; no river traffic in those days during droughts! Traffic histories are hard to find; I've learned a lot in 50 years of following railroads. I gotta go--but I did get the Panhandle Mingo Jct. to Columbus in 2004--thanks, Bennett!
Au contraire, orsomething like that. The PRR got to St. Louis FIRST, in 1869! The PRR then shortly thereafter acquired a 50% interest in an inferior route to St. Louis. Commodore Vanderbilt saw no need fro a line to St' Louis--which turned out to be a mistake. When Jay Gould arrived on the scene in the late 1870's the lack of a Vanderbilt line to St. Louis was a Serious Drawback and Weakness in its "system"; "Billy" Vanderbilt was running the Vanderbilt system then an while a great operating man he was weak as a strategist and hadn't developed a backbone--yet--untik the NYC&StL crowd took him to the cleaners. Whereupon George Roberts of the PRR sized up the situation and realized selling that 50% of the inferior route to Billy Vanderbilt--for a good price--would cause Gould's house of cards to collapse in short order and rearrange the railroad systems of the Midwest, so Billy fell for it in 1881-2. Note that while the general rule for PennCentral and later ConRail west of Pittsburgh [there IS an "h" at the end!) and Buffalo to downgrade the PRR lines and upgrade the NYC--the route kept to St. Louis is the PRR line and the NYC is largely gone. I have more remarks to be given elsewhere.
CSSHEGEWISCHHindsight is always 20/20. As has been mentioned above, corporate ego may have been a factor in the lease of the Pan Handle, considering that B&O had its own line to St. Louis and NYC had leased the Big Four. That being said, obtaining a route to St. Louis may have been a smart move at the time.
All things considered - one cannot truly understand the considerations that were in play when decisions were made well over half a century ago. While we can see the results as they played out over time, we don't know the 'forward looking' assumptions the decision makers used in making their decisions.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Hindsight is always 20/20. As has been mentioned above, corporate ego may have been a factor in the lease of the Pan Handle, considering that B&O had its own line to St. Louis and NYC had leased the Big Four. That being said, obtaining a route to St. Louis may have been a smart move at the time.
rrnut282 Pennsy tried to route more freight West of Pittsburg on the Panhandle line rather than the shorter, straighter, Fort Wayne line. Conversely, the premier passenger trains favored the Fort Wayne Line for fast running. Even so, there are rumors that there were 100 trains a day through Fort Wayne in the day. Imagine if they shoe-horned all the extra freight trains (and some passenger) from the PanHandle. That is a lot to stuff on a double main. Trains would be following on approach indications all the way most of the day. When would maintainers get anything done? They would have had to at least triple-track the line from Mansfield to Chicago to keep things moving somewhat.
Pennsy tried to route more freight West of Pittsburg on the Panhandle line rather than the shorter, straighter, Fort Wayne line. Conversely, the premier passenger trains favored the Fort Wayne Line for fast running.
Even so, there are rumors that there were 100 trains a day through Fort Wayne in the day. Imagine if they shoe-horned all the extra freight trains (and some passenger) from the PanHandle. That is a lot to stuff on a double main. Trains would be following on approach indications all the way most of the day. When would maintainers get anything done? They would have had to at least triple-track the line from Mansfield to Chicago to keep things moving somewhat.
Convicted One ncandstl576 How would things have developed had the Pennsy never got their hands on the line? It seems the Panhandle would be a very attractive purchase for the Van Sweringens. I recall reading somewhere that PRR acquired control of the line mostly to prevent the line from falling into the hands of competitors, and that the cost of doing so impacted the bottom line of PRR to the extent that it limited the ability to invest in other higher growth opportunities elsewhere. Birds that came home to roost decades later as highway freight traffic rose and the cost to maintain parallel routes became burdensome. So who knows? One possible outcome could be that the PC merger never became necessary, and the PRR today might be known as the Pittsburgh, Santa Fe, & Western. (**ducks for cover**)
ncandstl576 How would things have developed had the Pennsy never got their hands on the line? It seems the Panhandle would be a very attractive purchase for the Van Sweringens.
