looks llike 23 is doable, but 56 lots more difficult.
Did a Google Streetview tour:
East of where Erie Avenue becomes Torresville Avenue, nothing is left.
Tracks and wire are in place from Erie and Torresville to Erie and Germantown Ave, where the tracks connect to the tracks of the 23.
Tracks are gone from Erie and Germantown to the loop at West Hunting Park and 23rd, but oddly the wire is in place.
Other notes of interest:
Luzerne Car barn still exists, and tracks go up from Erie Avenue around the building, but all tracks to the building have been cut and it is in use as a distribution center, with loading docks where the tracks were.
There is a track connection along Old York Road from Germantown Ave to Erie Ave.
Where Germantown Crosses Broad Street, there is a gap in the tracks of the 23.
Northwest,
I dug out my trusty 1948 PTC map to locate route 56. Do you know if that line is still intact, wire and all?
It would also be nice if SEPTA revived 56, which was suspended at the same time as 23 and 15.
daveklepperNot all Providence streetcars were burned in Porvidence. Some surplus before WWII went to Washington, DC, and Richmond, VA and ran during WWII there. Providence's post-war trolleybuses went to Boston.
Dave,
I don't remember anything from before WWII as I was not quite 2 years old when the war started. And I did not see the Providence streetcars burned. But in my mind's eye I can see that picture in the "Evening Bulletin" as clearly as if I had seen it yesterday. It was a hugh pile of streetcars and they were all to be burned.
I did find on the internet one reference to Providence streetcars operating as late as 1948. I was 8 years old then and I suppose that is the time I saw the picture. And of course I cannot swear that every last streetcar was in that pyre. But there were a lot of them.
John
PS. Surfing around I also found an article about a guy who found one Providence streetcar and his work restoring it. And the Mayor of Providence wants to bring back streetcars to Providence.
That would be neat if Septa were to revive 23. A section downtown was running as a seasonal tourist loop as recently as the late '90s. I think it was from Girard ave to Bainbridge street, using PCCs painted in the old PTC and Red Arrow colors.
At one time, route 23 was touted as the longest streetcar route in the country. I'm guessing they were referring to modern times.
Excellent point, and I understand the City (Philadelphia) wants to revive all street-running Rout 23. I understand that when Chestnut Hill lAvenue was repaved a few years ago, every effort was made to preserve the streetcar tracks in operable condition, and this was successful except for a few spots, which may have been remedied since. SEPTA's own response had been that there is no money now to do it, but that might change. In addition to the PCC's rebuilt for 15, I understand there is a stock of additional PCC's that can be rebuilt in the future. I think most of the wire is still up on 23, also.
Not all Providence streetcars were burned in Porvidence. Some surplus before WWII went to Washington, DC, and Richmond, VA and ran during WWII there. Providence's post-war trolleybuses went to Boston.
In addition to the 5 subway-surface lines, don't forget the purely street running route 15 running across town on Girard Ave with rebuilt PCCs.
I grew up in a suburb of Providence where they did things differently. I can remember seeing street cars on the Post Road which came out of Providence and a block and a half from my house. And I remember seeing a picture of them in the "Evening Bulletin," our newspaper. The Providence streetcars were in a hugh pile at Rocky Point Amusement Park. They were burned in a bonfire on the 4th of July.
Fascinating reading, Dave!!
