New Haven Electrification

[daveklepper]

1.  It was in 1903 that the New Haven engineers decided on AC, 25Hz, 11000 Volt electrifcation for New York (Woodlawn) to Boston (finances ran out at New Haven).  The first locomotive, an EP-1, was tested in 1905.   The first Grand Central electric trains rolled in 1904, but the first New Haven electrics ran in 1907, first only to New Rochelle, than later that year to Stamford, and to New Haven in 1915.   Was there any experience anywhere in the World (Germany, Switzerland?) with high voltage overhead wire electrificaiton before 1903?   The only prior New Haven electrification experience was with trolley-like dc 600 volts.   The original Sprague Richmond, VA trolleys ran in 1887.

2.  A very good basically picture book on the New Haven's electrified zone, which taught me details about the equipment that I had not known, says that after the New York Connecting RR (the Hell Gate Bridge route) was electrified, the practice in the steam days was continued at Harold Tower (or nearby) and side-rod Pennsylvania (or Long Island) DD-1's took the New Haven trains into Penn Station until the Pennsy electrification was extended from Trenton to Sunnyside Yard in Queens and a connection with the New Haven's at Harold in 1936.   I'm sure this is not completely true.   The EP-2, EP-3, and EP-4 power (not sure about the "Jets" or the EP-1's) had a shoe that could pick up third-rail power from both the overrunning LIRR third rail and the New York Central's underrunning, so they could have run into Penn on dc power.

Speculation might suggest that originally they did hand over the trains to DD-1 power until WWI and a vast increase in traffic and the B&O trains added to the mix taxed the available DD-1 fleet, and the practice of running through continued after WWI.   Any information on this question will be appreciated.

[PBenham]

As to the first question, PRR with Westinghouse engineers, tested high voltage AC on test trackage in New Jersey in the early 20th century on the Camden & Amboy branch. (Pennypacker/Staufer, Pennsy Power and Pennsy Power VolII, and Vol.III.) Westinghouse invited interested parties to the tests, such as NYC, NH, Great Northern, and others, all of whom looked and listened. NH liked what they saw and bought in to the AC system, GN tried a Swiss three phase system, then went to the Westinghouse high voltage AC in the mid 20s, while they drilled the current Cascade tunnel. NYC's William Wilgus, in a rare boo-boo decided on 600v.DC, which led to the NH having to overpay for their passenger electrics, since they had to have third rail shoes, small gap bridging pantographs and switching gear which was very complex and expensive for the time frames in which they were designed and built. The amazing part of all of it was, that it all worked- and well, up until the FL9s early travails! The alternative would have been all-DC units to run from GCT to Woodlawn. Which brings in the second question. NH's dual voltage units should have been able to operate into Penn station. They didn't into the 20's since NH, thanks to their financial problems, could not get any more EP1s (Ponies). This also delayed electrifying the bridge until after WWI. (Why buy units for use where we don't have wires yet?) As a result, I2 Pacifics ran under the wires New Haven to Woodlawn NY, as did J1 Mikes, on freights. The Harlem River branch was electrified, and that was all-AC from the start. 411 on this, from "New Haven Power 1832-1968",  Jack Swanberg, with Alvin Staufer, editing, and writing those wonderful--and opinionated photo captions! (true, also for the Pennsy books, too,BTW)

[daveklepper]

Thanks for the quick reply.   I think you mean that Pacifics and Mikes ran under the wires from New Haven to New Rochelle (Shell interlocking tower), not Woodlawn (except possibly the occasional local freight to interchange with the NYC).   The question still remains between the post WWI electrification and 1936, did DD-1's ever haul for the New Haven with power swap at Harold to electrics and not steam?

[timz]

Does someone claim that NH electrics ever ran on overrunning third rail (except for that Cos Cob AC installation that NH Power mentions?          By the way, NY to Philadelphia was electrified early 1933; did that not extend to Harold and the NH?

[PBenham]

Thanks for the quick reply.   I think you mean that Pacifics and Mikes ran under the wires from New Haven to New Rochelle (Shell interlocking tower), not Woodlawn (except possibly the occasional local freight to interchange with the NYC).   The question still remains between the post WWI electrification and 1936, did DD-1's ever haul for the New Haven with power swap at Harold to electrics and not steam?

