|
|
| Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe (1394198) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (1394222) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Mon May 2 05:28:06 2016, in response to Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by Express Rider on Sun May 1 20:45:50 2016. Hello Express RiderIn early 1950, a very small number of IRT Hi-V cars (with hand level control doors) originally were assigned to the Polo Shuttle to replace Composite cars whose trucks were needed for 3rd Ave EL Q-Types and spare parts. These Hi-V cars eventually were predetermined to be either scrapped by 1952, or assigned to work motor service, when they could then be replaced by spare either Steinway or Standard low-V Motor cars -- due to the 1948 thru 1950 release of Steinways from the Flushing Line which were replaced by R-12, 14 and 15 cars - the Steinways going into mainline IRT Routes. The Steel Hi-V Cars, like their 1952 Low-V later replacements, had their standard steel paddle subway 3rd rail shoes "cut back" -- the end tips that were designed to ride on the further-away from track SUBWAY 3rd rail, were cut off, leaving intact, the remaining "inner" contact pad which IRT subway paddle shoes had for riding on the closer, higher "EL" style 3rd rail. COMMON SENSE would presume that this simple "cut off" torch work was done at Woodlawn Shops for expedience and convenience. ALL IRT pre-war and the earliest post war steel IRT (R-12-14-15-17) Subway cars had this "dual mode" style subway 3rd rail paddle shoe equipped on their shoe beams. So they could operate on ELEVATED ONLY lines fitted with "dual" 3rd rails. Even the IRT Flushing line had dual 3rd rails until the El style 3rd rails were finally all removed about 1955. That line still used some IRT wood EL cars as WORK & Maintenance TRAIN MOTORS, even tho wood EL PASSENGER revenue trains stopped service variably between June 1942 (IRT 2nd Ave EL) and Dec. 1949 (the end of BMT Q-Type EL Car Shuttles, which all had subway PADDLE SHOES anyway !!) So those steel cars on the POLO Shuttle had the outer tips of their paddle shoes removed, leaving the inboard tip to ride on (as normally intended) the EL STYLE 3rd rail on the Polo Shuttle as well as to clear the Anderson Avenue Tunnel. The 3rd rail in the tunnel was about 1 1/2 inches away from the wooden backboard of the EL Style 3rd rail. Standard length subway paddle 3rd rail shoes would have needed about 2 more inches PAST the concrete tunnel wall, to clear themselves. ALSO -- the "Manhattan EL Style" 3rd rail was retained, to the Polo Shuttle's end, along with its signature wooden safety backboard which was about an inch HIGHER than the third rail head surface. So standard subway paddle 3rd rail shoes would have had their end tips riding UP UPON the top edge of the wooden safety board, clear off the head of the 3rd rail !!! That safety backboard ENDED where the two shuttle (up and down) ramp tracks met at top of the Woodlawn-Jerome EL, and the shuttle tracks merged with the IRT Woodlawn EL line subway train mainline tracks. At that point, the EL style 3rd rails DID NOT have the backboard affixed, and as such so all the way up to and into, the Woodlawn yards and shops, so as to not foul the normal sized standard paddle shoes of passing steel mainline subway trains. By 1950, the small few MUDC's used on that POLO SHUTTLE line were gone -- and as they were "marooned" to the Woodlawn Line and Polo Shuttle, I would assume they were either scrapped at Woodlawn Yards -- or stripped for parts for sister 3rd Ave El cars, and bodies trucked to West Farms "Starlite" scrap yard. Their much higher clerestory Roofs could NOT clear the E. 158th Street tunnel portals and tunnels of the Woodlawn "subway" below E.161st Street Station !! Once the 9th Avenue El was removed from below W.155th Street, those MUDC's were "marooned" to the Shuttle and Jerome EL line. The Manhattan Els (and the Bronx 3rd Ave EL up to 1957) had "Manhattan EL STYLE" 3rd rail, ALL rails having that back safety wood board. My assumption was that the backboard PREVENTED ANY STEEL CARS, being much heavier vehicles, from trespassing under power on to any of the Manhattan 4 EL Lines. The Bronx 3rd Avenue EL portion, although REBUILT in 1913-16, to handle heavier steel cars, NEVER HAD dual 3rd rails. Instead, it retained this safety backboard on ALL of its own EL style 3rd rails, up until shortly before the December 16, 1956 replacement of wooden MUDC and Q Type EL cars with surplus steel Steinway subway cars. Weeks prior to that date, the wood safety backboard WAS REMOVED from the EL Style 3rd rails on BOTH LOCAL TRACKS ONLY --- so as to clear the standard subway paddle shoes on the Steinway subway cars. The OUT OF REVENUE SERVICE center former express track, RETAINED its EL Style 3rd rail AND ITS WOODEN BACKBOARD --- as the only thing expected to be moving (and stored thereupon) on those tracks, were the surplus MUDC and Q TYPE El Cars -- awaiting eventual removal and disposition. Sadly, the few remaining MUDC's were scrapped at E.174th St (Starlite Grounds)by 1957 and the Q's in gradual small groups, were sent to Brooklyn between mid-late 1957 and early 1958. By end of 1959, all EL STYLE 3rd rail was removed from the Bronx 3rd Ave EL -- and replaced with covered subway position and style 3rd rails. The center tracks had their 3rd rails removed, except north of 200th Street Station where the center tracks were used as layout using SUBWAY STYLE replacement 3rd rail. Well, Rider, heh, a