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
More on Boston. At Leachmere, what I call light rail terminates and people today transfer to buses to continiue their rides, on several. six or seven, bus lines. Almost all were once streetcar, but not routed into the subway over the Charles River Viaduct. The existing transfer arrangement existed then, and two of the purely surface lines out of Lechemere survived unttl after WWII. Three-car trains of center-entrace cars of the Commonwealth-Boston College and Beacon-Street-Reservoir lines connected with individual mostly Type 5 lighweight streetcars for Medford, Somerville, Clarendon Hill, and Harvard Square. The center-entrance cars had couplers and most had mu, but the Type 5's had only the pin for a drawbar. During the classic period, well before PCC's arrived, type 5's handled most of the traffic on the feeder lines that did not enter the subway, and on the Bunker Hil Street and Main St. lines that entered from the north along with the Estern Mass cars. MU center entrance cars handled the Beacon and Commonwealth lines. Watertown, Arborway, City Point, and Tremont Avenue were handled by the large and heavy Tye 4's, with couplers and the ability to pull center-entrance trailers, which they did on Watertown and Arborway, and sometimes on Tremont Avenue. The depresssion and the Elevated's purchase of the Eastern Mass Chelsea Division caused somewhat of a shuffel. The EM Chelsie lines were obtained witih some lightwieght and semi-convertable EM cars, but not enough to cover the complete service. This meant that a group of Type 5's and some Type 4's were shifted to those surface lines, and Type 4's were also used to replace 5's shifted to Chelsie on some of the pure surface feeder lines, and some center entrance cars started running to Watertown, Arborway, and Tremont-Eggleston. Reduced ridership during the Depression allowed the existing fleet to cover additional lines without purchasing new cars. Until 1941 only one PCC had arrived.
I apologize for forgetting one of Phily's lines, and I would never demote Philadelphis, with its Liberty Hall auditorium with picture of G. Washington that was copied for the Dollar Bill, and the Walnut Street Theatre, which has one of the two first-in-the-world sound systems employing digital technology (for signal delay), the other being St, Thomas Church Fifth Av. NYC.
The added sixth SF subway-surface line is the "T" for Third Street. It is actually through-routed with the K most frequently but can be through routed with the J. L. M. or N. They change the signs in the subway. Regardless of lots of street operation, for me, the J. K, L. M, N, and T are light rail because of train operation and cars that can load at high platforms, while the F and future E, which will share tracks with the T for much of its route, is streetcar. You don't have to accept my definitions, however. Call it whatever you want, but streetcars and light rail both have a future. Oh, eventually the T will be rerouted to a crosstown subway under construction passing under Chinatown.
Boston's City Point, Watertown, Tremont Avenue, Main Street, BunkerHill Street lines were streetcar lines that used the subway, also rarely ran with more than one car. All replaced by buses. Arborway, now only to Heath Street, has some street running, but does run two car trains. Riverside, BostonCollege. and Reservoir have zero street running, all private-right-of-way and/or center reservation, plus the subway. Today I would call the Green Line a Light Rail System, but it was definitely a hybred back during WWII when the five streetcar lines used the Subway. Even earlier, up to 1935, Eastern Massachusetts St. Ry cars from Lynn and Salem used the subway to Brattle Loop. Yet these were intertown streetcars, not really interuban lines. Like Brighton-Newton Watertown, and out of New York, the New Rochelle - Subway "A" streetcar though New Rochelle, Pelham, Mt. Vernon, and The Bronx. Boston's true interurban, the Boston and Worcester, did not use the Subway, but ran on Huntington Avenue and Boylston Street to Park Place. Middlesex and Boston streetcars from Woburn and possibly Wellsley did use the subway via Watertown for a short period.
NorthWestI refer to those systems in Germany as Tram-Trains, as some do, IIRC, operate without traffic preference in city streets. Perhaps interurban is the best term, although they often don't travel from one urban area to another.
Germans call it a Straßenbahn or Tram or Elektrische or Stadtbahn if it runs in streets even partially, including in a median.
Falcon48The "tunnels" in Boston, Philadelphia and San Francisco are different. They are actually subways that go for considerable distances and have multiple stations. Except for the equipment they use, they are much more like the State and Dearborn Street rapid transit subways in Chicago than the three river tunnels you mention.
Didn't the Tremont Street Subway (Boston Green Line) have rapid transit (precursor to Orange Line when it was still elevated) cars running through it for a brief period in the early 1900s?
Also, the thing that most matters is not "what category" but "does it work well for the riders?"
In other news, Cincinnati apparently is going ahead with its streetcar.
I refer to those systems in Germany as Tram-Trains, as some do, IIRC, operate without traffic preference in city streets. Perhaps interurban is the best term, although they often don't travel from one urban area to another.