I recall reading somewhere that PRR acquired control of the line mostly to prevent the line from falling into the hands of competitors, and that the cost of doing so impacted the bottom line of PRR to the extent that it limited the ability to invest in other higher growth opportunities elsewhere. Birds that came home to roost decades later as highway freight traffic rose and the cost to maintain parallel routes became burdensome.
So who knows? One possible outcome could be that the PC merger never became necessary, and the PRR today might be known as the Pittsburgh, Santa Fe, & Western. (**ducks for cover**)
The Pennsy's investment in mutlitracking of the Ft. Wayne Line would have been more sound than buying the Panhandle.. Sometimes you just have to scratch your head about historic purchases.. I still get irritated about the Penn Central even though it was before my time..
Convicted One I find it noteworthy that NS does not have it's own line between Columbus and Pittsburgh that could serve as part of a St Louis-Pittsburgh route, via Cincinnati. They've got trackage rights, ....but It would be useful to understand how often they use those rights, and for what traffic. Isn't the CSX line from St Louis to Cincinnati the route that I hear so many people bemoaning it's demise? Could just be that the former Wabash for NS and the former Conrail line for CSX adequately serve this corridor? NS cut loose the former Cloverleaf and the former Wabash line between St Louis and Chicago...as well. Sure looks like demand between St Louis and points east is only a fraction of what it once was.
I find it noteworthy that NS does not have it's own line between Columbus and Pittsburgh that could serve as part of a St Louis-Pittsburgh route, via Cincinnati. They've got trackage rights, ....but It would be useful to understand how often they use those rights, and for what traffic.
Isn't the CSX line from St Louis to Cincinnati the route that I hear so many people bemoaning it's demise?
Could just be that the former Wabash for NS and the former Conrail line for CSX adequately serve this corridor?
NS cut loose the former Cloverleaf and the former Wabash line between St Louis and Chicago...as well. Sure looks like demand between St Louis and points east is only a fraction of what it once was.
If the Panhandle hadn't been abandoned/sold off in the PC/Conrail era, NS would have a two-track Pittsburgh-Columbus direct line. Now they route traffic NE through Ohio and down the ex Pennsy Bellvue to Columbus line.
The ex B&O from Cincy to St Louis isn't dead yet, CSX is actually routing some traffic East from Seymour, IN after going North on the ex PRR Louisville-Indianapolis Line. West of Seymour, the scrappers are filling their acytlene tanks.
I agree St. Louis rail traffic is down, just like traffic everywhere. Fewer tracks can handle what is left.
OvermodWas there a market in regulated days for freight from St. Louis across to the L&N south?
The Tennessee-Tombigbee waterway might have cut into some of that traffic
Backshop A point to remember is that while we have been mainly discussing St Louis in relation to connections with the northeast, NS's Louisville-St Louis line was Southern.
A point to remember is that while we have been mainly discussing St Louis in relation to connections with the northeast, NS's Louisville-St Louis line was Southern.
But how much traffic did that line historically see? I think I've seen more PRR reference for Louisville via Indianapolis, and I always thought of that being extended west to Chicago, not St. Louis. Was there a market in regulated days for freight from St. Louis across to the L&N south?
BaltACDBackshop MidlandMike I wonder if NS misses the Panhandle? Going from Pennsylvania to St. Louis requires them to go north thru Cleveland. Interesting question, which brings up another one...has St Louis lost a lot of its railroad importance? With both the old B&O and PRR St Louis lines being mostly abandoned, I'd say a qualified "yes". The reality is that St. Louis is not the junction between East & West that it once was. With there nominally being two carriers in the East and two in the West. Only one of the Eastern carriers has St. Louis as their Western Terminus, CSX. NS still operates the old Wabash line to Kansas City and that is their Western Terminus. In the world of PSR, division of revenues for through shipments ends up setting the routing for most of the hauling.
MidlandMike I wonder if NS misses the Panhandle? Going from Pennsylvania to St. Louis requires them to go north thru Cleveland. Interesting question, which brings up another one...has St Louis lost a lot of its railroad importance? With both the old B&O and PRR St Louis lines being mostly abandoned, I'd say a qualified "yes".
