>>1233552>Also on a semi-related note, i recall hearing once that the brief trend of third-rail interurbans (Northern Electric (north part of SN), CA&E, Philadelphia & Northern, etc.) was a response to the arcing problem that trolley wheels would have at speed. This problem was solved by the invention of the trolley shoe, but for a few years third rails were seen as a viable solution. Is there any truth to this story?It would seem so. From Demoro's "Sacramento Northern," on NE's third-rail lines p. 31-32:
>Electric Railway technology was still evolving and there was spirited discussion among engineers over the advantages of overhead trolley and third rail. With a third rail, it was argued, greater currents could be carried and higher speeds attained without the inconvience of a trolley pole jumping from the overhead wire. Third rail was adopted on most elevated and subway lines to save space in tunnels and to avoid having trains stalled in tunnels by a trolley leaving the wire...>However, in a few years the unprotected third rail (it did not have a safety cover at most locations), would be considered a hazard. When the Speedway-Oroville section was converted to third rail from trolley, the section gang resigned rather than work next to the rail. 