One 800 classic Jewett did survive, as you probably remember, think the number was 812, and it may be in a museum somewhere. With Charlie as operator, I rode a fantrip with it.
Were any of the freight equipment trailers? This bit of kowledge escapes my memory. Also, by all means describe in as much detail as possible the last run.
Classic is the key word, in my opinion a line that has only a small fraction of its route on what was a regular railroad is not a classic interurban.
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
NJ Riverline serves 2 distict metro areas Camden and Trenton but is Diesal Powered. Interurban is the key word serving 2 or more urban areas
Dave, great to know that you were on LVT property when I was just a mid-teen railfan, almost too late too ride the Liberty Bell line (and made it by happenstance to get on the last run). And Charlie Houser was a great friend to railfans and an officer in the Lehigh Valley Chapter of NRHS.
At the end, LVT freight cars were of two kinds - - purpose-built cars with numbers C-dash-less than ten (single-digit). The others were converted heavy interurbans (800-series), Jewetts, I believe, that were rebuilt for freight service when more modern cars (e.g., the ex-C&LE lightweights, 1000 series) came along. These latter freights were numbered as C-dash-teen. The two sets could run mixed in trains of up to three cars, and were sometimes, though rarely, coupled as individuals to trail a 700-series passenger car. Lots of info on these in McKelvey's book and the LV Chapter NRHS publications on each of the various series (700, 800, 1000) of LVT interurban cars.
Correction, eight, not seven, plus one freight only, Charles City Western, in the locomotive.
Further thoughts. MUNI Metro Everyone I know considers it light rail, but look, more than half the mileage, 90% of what is not in the subway, is on the street, and more than half of that is lane-shared with general traffic. So why is it not just a subway-surface streetcar system like the Philadelphia City Division? Well, two-car trains are common, and each car is articulated, with provisions for high-level and low-level loading. Really not much different though.
The three railroad lines that initially ran over the Bay Bridge were SP's Interurban Electric, Sacremento Northern, and Key System. All were considered interurbans, and note the name of the first, also the first to quit. The only one legally, ICC-wise, of the three was Key, and again until IE's abandonment, and Key's move from street to ex-IE RoW, most Key's Bridge-train tracks were on streets, in places shared with Key's local cars, but often not. Interurban Electric was probably not even a separate corporaton, and I suspect its employees got SP checks. And Sacramento Northern certainly reported to the ICC as a regular freight railroad with a side passenger business, including some local streetcar operatons that outlasted interurban passenger service.
If you wish to use the ICC definition of what is an interurban, and then obviously rule out something like PATCO as clearly heavy rail, how can I possibly object? But when I posted the original posting, I truly had in mind those interurbans that did survive and that were called interurbans by the vast majority of fans despite ICC labeling. And on occasion by railroad executives themselves, PE defining itself publicly as the largest interurban, despite the ICC designation as a railroad. You brought up the case of Cleveland. If the interurbans had survived, undoubtadlly they would be accessing downtown Cleveland via the rapid transit. Rochester built a subway to get the interurbans a better approach to downtown. Your use of the word interurban has a different emphasis than mine, and I cannot complain. Perhaps just because I did ride seven North American interurbans and you did not have that opportunity, you are focused on the pre-1930 period while I am focused on those that survived until the end of WWII. And you have every right to your focus.
I should add West Penn and Pittsburgh Railways. WP had street running in about ten small cities and towns it served. The only local streetcar line, run with one car on a half hour headway, was the Connolsville - South Connolsville line, and it shared possibly about five blocks, less than half a mile, of track with the Connolsville - Uniontown "back way" line, which also handled local passengers. In all other cases, the interurban cars also performed the local work.
On the north side of the Smithfield Street Bridge, the two PR interurban lines shared the tracks of their downtown loop with the local streetcar lines. But they made the same stops, and the total length of the downtown loop was about a mile. Once on the bridge, it was all PRW, through the Mt. Washington Tunnel and beyond. Except in Washington, PA. Washington, PA had two local streetcar lines, called, East-West and North-South, operated with deck-roof lightweight Peter Witt double-end cars. The "north" part of the N-S line was shared with the interurban from Pittsburgh. Scheduling made inteference unnecessary. The local cars ran on about a 20-minute headway, 15 minutes during the rush hours, while the interurban ran on an hourly headway, half-hour during rush hours, if my memory is correct, with one extra trip added in the morning and one in the evening. The other extra interurban rush hour cars on the Pittsburgh - Washington line did not go all the way to Washington.