lot of additional tidbits info again here -- hope it was at least interesting for its length. regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1394223) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Mon May 2 06:35:09 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Mon May 2 05:28:06 2016. Thank you! I really, really, appreciate what you've written.We no longer have the possibility of George Horn's IRT history being published, so your's and other's sharing of the knowledge of any transit history pre-1950 is greatly appreciated. If details such as these are not passed on, NY transit history will surely be lost! Thanks again, Express Rider |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1394226) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon May 2 08:10:39 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Mon May 2 05:28:06 2016. Thanks for that.The Polo Grounds tunnels couldn't be used for planned subway expansion only because tunnel clearance issues.. Were costs that prohibited that a retrofit program was deferred? |
|
|
| (1394227) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Mon May 2 10:10:07 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by Edwards! on Mon May 2 08:10:39 2016. Hello EdwardsThe Polo Grounds "W. 162nd Street Tunnel" (actually 2 tunnels in parallel) were planned ONLY for use by Manhattan Elevated Lines Trains via the ancient 9th Avenue E mainline feeder -- which had even more stringent structural weight restrictions on some of its lower portions below W. 60th street (the original terminal of the 9th Ave El in 1878) -- than did the 2 east side EL's. Thus, the tunnel clearances were for IRT Elevated cars with their close to trucks drop sled 3rd rail shoes. Costs for a wider set of twin tunnels, excavation for same, and additional materials for wider construction, would add up even in 1917 dollars. For no obvious (in 1917) operational reason. When this El extension line construction was done in 1917-18, there was never a thought of running steel subway car trains thru the tunnel to operate on the 9th Avenue EL -- because of their weight excesses (compared to wood EL Cars) empty and more so loaded. There was never an envision of a "Polo Grounds" shuttle ending at W.155th St Station and using steel cars from there to the Jerome El and back --- back in those construction days of 1917. Thus the "unique" issue of how to run steel subway cars on the Polo Shuttle. Easiest way was to cut back the subway paddle shoes (don't have to remove them from the trucks to do that) - rather than remove them and replace them with surplus (from scrapped El cars) EL Type "drop sled shoes" Note: The W. 155th Street Station Complex El structure was built structurally heavier back when the 9th Ave. EL reached that point in (IIRC 1879) because the NY & Putnam Railroad Steam engine hauled rapid transit commuter trains terminated there with their terminal Station consisting of its own two tracks and single island platform, by sharing the easterly half of very wide entire Elevated structure. The IRT 9th Avenue EL used the western half of the structure, until around 1917, wen the IRT purchased (or I think "leased for 999 years") the Putnam RR Bridge and took over the Putnam Railroad's easterly side of the W. 155th St Station EL Structure. The IRT built a brand new High Level single island platform in place to match its earlier similar island platform the IRT used on the west side of the structure as its original "terminal" . This new platform to become the NORTHBOUND 9th Ave El Express and Local trains station stop. And the earlier identical IRT island platform and its 2 tracks on the west portion of the structure, became the SOUTHBOUND 9th Ave EL Local and Express trains new station stop Most persons used the IND subway along and via other Grand Concourse Bronx IND subway stations and at the last, the E. 161st St. IND subway station before the Harlem River, to get to the area of and around the Manhattan W.155th Street Terminal EL Station and to the Polo Grounds and the later new housing projects built on the by 1949 demolished W. 159th St "semi abandoned" EL yards in 1950-51. After 1950 fewer and fewer people used the Shuttle -- and the Putnam NYCRR trains provided AM and PM rush hour commuter trains terminating at Sedgwick Avenue joint Station, for railroad passengers either going west to Manhattan via the EL shuttle to catch the IND Subway south thru Manhattan from the free Transfer from the EL's W. 155th St Station --- or take the shuttle eastward to catch the IRT Woodlawn EL subway trains at E. 167th Street "transfer" station, for a ride south to Manhattan or north towards Woodlawn Terminal. Other than POLO Grounds events (some being Jehova Witness Mega Meets) and Sports (Ball) games, which generated shuttle ride crowds on those days -- the shuttle just barely earned its keep by 1953 thru 1958 I remember seeing lines of people going from the Bronx side to the Polo Grounds, avoiding the shuttle train fare at Sedgwick Ave Station, and WALKING ACROSS THE FREE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS on the north side of the Shuttle Line El structure and across its bridge north-side pedestrian walkway from Sedgwick Ave., Bronx, to the Manhattan side !!! And returning the same way after the game ended !! I even have a photo of it ! Regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1394371) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by GojiMet86 on Tue May 3 11:18:56 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Mon May 2 10:10:07 2016. I have read mentions of a plan that proposed (not sure how true they are) connecting the IRT Lenox line with the Polo line and unto the Woodlawn line. According to these mentions, the plan was dropped because of the third rail issue, and that it would have been expensive to convert the third rail into the subway third rail. I did not think it could be so expensive to convert about a mile or two of third rail to subway third rail when it was done for the rest of the elevated lines. |
