|
|
| [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 (1464389) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
| (1464389) | |
[PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Feb 5 15:56:38 2018 Two car train of "Flivvers" await for the trip to Sedgwick Ave and beyond.  Undated photo from collection of Gerald H. Landau of 155th St. from below. Anyone exactly where ?  Next two photos are from George Abere Jr. on the Harlem River bridge. George, a TA motorman was the photographer. Work train doing normal maintenance or preparing for the line's shutdown ?  Single track in effect with train heading toward Sedgwick Ave.  Undated photo of the view from the Bronx of the Harlem River bridge. Are those the stairs going down to the New York Central Putnam Division platforms ?  What's left of the stairs today ? (December 1999)  |
|
|
| (1464393) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Mon Feb 5 16:39:52 2018, in response to [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Feb 5 15:56:38 2018. 5 drooling stars out of 5 drooling tars or pictures and narration.chud1. :)..... |
|
|
| (1464399) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Feb 5 17:13:32 2018, in response to [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Feb 5 15:56:38 2018. We walked down those stairs for a SubTalk field trip around 1999. I think there were two trips. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1464401) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Feb 5 17:25:39 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Feb 5 17:13:32 2018. I see now I went on the second trip 1/16/2000.HERE |
|
|
| (1464412) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Feb 5 18:18:49 2018, in response to [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Feb 5 15:56:38 2018. I suspect that the second of Georges’ shots is two track operation rather than single track for two reasons. AFAIK, the single tk operation was on the northbound tk and the train in the photo is on the S/B tk. Also the train in the photo is equipped with kerosene deck lamps instead of the battery lamps which were installed circa 1956. That means that the train in question is either a Steinway prior to the installation of the battery lamps or a H-V none of which ever got them. |
|
|
| (1464453) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 09:07:13 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by randyo on Mon Feb 5 18:18:49 2018. I suspect that the second of Georges’ shots is two track operation rather than single track for two reasons. AFAIK, the single tk operation was on the northbound tk and the train in the photo is on the S/B tk.How can it be a two track operation when the work train is occupying the northbound track ? There are no switches until south of 167th St. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1464455) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 09:12:12 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Feb 5 17:25:39 2018. Been there, done that, probably seen you. :-)Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1464463) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:13:56 2018, in response to [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Feb 5 15:56:38 2018. Hello BillThis photo is looking south west along the uptown side (former N/B local) local track of the then truncated one time earlier 4 track W. 155th former Express EL Street Station, from the small park located along the East sidewak of 8th Avenue to the East side of the EL structure, with the Harlem River behind the small park. Been there a number of times when and the line was operating. The tall 3-section luxury apartment buildings in background are still there - visible in the mid-1950's scene behind, to the left of the subway car at the station, However, now since the tall Projects replaced the Polo Grounds and its parking lot to its south, the old luxury apartment building cannot be seen from street level at the same location today. So here is an aerial view showing it clearly -- and the photographer was standing across, on the east side of, 8th Avenue approximately from where the red M target-sign for subway entrance is on the image. The luxury buildings are see at top center of photo behind the left most tall housing project building https://www.google.com/maps/search/W.+155th+St,+8th+Ave,+NYC+NY/@40.8313563,-73.932705,243a,35y,242.72h,61.83t/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1464471) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:33:02 2018, in response to [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Mon Feb 5 15:56:38 2018. Hello BillThe photo below -- is looking west from the south-bound track at the center point of the ex-NYCRR Putnam RR, ex-IRT 9th Ave EL - then Polo Shuttle Harlem river Steam Swing Bridge. The year is likely around 1951-2 and that is a work train of 3 IRT Hedley Hi-V Manual Doors Motor cars and an ancient IRT EL Flat Car. The Flat Car has a load of coal which in this scene, is carrying coal for the bridge steam engines that power the bridge. The Coal is shoveled by the crew men into the open-cover coal chute opening seen to the right of the flat car - the coal falls to bunkers below. A similar type train - just like as done on Manhattan & Bronx EL's - was also used to stock the coal bunker boxes found on station platform for those stations that were still heated by coal burning pot belly stoves. Here are two different scenes featuring my hand made O Scale exact models of a similar train of IRT MUDC EL Cars as work horses, an EL Flat Car with its coal load, and an EL Trash collection covered hopper car, seen with its crew at one of my EL stations.   regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1464476) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Tue Feb 6 11:12:45 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:33:02 2018. 5 drooling coals out of 5 drooling coals for these pictures.chud1. :)..... |
|
|
| (1464491) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Tue Feb 6 13:10:42 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:33:02 2018. until the end of operations the bridge was owned by the NYCRR and rented to the t.a. for $17.000 a year. |
|
|
| (1464499) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Feb 6 13:55:42 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:13:56 2018. Looking at your aerial view, how did the el get past the 155th St. viaduct? Did it pass over it? |
|
|
| (1464507) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:11:27 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by tunnelrat on Tue Feb 6 13:10:42 2018. I also heard somewhere, or read long ago, that the Putnam Harlem River Bridge was the only part the 9th ave EL and later "shuttle" route the NY Central still owned -- and leased to the IRT back in 1918. Was that still the situation in 1958 when the Shuttle closed?$17,000 a year seems a bit high considering the IRT 5 cent passenger fare from ie: say 1900 thru 1950 -- and limited service after 1940 (as a shuttle) and a later 10 cent fare to 1953, when it went to 15 cents I think. I wonder who paid the bridge tenders to babysit and operate the bridge -- the IRT or the NY Central ?! Who had to maintain, repair, the bridge ? And "insure" the bridge ? Joe F |
|
|
| (1464509) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:29:11 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by italianstallion on Tue Feb 6 13:55:42 2018. Hellothe EL ran UNDER the Macoombs Dam Bridge Viaduct and its El station headhouse at the south end had stairways both down to 8th Avenue and W. 155th Street, but also UP towards the roadway viaduct sidewalks --see photos below BELOW -- looking south along the 9th Ave El S/B Express track at the S/B W.155th Street island Platform  BELOW -- looking north at W. 154th street & 8th Ave on the 9th Ave EL as it passes north UNDER the Macoombs Dam bridge Roadway viaduct to the W. 155th Street express Station by the Polo Grounds  regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1464512) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Feb 6 14:42:25 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:29:11 2018. Nice. Thanks for those photos! |
|
|
| (1464515) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Feb 6 15:49:39 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:29:11 2018. Great photos- thanks again, Joe! Do you know when Albert Volk's company finished demolition? I know that they went mostly south to north and this was the last area to be taken down. My guess is January, 1941, but nobody seems to know for sure. |
|
|
| (1464516) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Tue Feb 6 15:50:14 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:29:11 2018. 5 drooling rails out of 5 drooling rails.chud1. :)..... |
|
|
| (1464518) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Feb 6 15:57:53 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:11:27 2018. The articles that I read implied that the bridge was purchased by the IRT, in addition to the 155th St structures. Why would the railroad want a bridge that it would no longer use? |
|
|
| (1464519) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 15:59:02 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:13:56 2018. Thank you for the explanation Joe.Zooming across the river, is that walkway and stairs the same one in my photo of Dec 99. Stairs and walkway You can barely make out where the Sedgwick Ave station used to be. In this aerial view , You can see where the shuttle came out at Anderson-Jerome by the trees. Was it W.162nd St in the early photos I posted of the tunnel excavation ? Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1464520) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 16:05:06 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 10:33:02 2018. The Flat Car has a load of coal which in this scene, is carrying coal for the bridge steam engines that power the bridge. The Coal is shoveled by the crew men into the open-cover coal chute opening seen to the right of the flat car - the coal falls to bunkers below.So that's how coal was delivered. You learn something new everyday. Thanks Joe. Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1464523) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 6 16:30:52 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 09:07:13 2018. Even if the work train were occupying that track briefly there is nothing to indicate that it wouldn’t have moved north towards 167 St to clear the track when the next shuttle was ready to depart 155 St or for that matter that it wasn’t moving at the time the photo was taken. |