   To my knowledge, based upon the information available to me, the DD1s only ran as far as Harold. Then, an NH locomotive  (Steam or straight electric) took over for the run on the New York Connecting,and up to Shell (My bad). Officially, the trains were handed over at Harold, after a Long Island crew got the train there from Penn Station. After PRR re-electrified in the early '30s, they re-negotiated the crew districts and NH crews began to run into Penn Station. Amtrak crews are still running under that same arrangement today! (or one very close to it)                                                                                        

[PBenham]

Does someone claim that NH electrics ever ran on overrunning third rail (except for that Cos Cob AC installation that NH Power mentions?          By the way, NY to Philadelphia was electrified early 1933; did that not extend to Harold and the NH?

Yes on the second question. Please clarify the first question. Power from Cos Cob was 11Kv, which went to NH's overhead catenary. NYC's third rail system got NH trains into GCT, NH paid NYC for the power their trains used while running on the Harlem and Hudson lines into GCT, based upon a negotiated formula. Anyone have 411 on that agreement? I haven't seen it mentioned in the books I have on the Metro NY area. I know it existed, because Con Ed wanted to sue PC for unpaid balances in the ex-NYC and ex-NH accounts, and causing them to have more financial problems. PC won the suit (Hey, aren't we bankrupt? Was the PC defense), New York and the MTA paid Con Ed off. which means that tax payers like me paid Con Ed!

[timz]

I looked again at "NH Power"-- it says steam ran to SS2 on some NH trains until 1927, but a power change "was required" there until 1933. Was SS2 just the NH designation for Harold?

The same book mentions the short piece of AC-powered third rail at Cos Cob. Doesn't say when it was removed.

[PBenham]

I looked again at "NH Power"-- it says steam ran to SS2 on some NH trains until 1927, but a power change "was required" there until 1933. Was SS2 just the NH designation for Harold?

The same book mentions the short piece of AC-powered third rail at Cos Cob. Doesn't say when it was removed.

SS2 was Shell. Harold was an NH tower, it was Long Island tower later.(Post 1977?) NH's route to Bay Ridge, included some LI trackage rights starting at Harold. NH and LI both provided signalmen to man Harold and the practice continued with Penn Central, and Amtrak. I do not recall when Harold closed, if indeed it did. Anyone know? The AC third rail at Cos Cob was de-activated before WWI when NH dropped the idea.( NH was happy with overhead catenary, which was a safer way to get the high voltages to the trains using it.) As to the power change at SS2/Shell, clearences at Penn Station didn't clear the "NYC" shoes on EP1s. When NH got the EP2s (Tigers to true NH types) the clearence problem was done away with by having the shoes retract to a higher point above the rail head. After 1934, LI's third rail line by Harold did not see any NH trains, which ran on a new link up to Sunnyside, then in to Penn Station. One can ride this line on Amtrak for as long as it lasts!

[daveklepper]

More claification:  So you are telling me that the New Haven never used Long Island DC power until the occasional FL-9 pair ran into Penn Station with the double-sprung EMD shoes?   Even thought the EP-2 and EP-3 electrics could have used the LIRR third rail before 1933?

 

Also, the demonstration by Westinghouse on the Camden and Ambay line that led to the adoption by the New Haven of AC high-voltage electrification; had it been preceded by any other such demonstration or operating system?

[timz]

So you are telling me that the New Haven never used Long Island DC power until the occasional FL-9 pair ran into Penn Station with the double-sprung EMD shoes?   Even thought the EP-2 and EP-3 electrics could have used the LIRR third rail before 1933?

No, we're telling you that's what those two books seem to be saying. Personally, I have no idea. Why do you assume the NH electrics could use LIRR third rail?

[PBenham]

There was no reason for NH straight electrics to use the LI third rail.(under normal conditions) Yes, the FL9s could use the LI third rail, but it forced that train over on to a LI track into Penn Station. EMD made an effort to sell FL9s to Long Island, and NYC without success. Then, there would be a through train on a "narrow" platform, with little room for baggage trucks to move around. The FL9s used only LI tracks, PRRs were all 12Kv AC, which FL9s could not tap into. When the Empire Connection was built, LI gave up two tracks to Amtrak, and they didn't get the space back. 