With the number of systems in use worldwide (around 200?) it may be easier to consider each system as its own category, as they all have unique elements.
I do agree with the spectrum concept, also.
gardendance Stop demoting Philly. 10 Lancaster , 11 Woodland , 13 Chester, 34 Baltimore and 36 Elmwood Ave operate in the subway. That's 5 lines, same as Boston. San Francisco used to have 5 lines, J Church, K Inglesomething, L Taraval, M Oceansomething, N Judah, but I think they added one more to the subway.
Stop demoting Philly.
10 Lancaster , 11 Woodland , 13 Chester, 34 Baltimore and 36 Elmwood Ave
operate in the subway. That's 5 lines, same as Boston.
San Francisco used to have 5 lines, J Church, K Inglesomething, L Taraval, M Oceansomething, N Judah, but I think they added one more to the subway.
F - Market St. - Fisherman's Wharf (historic streetcar route - does not operate in subway)
J - Church
KT - Ingleside/Third Street (The T line is SF's newest line. I recall that the K and T lines were run as separate routes, but they now have apparently been through routed)
L - Taraval
M - Ocean View
N - Judah
I believe that Muni has also intermittently operated an "E" line using historic streetcars between Fisherman's Wharf and the Giants' ball field. When operated, it used the "F" line to the Ferry Building, and the "T" line beyond (surface trackage only). It doesn't show in Muni's current route listing. possibly because it's only run during the baseball season.
schlimm Falcon48 I agree that the MBTA Green Line in Boston operation is a mix (primarily because of itsdowntown subway). So, too, are some of the Philadelphia lines (again, because of subways) The rebuilt Washington St. tunnel (under the Chicago River) for streetcars was in use from 1911 to 1953 for electric streetcars. There was also a Lasalle St tunnel (closed 1939) and another between Jackson and Van Buren (closed 1924). The use of tunnels does not make streetcars something else.
Falcon48 I agree that the MBTA Green Line in Boston operation is a mix (primarily because of itsdowntown subway). So, too, are some of the Philadelphia lines (again, because of subways)
The rebuilt Washington St. tunnel (under the Chicago River) for streetcars was in use from 1911 to 1953 for electric streetcars. There was also a Lasalle St tunnel (closed 1939) and another between Jackson and Van Buren (closed 1924). The use of tunnels does not make streetcars something else.
The "tunnels" in Boston, Philadelphia and San Francisco are different. They are actually subways that go for considerable distances and have multiple stations. Except for the equipment they use, they are much more like the State and Dearborn Street rapid transit subways in Chicago than the three river tunnels you mention. One can, I suppose, debate whether these subways put the lines that serve them more on the "streetcar" or the "light rail rapid transit" side of the rail transit spectrum (particularly lines where the non-subway portion looks, smells and tastes like an ordinary streetcar line). But they don't fall as comfortably into the "streetcar" category as the Chicago system.
Interestingly, Chicago had plans to build true "subways" for streetcar lines serving the downtown area, but it never happened.
NorthWest narig01One of the things I see with rail in the US is an absolute classification of systems with no blurring of the lines. There is actually quite a bit of blurring, for example the previously mentioned San Diego Streetcar, having characteristics of both streetcar and light rail. The MBTA Green Line is a blend of light rail and rapid transit.
narig01One of the things I see with rail in the US is an absolute classification of systems with no blurring of the lines.
There is actually quite a bit of blurring, for example the previously mentioned San Diego Streetcar, having characteristics of both streetcar and light rail.
The MBTA Green Line is a blend of light rail and rapid transit.
Still, the distinction is a useful one, particularly when talking about proposals for new rail transit systems. The reason is that the more LRT characteristics a line has, the more likely it is to give service which is superior to busses on city streets. On the other hand, the more "streetcar" characteristics a line has (particularly the more street operations it has in shared traffic lanes) the less likely it will provide a service superior to busses. Based on artlcles I've seen in the general media, the differences between the two kinds of services are usually ignored (probably because streetcars aren't in the living memories of most modern journalists).