|
|
| (1464525) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 6 16:32:48 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 6 16:30:52 2018. I rechecked the photo and it is obvious that the work train wasn’t moving but that still doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t have been ordered to move when the N/B road was ready to proceed. |
|
|
| (1464526) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Tue Feb 6 16:37:48 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 09:07:13 2018. Bill: In later years the shuttle operated on a thirty minute headway during non-rush hours. There would have been plenty of time for a work extra to go out and due some business between intervals. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (1464535) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Feb 6 17:21:57 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Tue Feb 6 14:11:27 2018. Somewhere I read that the bridge was actually leased to the IRT for $1.00 a year not the #17,000.00 quoted. |
|
|
| (1464540) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Q4 on Tue Feb 6 17:35:17 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by chud1 on Tue Feb 6 15:50:14 2018. Loving these pictures and history lessons. Thanks. |
|
|
| (1464571) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Feb 6 22:29:57 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bob Andersen on Mon Feb 5 17:13:32 2018. I'm pretty sure there were three trips in all, and that we didn't actually use those stairs, because (a) they were too well secured, and (b) they ended high in midair. Instead, we managed to go down the hillside. |
|
|
| (1464572) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Express Rider on Tue Feb 6 22:39:03 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Feb 6 22:29:57 2018. I was on the first trip and we did use a stairway down. I'm not sure - this was the mid to late 1990s - I seem to remember that either they ended on one side, and you could turn to the right and go down a few more steps, or they did end, and you could still go to the right and let yourself down onto the hillside to the left of the Sedgwick platform remains. |
|
|
| (1464585) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Wed Feb 7 00:51:40 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Tue Feb 6 15:59:02 2018. Hello BillYES...that is the original stairway -- well, an upgraded version of it. The stairway ended at the west curbline of where Sedgwick Avenue originally ended -- now in the middle of the Major Deegan original center lanes (remember, Deegan was widened a bit). When the Deegan was extended north where it passed under the 3rd Ave EL E. 133rd St Express station, to pass where the shuttle went under Sedgwick, the left curb long narrow brick "lobby type" entry building built by the IRT in 1918, was removed and a new station headhouse built along the Manhattan Bound platform where the Put tracks ended at their station and bumpers. On the east side of the still remaining original (even today) sidewalk of the still existing but much narrowed section of Sedgwick Ave, there was installed around 1939, a new "open stairway" subway entrance was built, having the usual steel railings as found in post "kiosk" type entry eras. It went to an underpass to and from the station fare point located in a room at the center of the Manhattan bound Sedgwick Station platform. The you walked from that fare point thru a concrete doorway-portal entrance to the platform, or used the overhead walkway to get to the Jerome bound platform side. That new stairway provision were built as part of the initial original lower Bronx first part of the new Deegan Expressway construction around 1939-40, so then 9th Ave EL passengers passengers would be able to completely avoid "crossing" upon the Deegan Highway entirely. The STAIRWAY which originally went up the Hillside located to, along the south side of the (1918 created) Sedgwick Ave. EL Station platforms, landed level with the Sedgwick Ave. original west-sidewalk - just as seen in foreground in this 1910 photo BELOW, view due west across the original Sedgwick Ave towards the then NYCRR PUTNAM Railroad operated Line to W. 155th St across the river bridge BEFORE the IRT took over the line by 1918.  - This stairway now had to be re-built as part of the Deegan Highway Project, and it was extended upward to a new walkway overpass bridge above the Deegan highway lanes (see in the present aerial BELOW ) with a stairway - ramp southward angling southward down to a new sidewalk along the S/B Deegan Highway curb lane as seen here in this more angled view LINK BELOW from the Metro North tracks. (1) - NOTE: In the aerial image BELOW, notice the concrete / stone original stairway downhill from W. 161st Street --- you took that down to Sedgwick Avenue easterly sidewalk, then crossed the Avenue, and went to the stairway along the Putnam (later IRT) line, going down that steep hillside to the covered bridge to either the Railroad bridge pedestrian south-walkway, or at a left-angle down to the river shore to the boathouses located there . (2) - NOTE: The later added (1939-40) subway entrance open-stairway along the east sidewalk of Sedgwick Ave -- was located about where the large panel of graffiti scrawl is seen on the building wall along the sidewalk https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8308609,-73.9323798,118a,35y,49.51h,18.57t/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en Here is the Google street view looking south along the original east sidewalk (and its still all original sidewalk concrete) where you can plainly see the newer and wider different color concrete patch-cover which was installed in Sept. 1958 to close off the station entryway and stairs down to the underground passageway and fare paying area. I used this entryway a few times long ago, and remember it well. You can see in the background, the 1939-40 era added footbridge OVER the originally bit narrower, and presently somewhat wider, Deegan Highway. And if you move (scroll) around in the photo with your cursor, you can see how the Deegan was widened in recent decades to claim a significant portion of northbound traffic lanes of the so long ago much wider Sedgwick Avenue !! https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8314444,-73.9318774,3a,49.8y,167h,75.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfRpoBrExrbwlyMvwsiwcww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en Here BELOW is a 2004 photo view, long post abandonment, up the stairway to the East Sidewalk of Sedgwick Avenue showing the entry at sidewalk level concrete-slab covered as seen in above Google photo link. How well I remember this stairway when I used it !  Well, Bill, this should give you a better picture and feel of the area makes me melancholy (heh) in my memories in presenting all this visual material as to realize I was YOUNG wayyyy back then and hung around and visited, utilized, (and took some photos of) everything existing then - but now seen as just dinosaur-like long abandoned and decaying relics of what was SIXTY (a lifetime) and more years ago. regards - Joe F |
|
|
| (1464602) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed Feb 7 07:21:19 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Wed Feb 7 00:51:40 2018. Thanks Joe.Bill Newkirk |
|
|
| (1464620) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Wed Feb 7 10:20:19 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by Bill Newkirk on Wed Feb 7 07:21:19 2018. Bill : Thanks for starting this thread. It been very interesting. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (1464634) | |
Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2 |
|
|
Posted by tunnelrat on Wed Feb 7 11:27:32 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by randyo on Tue Feb 6 17:21:57 2018. I probably read this in the daily news when the bridge was being demolished. |
|
|
| (1464699) | |
Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 16:10:28 2018, in response to Re: [PHOTOS] Polo Grounds Shuttle - Part 2, posted by JOE @ NYCMTS - NYCTMG on Wed Feb 7 00:51:40 2018. We've veered a bit to talking about the Putnam Division. One problem the Put had in attracting riders was that it did not extend into Manhattan, requiring a transfer to subway or Hudson line in the Bronx (same problem the NYW&B had). But my question is, was there any technical reason the Put could not have run trains directly into Grand Central via the Hudson line tracks? Same parent company, after all. I know it was not electrified, but what about dual-modes? |
|
|
| (1464700) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 16:13:37 2018, in response to Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 16:10:28 2018. different unions, prohibited to operate on other unions territory.as for dual modes other than the ZFL=9's they were non existent. |
|
|
| (1464705) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 16:31:09 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 16:13:37 2018. How did Poughkeepsie trains get into GCT? Were diesels allowed then? |
|
|
| (1464707) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Feb 7 16:37:01 2018, in response to Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 16:10:28 2018. By the mid-1950's the Putnam's ridership dwindled to less than 500 per day and about 3 trains in each direction. No weekend service. It just didn't justify electrification and connection to Grand Central. |
|
|
| (1464708) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 16:44:51 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 16:31:09 2018. no they switched engines in Harmon . |
|
|