[daveklepper]

Would not there have been cases where New Haven EP-2's and EP-3's operated through to Penn Station with LIRR third rail power?   Before 1935?   Or were ALL trains handed over to DD-1's at Harold, until 1935?

 

Regarding FL-9's into Penn Station:  EF-3's and EP-3's and very occasionally EP-2's were pretty standard on NH trains to Penn Station, very seldom an EP-4.  Never an EP-1 in my experience.  ep-1's had been relegated to the Danbury and the New Canaan rush hour through jobs.)  !  When the Jets came they were used generally on Grand Central trains, not Penn jobs.  After the FL-9's came, the older NH power, including the EP-4's and EF-3's, were sidelined once they needed maintanance, without Van Nuys and with New Haven not able to keep up with diesel repairs.  They started using the Jets in Penn Station service.   Quickly they found the Jets interfered with communications and signals on the LIRR from RF interference.  So FL-9's were seen for a short time while RF suppression equipment was installed on the EP-5 Jets.   But they could do it.  They did make occasional trips afterward.

My understanding is that most tracks at Penn Station are (or were) equipped for both third rail and catenary.   I know the Broadway traditionally left on a track that was frequently used by LIRR trains.

At one time all tracks had third rail obviously.   And I know from personal observation that many LIRR tracks had catenary at least up to about 1990.

Check the TRAINS Forum, European Operations, for info on early German electrifications, single phase AC in 1904 and three phase in 1902.

[Kevin C. Smith]

NYC's third rail system got NH trains into GCT, NH paid NYC for the power their trains used while running on the Harlem and Hudson lines into GCT, based upon a negotiated formula. Anyone have 411 on that agreement?

You might find something in the book Passenger Terminals and Trains-there is a full chapter on the NYC/NYNH&H argeement for using Grand Central Terminal.

[daveklepper]

Looking over all the postings on this thread, and particularly "up to 1933, change to a DD-1 ws required," it would appear that the New Haven EP-2's and EP-3's DID use LIRR/PRR third rail power in 1933, 1934, and 1935, just up to the time that the Pennsy's Trenton - Sunnyside electrification was activated.  Of course at that time all tracks at Penn Station had third rails.

[PBenham]

NYC's third rail system got NH trains into GCT, NH paid NYC for the power their trains used while running on the Harlem and Hudson lines into GCT, based upon a negotiated formula. Anyone have 411 on that agreement?

You might find something in the book Passenger Terminals and Trains-there is a full chapter on the NYC/NYNH&H argeement for using Grand Central Terminal.

Indeed! The tripartite agreement between the New York Central's two predecessors and the New Haven divided up the expenses for everything involving NH with the Harlem RR. The Hudson River's share wasn't involved. This agreement was superseded by a new power contract between ConEd and Metro-North. ConEd wants this contract re-negotiated, Metro-North doesn't want it re-done, naturally.

[daveklepper]

One interesting fact that is sometimes overlooked.   The New Canaan Branch actually is the oldest U. S. A. railroad (as oopposed to interurban or trolley line) electrification still in use.   It was originally electrified at 600V DC with regular trolley wire and integrated into the Satmford Connecticut Co. (New Haven subsidiary) streetcar network, like other semi-experimental New Haven RR branches in Connecticut.  All exceept the New Canaan Branch were eventually converted back to steam operation or abandoned, but the New Canaan Branch was converted to AC 11000V shortly after the main line electrication reached Stamford in the autumn of 1907.  I think I once did see a photograph of a streetcar on the line.  Can anyone think of an earlier electrification still in use?

Ther B&O Baltimore Tunnel electrification was the first, but it isn't in use. replaced by diesels.

 

Was any on the existing South Shore originally a trolley line electrified earlier?   I cannot think of any other candidate.

[timz]

it would appear that the New Haven EP-2's and EP-3's DID use LIRR/PRR third rail power in 1933, 1934, and 1935, just up to the time that the Pennsy's Trenton - Sunnyside electrification was activated.