With respect to some of the U.S. systems mentioned in these notes, I would say that the San Diego system and the Shaker Heights system are very much on the LRT side of the spectrum. Shaker Heights, in fact, has no street running at all. San Diego has some street trackage, but it's all in reserved traffic lanes. Most of the San Diego mileage is on private rights-of-way and is pretty fast. I agree that the MBTA Green Line in Boston operation is a mix (primarily because of itsdowntown subway). So, too, are some of the Philadelphia lines (again, because of subways) and the Muni subway-surface system in San Francisco. The Muni F line, on the other hand, is much more of a streetcar line. Most of it is in shared traffic lanes. Even the east end of the line, which is in a median roughly from the Ferry Building to Pier 39, is relatively slow, since there is no traffic light preemption for the many street crossings.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
This is a semantic argument. Kalsruh has more than one tram-train line, and the proportions of street running and railroad trackage vary, but always the greater proprotion is on the railroad line. And the original line, north-south, was not dual current, and still uses 750V dc its length because it took over the passenger operations of a regional diesel short line south into the Black Forrest, which still runs steam excursions occasionally on the same tracks as what I call light rail cars and you call trams operate, and a Federal diesel freight-only line on the north. The success of this first operaton, about 35 years ago, prompted the first dual-current line, and now there are several. This first line still sees diesel freight on both the southern and northern portions.
And you are also correct that there is really no firm dividing line between streetcar/tram and light rail. A case in point is Philadelphia's City Division, with four lines operating in a subway wih signals, like Boston, but unlike Boston, having in-traffic-lane surface operation instead of reserved right-of-way, and operating single cars only, not any trains. I don't think I can call it light rail, but it is not just streetcar or tram. At the other end of the spectrum, perhaps you saw my letter in Trams and Urban Tranist questioning how Docklands Light Rail can call itself Light Rail with completeliy grade separated RofW, almost entirely in tunnels with subway stations or on elevated structures, train operation typical, end (train) doors in rolling stock, third rail operaaton. You certainly have my permission never to use the term light rail! And we agree streetcars have a future.
daveklepperIn Kalsruh, the lines you referred to mostly use powerful dual-current "tram-trains" (that is the trans, from German) that are equally at home on the DR high-speed high-voltage ac-electrified lines and on 750V dc tram-lines. This concept is adopted elsewhere. I would call them light rail, because only the downtown portion is on-street, shared with trams, and they are now planning a subway.
The line in question (S4) runs through most of Heilbronn as a trolley. Its halt in Heilbronn is next to (not in) the Hauptbahnhof. If it looks like a trolley, runs like a trolley and sometimes runs on DB (not DR, which was the railway in the former East Germany) track, most folks would call it a trolley. But if you want to call it light rail or interurban, go ahead. The term light rail was originated as an updated, more modern-sounding blanket name for the new systems instead of using an old fashined term like streetcar, trolley or interurban.
http://reiseauskunft.bahn.de/bin/traininfo.exe/dn/805245/517053/383114/76859/81?ld=96235&seqnr=3&ident=3t.023971235.1387465749&date=19.12.13&station_evaId=8079041&station_type=dep¤tReferrer=tp&rt=1&
The Verkehrsbetriebe Karlsruhe (VBK) operates the city's urban public transport network, comprising seven tram routes and a network of bus routes. This network is well developed and all city areas can be reached 24/7 by tram and a night bus system. The Stadtbahn is well known in transport circles around the world for pioneering the concept of operating trams on train tracks, to achieve a more effective and attractive public transport system, to the extent that this is often known as the Karlsruhe model tram-train system.
Cleveland Transit is on exception, with light rail and heavy rapid transit sharing the two tracks east from the Public Square, with East 55th Street station having both high and low platforms for the same two tracks. Downtown Salt Lake City is another, as noted in my previous posting.