I have read about the Union Railway in Oklahoma, which was really, like the typical lines you refer to, much like a very extended streetcar line. The interurban cars performed the local work in all towns served, without any specific local cars.
Pacific Electric did share tracks with narrow-gauge local LA Rys cars on their southern division, but in many cases this meant just a few blocks before PRW was reached. It would be interesting to know how Texas Electric fared in Dallas. Possibly you have a good case there. In Peoria, IT had a situation much like PR in Pittsburgh, while in St. Louis it was PRW.
which, of course, as zero to do with a good railfan definition of what is and what is not an interurban, the North Shore being a very good case. The PATCO Philadelphia - Franklin Bridge - Lindeonwald line was rebuilt-built legally as an interurban, but it is clearly heavy-rail rapid transit. The Hudson and Manhattan was built legally as a railroad, so it could be thru routed with the PRR Journal Sq. - Newark, but it too is heavy-rail rapid transi. I agree the typical interurban had street running, but most of the times it was not as extensive as you claim, and most of the times intelligent scheduling avoided delays to the interurban cars. I rode LVT's Liberty Bell in regular service possibly a dozen times, counting round trips as two, and never once were we held up by a local car between the junction with the South Bethleham line and 8th and Hamilton in downtown Allentown. Fan trips were different, because of the desire to photograph the interurban car with the local car. The same applies to the North Shore in Milwaukee. It doesn't take rocket science intelligence to schedual the departure of a local car from either the downtown or city limits terminanl immediately after the interurban leaves, with it arriving at the other end just before the next interurban. With headways seldome shorter than every half hour, hourly service being more typical, there was no reason for local cars to delay the interurban in most situations.
Granted, there was the case of the frequent-service Washington Avenue streetcars delaying the T&EI, then the Indiana RR interurbans leaving Indianapolis for Richmond, to connect with D&W cars to Dayton. But by the time Indiana RR took over the D&W and ran through cars to Dayton, they abandoned that route, adoting one with longer mileage but without the extensive street runing.
My own experience with interurbans:
Quebec - St. Joachim, formerly Quebec Ry. Light and Power, then CN All PRW, no street running
Laural Line, Scranton - Willksbarre again alll PRW
Lehigh Valley Transit, lots of short sections of street running without local cars, longer section South Bethlahem Jc. - downtown, handled with schedling. However, on one trip Easton - Allentown on the Easton Limited, we were delayed because an older car substituted for the usual ex-Dayton and Troy lighweight, and we missed our slot at Bethlahem, and we caught up to and were delayed behind a Minci Trail local car, but this was an exception.
Perhaps you can give specific examples of journeys reported with these delays?
Baltimore and Annapolis All PRW Granted, however, when they ran into Washington, probably delays by Benning streetcars did occur, since it was a close-headway line.
Waterloo Ceder Falls and Northern Very little street running with no interference
The three Chicago Insull lines - already discussed
Swiss, Dutch, German, and Belgian interurbans and the Isle of Man, nearly all cases, the local service in the street-running prortion is only provided by the interurban cars themselves. The single exception now is the Rhinebahn between Manheim and Heidelburg, which has street running with local cars at both ends, but these are short enough so scheduling permits operation without delay.
In 1960, when I rode the Localbahn between Vienna and Baden, the subway entrance to the Opera terminal in Vienna was still far in the future, but again because of scheduling, I do not remember any delay from local service.
