pitt_div

pitt_div

Pittsburgh Division
Distribute freely (unless otherwise noted)
Corrections? Additions? Questions? Email your webmistress!!!

(take me back home
(take me back to the documents main page)

Employe Timetables
Employe Timetable #31, effective April 28, 1940 (scans and link courtesy Derrick Brashear)

Track Charts
Pittsburgh Division Track Chart, correct to January 1, 1941 (original document courtesy Tom Olsen)
Conemaugh Yard map, correct to September 3, 1957 (original document courtesy Tom Olsen)

Other Documents
Pittsburgh Passenger Station Improvements brochure

Interactive Timetable - station list taken from Employe Timtable #1, September 28, 1941
- information collected from ETT's #31,#33, #1, #2, #5, #7

Interlocking	Interlocking Station	Block Station	Block Limit Station	STATIONS	Distance from Altoona	W	E	Both
M A I N L I N E
Interlocking	Interlocking Station	Block Station	Block Limit Station	STATIONS	Distance from Altoona	Sidings as- signed direction Car capacity 50 ft. cars
-	-	-	-	ALTOONA (Middle Division)	0.0	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	BO	0.9	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	GY	3.3	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	KITTANNING POINT	5.4	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	SF	10.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	GALLITZIN	11.8	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	UN	12.0	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	AR	12.0	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	MO	14.0	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	CRESSON	14.4	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	LILLY	17.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	PORTAGE	19.3	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	NY	21.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	WILMORE	23.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	SUMMERHILL	26.2	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	W	26.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	SOUTH FORK	28.1	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	SO	28.5	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	AO	33.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	CONEMAUGH	35.0	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	C	35.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	JOHNSTOWN	37.5	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	SG	39.7	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	SQ	42.7	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	SEWARD	46.8	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	NEW FLORENCE	50.9	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	JD	52.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	LOCKPORT	54.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	BOLIVAR	56.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	TORRANCE	61.6	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	BH	61.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	GRAY	63.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	HILLSIDE	65.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	MILLWOOD	67.3	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	DERRY	68.9	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	DR	69.4	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	LATROBE	73.8	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	KR	74.2	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	DONOHOE	78.9	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	SW	82.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	GREENSBURG	83.1	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	RADEBAUGH	85.0	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	RG	85.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	GRAPEVILLE	86.7	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	JEANNETTE	87.2	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	PENN	88.7	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	MANOR	90.2	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	SHAFTON	91.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	IRWIN	92.5	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	CP	93.4	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	LARIMER	93.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	ARDARA	94.8	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	TRAFFORD	96.9	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	SZ	97.0	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	UJ	98.0	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	PITCAIRN	98.5	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	WILMERDING	100.1	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	WG	100.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	TURTLE CREEK	101.2	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	PORT PERRY BRANCH JUNCTION	101.4	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	EAST PITTSBURGH	101.7	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	R	102.4	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	BESSEMER	103.0	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	BRADDOCK	103.8	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	COPELAND	104.3	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	HAWKINS	104.9	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	SWISSVALE	105.8	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	WK	106.2	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	EDGEWOOD	106.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	WILKINSBURG	107.3	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	HOMEWOOD	108.3	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	CM	108.7	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	EAST LIBERTY	109.3	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	ROUP	110.2	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	SHADYSIDE	110.7	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	DV	111.1	-	-	-
X	X	X	-	BU	113.2	-	-	-
X	X	-	-	UF	113.6	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	PITTSBURGH	113.8	-	-	-
NOTE; 'X' -- Indicates in service. Block stations are open continuously.

PART I - the EAST SLOPE, 'BO' to 'AR'

BO
Renamed 'SLOPE' by General Order No. ___ (sometime during late 1941 or early 1942). This interlocking controlled general routings in and out of Altoona, including light helper moves. This interlocking was considered part of the Middle Division, Eastern Region during the 1940's.
Headed west from 'BO', the four-track mainline began its assault on the East Slope, passing through a cut and over a high, curving fill. The Division Post between the Pittsburgh and Middle Divisions was 0.3 miles west of 'BO' (1.2 miles west of Altoona). Pittsburgh Division Timetable #5 notes this point in its station list and is the earliest ETT Io which I currently have access that does so.
The main line just west of 'BO' has been thouroughly photographed from two good access points - the 24th St. bridge (overhead bridge 237.46) east of the 'BO' eastward home signal, and the 'Brickyard' crossing at the west side of the fill.

Timetable Special Instructions, 'BO' to 'GY':
SI D2002, Pittsburgh Division ETT #33 - Speed on curves restricted to 40mph, exept Wilkes Curve (2nd curve west of 'BO') 35mph on 2, 3, & 4 Tracks

Industries, 'BO' to 'GY':
No industries received rail service on this segment of the main line in 1945, according to the CT1000-C. However, a brick works occupied a lot on the south side of the tracks just east of signal bridge 238.2. The 1941 track chart shows a siding for the brickyard.

back to timetable

GY
This interlocking routed westward passenger trains from #4 Main to #3 Main, as well as providing flexible routing to deal with dense East Slope traffic. This interlocking was taken out of service by General Order No. ___ at the end of the decade.
Headed west from 'BO', the four-track mainline began its assault on the East Slope, passing through a cut and over a high, curving fill. The Division Post between the Pittsburgh and Middle Divisions was 0.3 miles west of 'BO' (1.2 miles west of Altoona). Pittsburgh Division Timetable #5 notes this point in its station list and is the earliest ETT Io which I currently have access that does so.
The main line just west of 'BO' has been thouroughly photographed from two good access points - the 24th St. bridge (overhead bridge 237.46) east of the 'BO' eastward home signal, and the 'Brickyard' crossing at the west side of the fill.