| (1464710) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Wed Feb 7 16:46:06 2018, in response to Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 16:10:28 2018. The Put was electrified from Getty Square down to Sedgewick Avenue until 1943. It was served by MU trains and they could have run all the way through to Grand Central if the railroad had wanted them to. The main line service to Brewster used locomotive hauled trains and a change of power would have been necessary at some point. The Hudson Line had no station at Sedgewick Avenue. Passengers transferred at Highbridge Station. There was also the question of capacity. There were many long haul trains in those days. They usually arrived on the five westernmost tracks of the upper level and then proceeded around the loop and up to Mott Haven for servicing. When they were ready for service they had to deadheaded back to GCT. The medium haul trains from Brewster and Poughkeepsie were hauled by electric locomotives while in the electrified zone. Once they arrived at GCT a switcher engine had to couple on and move them to another track to free up the road engine. Also the car wash was located on the Hudson Line between MO and Sedgwick Avenue so there were many deadhead moves on this stretch of track. Into this mix we have to add the trains of the New Haven Railroad as well. Larry, RedbirdR33 |
|
|
| (1464712) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Feb 7 16:50:27 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by IRTRedbirdR33 on Wed Feb 7 16:46:06 2018. Plus, they would have had to store all of those extracted Bronx 3rd Ave el pillars somewhere else! |
|
|
| (1464718) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 17:03:17 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 16:44:51 2018. OK, putting aside the union issue, could've switched engines at Sedgwick. |
|
|
| (1464719) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 17:04:46 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Elkeeper on Wed Feb 7 16:37:01 2018. Well, that raises the eternal question. If direct service to GCT were provided, would not ridership have soared? |
|
|
| (1464721) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 17:13:05 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 17:03:17 2018. to what ? |
|
|
| (1464722) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 17:13:43 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 17:04:46 2018. nope, to close to Harlem and Hudson , both were way faster. |
|
|
| (1464724) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Feb 7 17:19:44 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 17:04:46 2018. Don't forget, the area along the Putnam wasn't exactly very populated in the 50s. The population was on the Hudson and in the Bronx River and Saw Mill River valleys.The route of the New York, Westchester, and Back was much better populated, though still far from dense. |
|
|
| (1464729) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Feb 7 18:32:34 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 16:13:37 2018. What different unions? Almost all the railroads' employees in the country at the time were represented by the same unions, the brotherhoods of the various crafts such as locomotive engineers and trainmen. |
|
|
| (1464730) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Feb 7 18:36:29 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 7 17:04:46 2018. There was a branch of the Put that ran to Yonkers but even though it was electrified, it didn’t attract much ridership at the time and I don’t think even that branch ran into GCT. The problem with the Yonkers branch at the time was that a trolley ride to V/C and a transfer to the IRT was still cheaper than a ride on the Put would have been. |
|
|
| (1464736) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 19:01:22 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by randyo on Wed Feb 7 18:32:34 2018. yes but one local would have different contract than another local. |
|
|
| (1464738) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Feb 7 19:20:28 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by randyo on Wed Feb 7 18:32:34 2018. I thought it was a required crew change that inhibited thru service. |
|
|
| (1464740) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 19:22:50 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Joe V on Wed Feb 7 19:20:28 2018. correct because of different contracts, which made operations to costly. |
|
|
| (1464742) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Feb 7 19:28:16 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Dutchrailnut on Wed Feb 7 19:01:22 2018. If i recall, all the lower Harlem Hudson and Put were the same local of the respective unions. |
|
|
| (1464746) | |
Re: Putnam question |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Feb 7 19:33:53 2018, in response to Re: Putnam question, posted by Joe V on Wed Feb 7 19:20:28 2018. Crew changes were mandated for 2 reasons. One, of course was the change in power at Harmon and North White Plains. The other would be a change in divisions on through trains such as changing crews at Albany from Hudson Division to Mohawk Division. If the Put had access top GCT then it would have been a Putnam Div crew that would have taken the trains there unless some sort of other union agreement would have been reached regarding operation of the electric locos. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