I can only speak from my own experience and from what I have read of earlier travels on interurbans.
daveklepper Long street-running sections and being held up by local streetcars was not necessariy typical. C&AE had very little street-running and none shared with local streetcars. The North Shore's Milwaukee entrance was shared with their own local cars, but scheduling apparently resulted with very little delay to the Chicago trains, none if all was running on shedule, and the North Shore did run a pretty tight ship. The South Shore does have street running in Michigan City and had some in East Chicago and South Bend, but not shared with local cars. The Laural Line used trolley wire in Willksbarre because of multiple grade crossings, but had no street running. Pacific Electric's Glendale-Burbank line, with its subway entrance to downtown LA is another example after its freeway center-strip relocation.
Long street-running sections and being held up by local streetcars was not necessariy typical. C&AE had very little street-running and none shared with local streetcars. The North Shore's Milwaukee entrance was shared with their own local cars, but scheduling apparently resulted with very little delay to the Chicago trains, none if all was running on shedule, and the North Shore did run a pretty tight ship. The South Shore does have street running in Michigan City and had some in East Chicago and South Bend, but not shared with local cars. The Laural Line used trolley wire in Willksbarre because of multiple grade crossings, but had no street running. Pacific Electric's Glendale-Burbank line, with its subway entrance to downtown LA is another example after its freeway center-strip relocation.
As an aside, none of the railroads you mention were considered electric interurban railroads by the Interstate Commerce Commission. By the 1930's, the ICC considered all of them to be electrified parts of the general steam railroad system of transportation.
NJ Transit's Riverline does have available roads close by, and even has bus routes plying those roads. I haven't looked at historical schedules from before the Riverline started in 2004, but those bus routes have less than hourly headways after the last Riverline trip. To me that suggests that there might not be enough demand to warrant rail service.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE TIME SHARING ON THE RIVER LINE IS THAT CONRAIL MADE DEMANDS IN LINE WITH ITS FRIEGHT REQUIREMENTS AS A CONDITION FOR SELLING THE LINE TO THE STATE. ON A NEW LIGHT RAIL LINE WITH TYPICAL DISTANCES A ONE AM TO FIVE AM FREIGHT WINDOW SHOUJLD BE SUFFICIENT AND NOT CAUSE DISRUPTION TO PASSENGER REVENUES, ESPECIALLY IF EXTENDED TO TWO AM SUNDAY MORNING.
EVEN THEN SUBSTITUTE BUS SERVICE HOURLY DURING THE ONE AM TO FIVE PERIOD WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA IF AVAILABLE ROADS ARE CLOSEBY.
gardendanceDon't you mean I misspelled "Webster"?
Not unless there is a "Philadelphia and Webster" in this discussion somewhere. If there is, I must have missed it.
daveklepper Your comments are correct in entirety. Regarding the last, again you are correct, but there is always a possibility for the future. Why not? All it takes is an industry along a new LRT line seeing an opportunity to move from truck receipt and distribution to rail by making the investments necessary for the sidings and witches and, if not already present, the interchangne facilities where the LRT and the frieght railroad abut or cross. I think eventually we will see one or two examples.
Your comments are correct in entirety. Regarding the last, again you are correct, but there is always a possibility for the future. Why not? All it takes is an industry along a new LRT line seeing an opportunity to move from truck receipt and distribution to rail by making the investments necessary for the sidings and witches and, if not already present, the interchangne facilities where the LRT and the frieght railroad abut or cross. I think eventually we will see one or two examples.
If you study the issues of "division " of service time on the joint -- Conrail/NJT -- RiverLine you can see why transit operators would probably be opposed to starting freight service. Aside from the issues getting FRA permission in the first place, the freight service requirements have limited the usefulness of the light rail line. Service doesn't begin as early in the morning as some would like and terminates fairly early in the evening on week days. Luckily there is no need for freight service on Sat. night so the light rail service is available to those wishing to spend an evening in downtown Philly.
There is one freight-carrying streetcar system and it's in Dresden, Germany. It serves the Volkswagen plant that was only allowed to be built near a large park if it was served by the streetcar system as the city didn't want more trucks on the roads. The cars themselves look like any European tram, but with no windows and large doors on each side to carry new cars out of the plant to the rail yard. I've been by the plant and sure enough, streetcar tracks go through a gate into a loading area. Interesting for sure.