Timetable Special Instructions, 'GY' to Kitanning Point:

Industries, 'GY' to Kitanning Point:
No industries received rail service on the main line in 1945, according to the CT1000-C. However, a brick works occupied a lot on the south side of the tracks just east of signal bridge 238.2. The 1941 track chart shows a siding for the brickyard.

back to timetable

PART II - the WEST SLOPE, 'AR' to Johnstown

back to timetable

PART III - the Conemaugh River Valley, Johnstown to 'JD'

Johnstown

Timetable Special Instructions, Johnstown to 'SG':

SG

Timetable Special Instructions, 'SG' to 'SQ':

1501, ETT #1, 9/28/41

SQ

Port Perry Branch Junction
As the name implies, this is the eastern conection of the Port Perry Branch to the Pittsburgh Division mainline. See below:

PORT PERRY BRANCH
Interlocking	Interlocking Station	Block Station	Block-Limit Station	STATIONS	Distance from Port Perry Branch Jct.	Sidings Assigned direction Car Capacity 50 ft. Cars
Interlocking	Interlocking Station	Block Station	Block-Limit Station	STATIONS	Distance from Port Perry Branch Jct.	West	East	Both
X	-	-	-	PORT PERRY BRANCH JUNCTION	-	-	-	-
X	-	-	-	U JUNCTION	1.1	-	-	-
-	-	-	-	DIVISION POST (Monongahela Division)	1.3	-	-	-
Interlockings - Remote controlled, operated from:
Interlocking		Operated From
Port Perry Branch Junction		WG
U Junction		R
The driection from Division Post (Monongahela Division) to Port Perry Branch Junction is Eastward

back to timetable

DV
bloomfielD raVine (?). DV controlled the eastern access to Pittsburgh Passenger Yard, which stretched west to the Pittsburgh passenger terminal. It also controlled access to several industries in the Bloomfield neighborhood of the city of Pittsburgh.

back to timetable

BU
pittsBUrgh (?). BU controlled the east end of the Pittsburgh Station trackage proper, and, together with UF, routed trains between the station area and the Pittsburgh Division main line, the passenger yard area, or the 29th St. freight connection to the Allegheny Valley line of the Conemaugh Division. In addition to its own interlocker, BU also housed a relocated interlocking machine, NA, which dealt mainly with the Allegheny Valley connection. One can see the division of machinery in the fact that the levers for BU are double-numbered The tower structure itself was the victim of a wreck in late 1946. A temporary structure housed the interlocking machinery until PITT went into operation in the early 1950's.

back to timetable

UF
UF stood at the eastern end of the Pittsburgh Station platforms, and also housed the Pittsburgh Station Train Director's post. As such, it formed the hub of the downtown Pittsburgh interlockings. UF had provisions to lock together with BU, US, and PH in the station area, and those interlockings, in turn, needed good communications with DV, MONON, and FEDERAL STREET in order to keep traffic smoothly moving in and out of downtown.

back to timetable

Pittsburgh
The original goal of the PRR in 1846, by the 1940's Pittsburgh had become the central nexus of the Pennsylvania Railroad system. The station building (now a historic landmark, and still standing) dates from 1901, and was originally constructed with a large glassed-in arched shed over the platforms. This shed came down shortly after World War II, and only modest umbrella shelters covered the platforms until the new, low trainshed was completed in 1951. Three prior station buildings occupied more or less the same site, at the intersection of Grant and Liberty streets at the backside of downtown Pittsburgh.
This site is adjacent to the bottom of Polish Hill, which, due to the change in topography, marks the end of the 'Golden Triangle'. Although the location made eminent sense from a city planning perspective (allowing good access to business travelers without the Chinese Wall of tracks problem at Broad St. in Philadelphia), from an operational perspective it was problematic. Polish Hill, on its northwest side adjacent to the platforms, falls steeply, at times almost cliff-like, and prevents any widening in that direction. On the opposite side, Liberty Ave. and the dense Strip District businesses prevent any expansion to the northwest (and, indeed, due to grade separation, significant grade elevation would have been needed to make that area useful). Finally, due to the location of the Fort Wayne bridge over the Allegheny, Chicago-bound trains had to negotiate a tight, climbing curve on their way out of the station, causing problems with long wheelbase locomotives, particularly the T1s. The site was, therefore, extremely cramped. During the 1940's, longer trains and longer locomotives put severe strain on operations near the station, prompting the rebuilding project at the end of the decade. Ironically, within a few years of the reconstruction, passenger traffic dropped dramatically, leaving the station with a great deal of excess capacity, and, in its own way, solving the operational problems.

back to timetable

More to come!