The ERA BULLETIN - NOVEMBER, 2014 Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 57, No. 11 November, 2014 The Bulletin INCONSISTENT BROOKLYN TRANSFER PRIVILEGES Published by the Electric In the 1930s, about 80 years ago, the base entity, and transfer privileges were curtailed Railroaders’ Association, fare on Brooklyn’s surface lines was only a on October 16, 1919. More than 30,000 pas- Incorporated, PO Box nickel, but most passengers paid an addition- sengers paid two fares because transfers 3323, New York, New York 10163-3323. al two cents or a nickel when transferring between the “L” and BCRR trolley cars were between trolley cars or buses. They also paid discontinued. The only transfer points that an additional nickel on several trolley lines were retained were 86th Street-Fourth Ave- For general inquiries, with two-fare zones. nue, Sands Street, and Marcy Avenue. On contact us at bulletin@ erausa.org. ERA’s The map and guide to the BMT Surface the same date, most transfers, 150 points website is Division describes the bus routes and ex- among BCRR lines and 450 points between www.erausa.org. plains the transfer privileges. Because there BCRR and BRT lines, were discontinued. But is no date on this map, we studied the infor- several other transfer points were retained Editorial Staff: mation on the guide and we were able to de- because of franchise or other legal obliga- Editor-in-Chief: Bernard Linder termine the approximate date. BMT started tions. Two fares were charged on several Tri-State News and operating six bus lines on August 10, 1931 BCRR lines, and transfers between most Commuter Rail Editor: and was operating full service by November BRT lines cost two cents. Free transfers be- Ronald Yee 1, 1931. On February 20, 1933, buses re- tween all intersecting lines were still issued at North American and World News Editor: placed trolley cars on the Norton’s Point several locations. Alexander Ivanoff shuttles, but the map shows a trolley line. Feeder tickets, which were valid on all inter- Contributing Editor: Therefore, we concluded that the map was secting former BCRR and BRT lines, were Jeffrey Erlitz issued between 1931 and 1933. issued on all cars operating in Downtown Many passengers have often wondered Brooklyn, the Williamsburg Bridge Plaza ar- Production Manager: David Ross why the Brooklyn surface transfer privileges ea, and the Greenpoint area. Another feeder were so inconsistent. Oddly enough, one line ticket was issued to a passenger handing in allowed passengers to transfer to nearly eve- a feeder ticket. Continuing trip tickets, issued ©2014 Electric ry intersecting line while another, parallel, line on cars operating in the opposite direction in Railroaders’ Association, had hardly any transfer privileges. In this arti- the above areas, entitled passengers to the Incorporated cle, we will explain why these inconsistencies same privileges as a cash fare. evolved. Following are the lines operated by Brook- Shortly after World War I began in 1914, lyn City: Avenue C, Bergen Beach Shuttle, In This Issue: inflation made it difficult for BRT to make Bushwick Avenue, Calvary Cemetery, Court Toward ends meet. But Mayor Hylan, a foe of the Street, Crosstown, Cypress Hills, Flatbush Underground “traction interests,” and the Board of Estimate Avenue, Flushing Avenue, Flushing- refused to allow the company to increase the Ridgewood, Fulton Street, Gates-Prospect (and fare. Meanwhile, BRT’s financial condition Park, Graham Avenue, Grand Street, Greene Underwater) grew steadily worse. When it was unable to and Gates Avenue, Greenpoint, Hamilton Rolling Stock pay the October 1, 1919 quarterly rental to Avenue, Lorimer Street, Meeker Avenue, (Continued) the Brooklyn City bondholders, a judge ruled Myrtle Avenue, Nostrand Avenue, Nostrand ...Page 2 that Brooklyn City, which was still solvent, Avenue Shuttle, Nostrand-Prospect Park, would have to be separated from BRT. On Putnam Avenue, Richmond Hill, Sixteenth October 1, 1919, BCRR became a separate (Continued on page 4) 1 NEW YORKERA BULLETINDIVISION BULLETIN - NOVEMBER, OCTOBER, 2014 2000 TOWARD UNDERGROUND (AND UNDERWATER) ROLLING STOCK: THE ALL-STEEL REVOLUTION by George Chiasson (Continued from October, 2014 issue) As subscribed under its original operating plan of Westinghouse Electric. It was, in fact, actually owned April, 1902, the Pennsylvania only planned to run elec- (and “contributed”) by that company specifically for tric-powered trains from Bergen Hill, immediately on the these tests. Through that time the overhead system of “Jersey” side of Manhattan, through two stiff tunnel a.c. power distribution was proving itself superior to d.c. grades (1.93% each) to and from Sunnyside Yard im- third rail for main line operations and of better potential mediately on the Queens side, and the desired maxi- in the long run (this comparison being