Don't you mean I misspelled "Webster"?
gardendancehighgreen, I'm so ashamed. How could I have missed a chance for a double header? I should have corrected you for the misspelling :)
Well, he didn't correct you for "Wester" so I guess you're even.
I should also comment on LVT's freight business. It could reach the national railroad system through the Philadelphia and Western (Norristown Line), but the sharp streetcar curves in the short distance of street running just north of the ramp from the P&W elevated Norristown station would have prevented handling regular freight cars lacking radial drawbars. The LVT Philadelphia Freighthouse was located on P&W (at the end Red Arrow) property southwest of the 69th St. terminal, and the freight trains continued through service to that point after passenger service was cut back to interchange with the Red Arrow P&W service at the Norristown Station. In the winter of 1950-1951, another MIT undergraduate, Dick Hamen, and I were railfanning and were at the LVT Fairview yards, where we met Charlie Hauser, who was about to run a three-car freight to Philadelphia. I had already ridden two fantrips where Charlie had been operator, and he offered us the chance to ride the back platform of the last car. We jumped at the chance. He was very specific as to where we should duck down out of sigiht, and we complied with his wishes.
At the time, the LVT was not advertizing freight service itself. Its freight service was under contract to a local truck company which determined it could save money by using trolley frieght instead of running its own trucks, despite transfer costs at the freight houses. No local work was performed on the trip we rode, the train ran through, stopping only where requjired for meets on the single-track line.
All three cars probably were ex-passenger wood motors, retaining end platforms, new full-height side sheathing without windows and with a large center sliding door. Maroon red with yellow-cream lettering. Probably, because the center car may possibly have been a de-motored trailer.
Did not know about the E. Chicago local service. If this was pre-1926, it meant 25Hz ac equipment, not the current 1500v dc, which was instituted around 1926. Earlier, South Shore trains were hauled from Kensington to Randolf Street by IC Forney steam locomotives, like the IC suburban trains themselves. Can you describe the local cars or post a picture? The interurban cars of that period were, if my memoroy is correct, the usual wood arch-windowed cars typical of Niles or Jewett, even though possibly built by Pullman. All were replaced by new steel cars with the change in electrification to conform with IC's,1500V-dc.
During the period you mention, surely schedules were arranged so local cars never delayed the interurbans.
highgreen, I'm so ashamed. How could I have missed a chance for a double header? I should have corrected you for the misspelling :)
By the way, instead of using catenary, SEPTA's 2 suburban light rail lines use simple trolley wire, with span wires between poles substantial enough to carry catenary.
South Shore's street running on Chicago Ave. in East Chicago was shared with its own local service to Indiana Harbor in the pre-Insull era. The local cars were discontinued around 1926.
Thanks for the correction, Gardendance. I should come over and ride SEPTA to Media sometime. Never done that. Also, I *did* misspell "pantograph." Ugh!
Legally, the Philadelphia and Western, now the 100 SEPTA route, the Norristown Line, was built as a railroad, and there were big plans for it being part of a long-distance line that never got farther from Straford or Norristown. Since it is entirely grade seperated, without any street-running or grade crossings, uses high-platform-only cars with high-platform stations, it lacks the basic characteristics of a typical interurban, and more of a heavy rapid transit line, or at least a suburban modern light rail line. But for many years, up to a date in 1949, the Lehigh Valley Transit's Liberty Bell Rout used the line to access the 69th Street, Market Street Rapid Transit Terminal, and it was about as typical of a fine interurban line, one of the best, as possible.
Regarding inter-city operation, the second Twin Cities light rail line certainly links two cities, and the eastern St. Louis line does also, since Bellville is itself a center of employment, and I am confident that there are users of the line, east and west of Belleville that commute to Bellville and not St. Louis, plus the usual non-commuter "intercity" more casual use of the line. Pittsbugh's operatons are of course wide-gauge, precluding any interchange freight. They are remanants of true interurban lines (rode them), and at one time Pittsburgh Railways did have its own Trolley-Freight businesss, through routing with the two West Penn Railway divisions, also wide-gauge.