|
|
| (1394396) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue May 3 16:19:07 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by GojiMet86 on Tue May 3 11:18:56 2016. Hello GOJIMET86Yes, I well remember back then the "loosely proposed" plan by those various individuals who wanted to SAVE the shuttle line -- to connect it to the IRT Lenox Line at the area where the IRT Lenox repair shops were along the river. However, the main problem, besides the cost of cutting out about 6 inches of tunnel walls ( 2 tunnels, 4 walls) from surface level to about 4 feet high (the height needed for 3rd rail future maintenance and repair work access-clearances) to make them wider for subway 3rd rail -- was the ancient Putnam RR bridge - which dated from about 1879. It was (IIRC) 'leased" to the IRT from the Putnam (branch of NYCRR) and was in dire need of overhaul by 1958. It was a steam operated bridge if I recall...one of, if not THE last surviving Harlem River ones. Perhaps needing eventual total replacement in a few years. Additionally, the added costs of having 3 daily shifts of BRIDGE TENDER operator employees to open and close the bridge the occasional times when needed. AND - lastly, the fast aging 1878 built ancient all lattice girder constructed EL Structure at W. 155th Street was another consideration - already 80 years old in 1958 and minimally maintained thru the previous many decades. For the little projected passenger gain -- and the new construction costs for the connective new structure from Lenox Avenue to the W. 155th Street Shuttle EL Station, and W. 162nd Street tunnel wall modifications...the plan was quickly discarded. regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1394411) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue May 3 17:15:09 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue May 3 16:19:07 2016. Despite the alleged drawbacks, it’s too bad that the connection wasn’t built since it would give the IRT improved operational flexibility in the event of service disruptions. |
|
|
| (1394412) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue May 3 17:30:54 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue May 3 16:19:07 2016. Joe, the Putnam Drawbridge, the 155th St station, and the right of way connecting to the Putnam tracks were bought, not leased. Part of the deal was that the Putnam passengers would have access to the 6th and 9th Ave els, so the Sedgwick Ave station was constructed for that purpose. Yes, joe, it was the last steam powered bridge in NYC.I recently read an article in the Brooklyn Eagle from about June 10th, or 11th, 1940. One of the projected plans was the connection between the IRT 7th Ave- Lenox line to the 155th St station. As you mentioned, the walls would have to have been widened, along with some type of upgrading for the old bridge. Declining patronage on the Putnam and the shuttle probable played a part in their decision not to make the connection. Also, most people were using the free post-Unification transfer at 161st St-River Ave, between the IND and the Lex-Jerome IRT. |
|
|
| (1394413) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue May 3 17:32:36 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by randyo on Tue May 3 17:15:09 2016. Really would not have been worth all of the work involved. Besides the wall widening, you would also need a subway portal, south of 155th Street! |
|
|
| (1394424) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue May 3 18:14:55 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by Elkeeper on Tue May 3 17:32:36 2016. I have heard that there was a scale model mock up of the area which included the shuttle and its connection but I don’t know if it still exists or has been destroyed. From what I was told, either a reenforced 9 Av structure, or a new one would have connected to a new ramp into 148 Sy Yd and connect into the subway via the existing portal at the entrance to the yard. |
|
|
| (1394440) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue May 3 19:21:50 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by randyo on Tue May 3 18:14:55 2016. Besides buying out the BMT, IRT, and Manhattan Railway lines, the City had to spend $10,550,000 to tear down the 9th ave el- south of 155th St, the 2nd ave el- north of 60th St, the Fulton St el and 5th Ave- Bay Ridge lines. If you include the earlier 6th Ave el, it cost $12.5 million+ $5 million to reinforce the 6th Ave el- right before they closed it! That's $23,550,000 just in demolition/reinforcing costs! I'm amazed that LaGuardia didn't bankrupt the City, especially if you factor in his bus leases/purchases to replace some of the Brooklyn streetcars routes! |
|
|
| (1394442) | |
Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue May 3 19:22:54 2016, in response to Re: Question for Joe F. -Woodlawn - PG shuttle 3rd rail shoe, posted by Elkeeper on Tue May 3 19:21:50 2016. Moral of the story, "No money, honey!". |
|
|