In Kalsruh, the lines you referred to mostly use powerful dual-current "tram-trains" (that is the trans, from German) that are equally at home on the DR high-speed high-voltage ac-electrified lines and on 750V dc tram-lines. This concept is adopted elsewhere. I would call them light rail, because only the downtown portion is on-street, shared with trams, and they are now planning a subway. Saying there is no distinction is like saying there is no distinction between the North Shore and the CTA just because the North Shore used CTA tracks.
Koln is mostly light rail, including the two lines to Bonn, both using subways in Koln and through-routed to northern residential neighborhoods. These lines use high-floor cars and usually run in trains. There two crosstown lines are mostly on-street, and now have articulated low-floor cars, usually running singly. True, the sysem is marketed as one, but the two types of equipment and style of operation is different. There is one location where surface tracks are shared in regular operation, and carhouse moves also use shared track.
In Salt Lake City, similarly, the new downtown circulator streetcar is totally on-street, but almost all of its on-street trackage is also used by light rail trains. Portland is totally separate now, but shared use of a bridge is planned.
Berlin has U-bahn, S-bahn and trams, mostly in the former East Berlin. Köln (Cologne) still has trams. The distiction between trams and light rail is dubious. The S-bahn between Karlruhe and Heilbronn and then on east. When in the countryside, it has its own ROW (standard guage, not meter) and then in cities it runs on the tram tracks, also standard guage.
daveklepper ... Answering the earlier trolley bus question, large trackless trolley networks are in Dayton, Seattle, and San Franciscio. Boston has the Silver Line between South Station and the Airport, and across the Charles River are three lines based on Harvard Square, the latter the remains of a much larger network.
...
Answering the earlier trolley bus question, large trackless trolley networks are in Dayton, Seattle, and San Franciscio. Boston has the Silver Line between South Station and the Airport, and across the Charles River are three lines based on Harvard Square, the latter the remains of a much larger network.
Glad to hear Dayton still has their trolley-buses. I rode them when I went to college there in the late 60s. I remember once at the turn-around circle, the bus had to pass close to a gas station with a gas pump that was on fire. Going around the tight circle was always an opportunity for the trolley pole to slip off the wire, and sure enough that happened and we rolled to a stop opposite the fire. The operator hopped out with his heavy gloves and yanked the ropes to get the poles back under the wires. We quickly got back under way. I never heard that there was ever any explosion at that fire event, but it made for an exciting trip on a trolley-bus.
I did not include those cities, and I am very familier with several of them, because they have been upgrading their street tram lines to light rail, putting downtown sections in tunnels with underground stations, and converting the street trackage in the residential neighborhoods to center reservations where autos are prohibited, although sometimes the lanes are shared with buses. They also have a few lines left that are streetcars or trams in the traditional sense and will stay that way. In Stuttgart and one other city, high-floor cars are used, and high platforms exist even in the middle of suburban streets for level rapid-transit type loading!
Berlin is an exception, and should not really have been included in your list. The main transport network in Berlin is the U-Bahn, the direct analogy to New York's subway system, London's Underground, and the Paris Metro. The part of Berlin that was ruled by USA-France-Great Britain lost its streetcar network in favor of buses, mostly double-decked, while the Russians preserved the network in their area, using mostly PCC-take-off cars from Tatra in Czekoslovakia (Sp?). Since unification, there has been some extension of E. Berlin tram lines into the western part, and the new Hauptbahhauf, posssibly the busiest station in the World, is now or will be served by trams as well as the U-Bahn.
Berlin and most other large German cities have exclellent electrified commuter networks, S-Bahn.
(U stands for underground and S for Schnell, or fast.)
One can go from Bonn to Kuhn (Cologn) either by Schnelbahn or by either of two Staatwerk light rail (or interurban) lines. Standard gauge. Manheim and Heidelberg or rather Manheim/Ludwigshaven and Heidelberg are both well served by large conventional tram lines and the Rheinbann modern interurban connecting these two urban areas. All these systems are meter gauge, and worth a visit.
Answering the earlier trolley bus question, large trackless trolley networks are in Dayton, Seattle, and San Francisco. Boston has the Silver Line between South Station and the Airport, and across the Charles River are three lines based on Harvard Square, the latter the remains of a much larger network.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.