On Wednesday, September 3, 2014 12:32:47 PM UTC-4, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
      
   > Chicago ...   
      
   My post dealt solely with Philadelphia, not any other system.  Contrary to   
   curremt myths being espoused these days*, Philadelphia's system was   
   financially healthy and it was taken over by National City Lines for a major   
   rapid conversion to buses, sold    
   and supplied by NCL participants.   
      
   *Like NCL never existed or performed major conversions.   
      
   As to Chicago, I do not understand why a fleet of nearly new PCC cars was   
   retired, nor whether surface route service was better as a result.  Since a   
   Chicago PCC, IIRC, was 50 feet long, vs 40 feet for a bus, I can't help but   
   suspect that service quality    
   went down.  Further, diesel buses of that era could not accelerate as quickly   
   as a PCC car, so the PCC's were faster.  In that era public transit use was   
   still heavy.   
      
   People make a big deal about how the PCC cars were recycled to become L cars,   
   but nobody talks about the cost to do that.  There was certainly labor   
   involved in carefully disassembling the streetcars, and many components could   
   not be reused on L cars.     
   Also, buses had to be purchased to replace the streetcars, and that was a   
   significant cost.   
      
   Also, regarding Chicago, I don't understand why the city got involved at all.    
   Phila's system did quite well under private ownership until 1968, indeed, it   
   took court action which delayed acquisition by SEPTA.  In New York, I think   
   the carriers could've    
   been profitable except for the mandated unrealistically low fare.  (NYC   
   should've raised the fare to 8c or 10c in 1940.)   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)