played against a mum speed was 45 mph under a load of 500 tons. But constantly raging d.c. vs. a.c. debate among the Penn- by the time both AA-1s had arrived on PRR property, sylvania’s predisposed engineering staff). Most unlike the scope of PRR’s terminal electrification was being its companions though, 10003 was a single-ended unit coincidentally expanded under a revised operating plan possessing a 4-4-0 wheel arrangement (that is, 4 pilot that was adopted by the aging Cassatt in May of 1905. wheels, 4 driving wheels, and no trailing wheels without The addition and removal of electric motive power on a tender) with a frame similar to an “American” type the New Jersey side of the Hudson was to be relocated steam locomotive, and one motor connected to each of from the tight confines of Bergen Hill to the more spa- the two powered axles, which turned its 72-inch diame- cious and accommodating “Manhattan Transfer” (as this ter drivers. This was based on an important design nondescript location was unofficially coined in 1906), a modification that was at that time being incorporated more or less arbitrary point in the “Meadows” where the into both the New York Central’s “T” motors and the entirely new line to the New York Terminal diverged New Haven’s EP-1s: the expanded use of single or dou- from the former United New Jersey Railroad & Canal ble guiding axles to stabilize the inherent oscillation of Company right-of-way into Jersey City (née Exchange main “B” or “C” type trucks at speed. Place). This instantly added 4.2 more miles to the elec- When completed in April, 1907 10003 was static test- trified zone, and as well increased the projected duties ed at the Westinghouse Electric plant near Pittsburgh, of the proposed electric motive power fleet, as it would then progressed to making short runs around the com- now have to be switched on and off all trains at the mer- pany’s grounds in a controlled operational environment ger point, as opposed to just pulling whole consists, by July 12. To evaluate the differences in lateral stress including their idle steam power, through the terminal that were experienced by this newer unit in comparison under Manhattan as was existing practice in B&O’s tun- to the two earlier designs, particularly on a long, slight nel. For this reason among others, a higher speed was curve, the Pennsylvania then set up a test track of sev- sought from the developing electric locomotive’s specifi- en miles length near Franklinville, New Jersey on its cations, but when the two prototypes were pushed be- West Jersey & Seashore affiliate (an electrified route yond their original limit during initial tests on the 4-track from Camden to Millville). Between November 12 and portion of LIRR’s long, straight, and electrified Atlantic December 11, 1907 all three prototype PRR locomo- Division main line, they displayed excessive lateral tives plus an imported New Haven EP-1 (028) were so force that in turn caused damage to both motor driving examined, with 10003 toting a flat car that held an in- systems. verter and step-up transformer that changed the 650 As the Pennsylvania’s engineering staff continued to volts d.c. it collected from the third rail to the 11,000 scrutinize ongoing industry advances during the time volts of a.c. needed for proper functionality, which was that the New Haven’s early electrification was being then wired into its otherwise idle pantographs. During developed (it ultimately commenced on July 24, 1907 the tests, all four electric locomotives were checked between Woodlawn Junction and New Rochelle), the against a pair of steam engines provided by the Penn- engineering partnership of Westinghouse, with PRR sylvania for comparison—a 4-4-0 “American” and a 4-4- help, began to explore possible remedies to the appar- 2 “Atlantic.” Aside from evaluating and understanding ent deficiencies in the two d.c. prototypes’ design in the causes and effects of the earlier lateral stress phe- terms of speed and power. Thus was drawn up a third, nomenon, the proscribed testing process eventually entirely different trial locomotive, which the Pennsylva- enabled prototype 10003 to reach a speed of 80 mph nia classed as a lone “Odd D” unit and dubbed “10003.” on its scripted run of November 16. Under such tremen- This newer prototype was designed for use under New dous speed very little of the shuddering, side-to-side Haven-style a.c. catenary, built by Baldwin at its plant movement that had been felt on the two earlier units near Philadelphia and (similar to 10001 and 10002) was exhibited, which thus reduced its stress on the mo- equipped with two 375-hp motors and control from (Continued on page 3) 2 ERA BULLETIN - NOVEMBER, 2014 Toward Underground (and Underwater) Rolling tem (specifics unknown); and the seventh was a 1,200- Stock foot stretch of overhead hung from small “gantry” style side supports.