MidlandMike I wonder if NS misses the Panhandle? Going from Pennsylvania to St. Louis requires them to go north thru Cleveland.
I wonder if NS misses the Panhandle? Going from Pennsylvania to St. Louis requires them to go north thru Cleveland.
Interesting question, which brings up another one...has St Louis lost a lot of its railroad importance? With both the old B&O and PRR St Louis lines being mostly abandoned, I'd say a qualified "yes".
The reality is that St. Louis is not the junction between East & West that it once was. With there nominally being two carriers in the East and two in the West. Only one of the Eastern carriers has St. Louis as their Western Terminus, CSX. NS still operates the old Wabash line to Kansas City and that is their Western Terminus.
In the world of PSR, division of revenues for through shipments ends up setting the routing for most of the hauling.
How much traffic does NS carry on it's Louisville-St.Louis route?
What I see is a large hollowing out of the central appalachian area (SE Ohio, Eastern KY, Eastern Tennesse, West VA) as far as rail traffic is concerned. The majority of which was coal.
Frequently the (mostly) chemical trains headed East on the former Wabash through Indiana would still have UP power on them. I only say "would" because it's been about 10 years since I looked closely enough to keep track of it.
That explains the current role for St. Louis. It isn't much of an East-West gateway anymore but serves more as a gateway between the East and Texas.
I think there still is a decent amount of chemical business that "comes onto the property" in St Louis for NS.
St. Louis is still one busy place, especially on the east side of the river. (Spent plenty of time assisting NS with their ongoing expansion efforts west of Decatur and undoing some pretty poor engineering efforts by Wabash and Gould era blunders playing keep-away.)... The two "union" railroads in town are solid evidence that the place is plenty busy.
(NS still has an "island" at Des Moines and a joint line with BNSF (old CB&Q) to get there. Had things been a little different, the line to Omaha might still exist)
Backshop MidlandMike I wonder if NS misses the Panhandle? Going from Pennsylvania to St. Louis requires them to go north thru Cleveland. Interesting question, which brings up another one...has St Louis lost a lot of its railroad importance? With both the old B&O and PRR St Louis lines being mostly abandoned, I'd say a qualified "yes".
There is likely some more complicated reason for relative disinterest by PRR in going through St. Louis with bridged freight business once any passenger business started dying on the vine. In my opinion the connections to the west are fairly wretched, and in the case of the Merchants Bridge hard to reach from the east, and only very recently has there been concerted effort and planning to fix that. It always seemed obvious to me that a connection via the Panhandle and St.Louis shaved substantial time and congestion concerns off a handoff from certain Western railroads to the high-speed infrastructure from Enola east including via the A&S. Instead we see all sorts of withering and abandonment. Fort Wayne I can understand as being a high-speed passenger line without any real purpose, especially after Amtrak, and PC was certainly not going to have its counterpart to a Super C even if that business model could have paid better in the East.
"Western Transportation Company" was incorporated by the Pennsylvania Railroad in 1856. Through a series of legal maneuvers (including a foreclosure) in 1868 it's holdings were combined with other connected entities to form the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, & St Louis Railway.
I don't know how big a share of the whole pie that gave PRR, but I suspect enough to be in control of their own destiny.
Thanks.
Because it cut across the WV panhandle going west from Pittsburgh.
Why was it known as the Panhandle Route?
Nor, I assure you, was it my intent to demean you in any way by calling you "dismissive"...it just appeared that you felt "no way, jose" based upon your comments, so "dismissive" seems like an appropriate descriptor.
Gould's Wabash ran up through Canada, with it's eastern terminus barely in New York state. As far as an East coast to Chicago trunk line goes, I personally believe this route left a little bit to be desired.
And I believe he intended to remedy that shortcoming by rerouting thru Connellsville. Granted, it's possible that he intended to continue to operate both routes...but I personally doubt it. I think that Connellsville was a way for him to cut the cord with the Canadians.
As far as "land bridge to europe" goes...I've never thought that to be part of his ambition(s)
Moving manufactured goods and commodities from the industries of the east to points out in the western frontier sounds more likely. Making both his transcon as well as Chicago destinations he would want to offer.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.