ukensol
Member
2nd location of cc whlhse not ruled out
Just from a logic standpoint and not knowing much about Frank Norris, leveraging the cable tension on both sides of Nob Hill to ensure safe and efficient movement of the cable cars over the hill to downtown seems to be a reasonable engineering approach. The thought of the extra stress on a cable system by tension applied over long distance, over a hill, and by a heavy, variable load (the cable car plus passengers) and with high frequency seems to call for an extra regulatory locus for cables at a second location. In assessing the risk as an engineer (which I am not), I would explore that.
This does not mean that v (3) is NOT correct; but ALSO correct
and v (2) is NOT wrong; but perhaps ALSO correct
this perspective might imply that while cc whlhse at Clay and Polk is the initial location that there was also a "substation" at the now cc museum or around there
if there was only one cc whlhse regulating the movement of the cable cars then that is truly an engineering marvel as this model has validated itself over time (>100 yrs) as reliable
and I could be wrong again
but now that you have mentioned Frank Norris, he is also worth exploring because I like anything involving SF History and good writing and to see his character development of McT in the midst of the then speculative industry: the railroad
I hope I have not bored UU browsers with these tidbit should they stumble upon it; because I have odd wiring that no one can explain sometimes but I am not going to apologize for it
back to ukes
the marvel of the cable cars could be the start of a good song, something along the lines of "Freight Train"
Just from a logic standpoint and not knowing much about Frank Norris, leveraging the cable tension on both sides of Nob Hill to ensure safe and efficient movement of the cable cars over the hill to downtown seems to be a reasonable engineering approach. The thought of the extra stress on a cable system by tension applied over long distance, over a hill, and by a heavy, variable load (the cable car plus passengers) and with high frequency seems to call for an extra regulatory locus for cables at a second location. In assessing the risk as an engineer (which I am not), I would explore that.
This does not mean that v (3) is NOT correct; but ALSO correct
and v (2) is NOT wrong; but perhaps ALSO correct
this perspective might imply that while cc whlhse at Clay and Polk is the initial location that there was also a "substation" at the now cc museum or around there
if there was only one cc whlhse regulating the movement of the cable cars then that is truly an engineering marvel as this model has validated itself over time (>100 yrs) as reliable
and I could be wrong again
but now that you have mentioned Frank Norris, he is also worth exploring because I like anything involving SF History and good writing and to see his character development of McT in the midst of the then speculative industry: the railroad
I hope I have not bored UU browsers with these tidbit should they stumble upon it; because I have odd wiring that no one can explain sometimes but I am not going to apologize for it
back to ukes
the marvel of the cable cars could be the start of a good song, something along the lines of "Freight Train"