Regarding the two remaining suburban Red Arrow overhead-wire lines, one cannot call them interurbans in my opinion, not long enough, strictly suburban. But the abandoned line to Westchester was far longer and did get commuter traffic in both directions. In those days the Westchester, Ardmore, Media, and Sharon Hill lines were all operated with trolley poles. The mixture of equipment included wood Jewett arch-window typical interurban cars (the 40-series), heavy center-door mu cars, often runing in two-car trains with three-man crews, the Brill suburban take-off on the Master-Unit lightweight designs, the 1939 adaption of the Brilliner design with the same electrical and mechanical equipment as the previous lightweights, and the 1947-1948 PCC bodies with more rapid-transit like electrical and mechanical equipment, with mu capabilities.
highgreen Lastly, Philadelphia's system also has both LRT and interurban aspects, using two-trucked cars, not articulateds, with trolley poles, not pantagraphs.
Lastly, Philadelphia's system also has both LRT and interurban aspects, using two-trucked cars, not articulateds, with trolley poles, not pantagraphs.
Trolley poles on the city division. The 2 suburban light rail routes use pantographs. The other suburban sort of light rail route, by many accounts the other "last of the interurbans", route 100 Norristown Philadelphia and Wester, uses 3rd rail, and has done so since 1907.
The new Denver light rail line to Golden is suburban service in nature, but much of the line is built on the old Denver & Intermountain (an interurban) ROW. Some of the distinction between the two types in this case came about with the passage of time. In interurban times, I remember a Lucius Beebe photo of the line going thru fields of wildflowers. On the modern line, suburbia has fillled in between Denver and Golden.
I find your list of similarities and differences accurate overall, but I'd add, if it's not too obvious, that LRT is usually intra-urban, or at most connects a large city and its suburbs, whereas classic interurban operation connected more distant cities & towns with each other.
Pittsburgh is an example of both. Port Authority's LRT system matches all the criteria on your "similarities" list except that during rush hours only, fares at busy stations are collected at off-car booths and two-car trains are the norm. Otherwise the operator collects fares, both cash and tap cards. All 85 LRVs are articulated with pantagraphs. It's a passenger only system, no freight, as with the trackage rights on San Diego's system. (Some European systems handle urban freight off-hours in specially designed LRVs.)
Pittsburgh's 14 mi. Blue Line/Library, has both an LRT and interurban flavor. Like the Red/Beechview/Castle Shannon and Blue/South Hills Village Lines, it runs from the new Allegheny Station on the north side, under the Allegheny River, through the downtown subway and Mt. Washington transit tunnel to So. Hills Jct. The two Blues Lines then use the modern, cab signalled Overbrook line to Willow Station and on to Washington Jct., where the Library and So. Hills Village Lines part ways.
From Washington Jct. to Library, the Blue/Library line has a definite interurban look and ride. Even the signals are interurban era relics, with a few updated exceptions, such as Library terminal. It's quite a contrast!
Until 1953, this line was part of Pittsburgh Rlwys Co's. interurban service to Charleroi, PA, about 25 mi. south of Pittsburgh. It, and a 25 mi. line to Washington, PA, were plied by specially outfitted PCCs and older equipment before them.
Falcon48 Finally, to my knowledge, the East Troy operation is no longer hauling carload freight and hasn't done so in some time. In fact, I'm told by someone I know who works for CN that the switch between the East Troy trackage and the CN (ex WC, ex Soo) at Muckwanago has been removed. Also, I believe the municipality no longer owns it - it's been sold to the historic group that runs the tourist trolley operation.
Wow, Falcon, great post !! Per my knowledge, LVT never handled interchange freight (no equipment with RR couplers) although it did have two interchange track connections of its own: One in Allentown (don't remember the RR) and one near Hatfield (Reading RR). The latter was reputedly used during construction of the line in the early 1900s and the former was used when LVT parlor car #1030 (ex IRR #55) departed on a Pere Marquette flatcar (I watched the tie-down process) for the Seashore trolley museum. Via LVT's trackage connection with the Philadelphia and Western, there was also access to an interchange track near P&W's 69th St. Terminal, which might've been used for rail delivery of new trolley cars from the Brill plant.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.