Trenton to NY Penn electrified service started January 1933 (or maybe Dec 1932). I assume the catenary to Sunnyside Yard opened then, and seems likely the LIRR main line thru Harold got catenary then too-- but I don't have a 1933 LIRR empl TT.

[PBenham]

I do not have a LI employee's timetable, but LI used its own tube under the East river and existing LI trackage was moved south as to accomodate Sunnyside yard. The links to the PT&T (Pennsylvania Tunnel & Terminal) being in Penn Station's east end, and at Harold tower. Big thanks to Triumph V,Dave Messer/ Charles Roberts, published by the latter. All that relates like this: NH trains came in around the edges of Sunnyside Yard, and Amtrak still does this. So the links to the New York Connecting (The other NYC) went to a split north of Harold, one for the Westbound NH trains for Penn Station, another for NH freights bound for Fresh Pond Jct or Bay Ridge, then the track for NH eastbounds. NH strung it's catenary on the NY Connecting in the early '20's, basically when NH could arrange affordable terms for the loans (bonds). NH also owned and maintained the catenary they had over LI trackage on their link to Bay Ridge yard. Catenary was strung over all PT&T trackage during 1932-3,and NH was first to use it! LI did not (unless they had to) use the tracks with overhead, since it was (and still is) against the rules of the Amtrak (PT&T/PRR) AND LI to have both power sources charged at the same time. Thus, someone at NH power control had to let PRR know when a train with an FL9 was headed to Penn Station. If that was to be the case, the third rail was energized and the overhead on the affected track was de-activated. Amtrak and, before them PC, solved the problem by sending GG1s to New Haven. This had both positive and negative sides, as might be imagined. GG1s did not look right to me sliding by Stamford at 80! BUT W-O-W! Needless to say the GG1s caught some NH hog heads off guard, as they were not used to the  high rate of acceleration as opposed to the EP5s, which could get up to 70 in the same time that a GG1 could get up to 80, or 10 MPH over the ex-NH 70 MPH limit!

[timz]

it was (and still is) against the rules of the Amtrak (PT&T/PRR) AND LI to have both power sources charged at the same time.

Any idea where that rule is printed?

So when an NJT train pulls into NY Penn on Track 14, someone has already cut off the third rail power, and after it leaves they cut off catenary power and restore third rail in preparation for the next LIRR train?

[daveklepper]

I don't think the EP-5's were the slouches in comparison to the GG-1's.   The FL-9's were the slouches.   One book I have shows three FL-9 units on the head of long passenger train during an airline strike leaving South Station.   No passengers train west of New Haven ever required more than one EP-5, EP-4, or EP-3, no matter how long.   (The "Pny's", the EP-1's, generally did run in multiple, typically two on the rush hour GCT - New Canaan train.)  And no more that two DL-109's or or two PA's east of New Haven.  (Of course there were power transfer moves.)  Not that the FL-9 was anything but a very good locomotive for what it was, and that is why there are still a few running today.  But not the equal of electric power.  .   And an EF-3 on a Penn Job passenger train could out-accelerate a GG-1, more hoursepower and more tractive effort.   Of course the EF-3's had been gone for about ten years by the time the GG-1's started running through.   After the GG-1's started running through, New York-based  Electric Railroaders Association ran a fan trip of PRR MP-54's to New Canaan and to New Haven, possibly the only time this equipment ran there.

 

The reason the New Haven enginemen did not like the GG-1's was not that they accelerated "too fast" but that their cab amenities were typical of a steam locomotive, while the New Haven engineers had been spoiled for years with comfortable seats, excellent vision, etc., even back to the box cab EP-2's and EP-3's.

 

I rode in the cab of a GG-1 once from New Haven to Penn Station.

 

Are you sure about that 1932 - 1933 date?  Others say 1935. 

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Comparing FL9's against straight electrics is a bit unfair since a straight electric has access to a lot more horsepower from the power plant than a diesel-electric from its prime mover.  Not keeping everything properly maintained was New Haven's problem.

[daveklepper]

Of course you are correct.  But in acceleration, the PA's, at least when new, could outperform the FL-9's, when new.   I guess just a matter of simple horsepower rating.

[PBenham]

it was (and still is) against the rules of the Amtrak (PT&T/PRR) AND LI to have both power sources charged at the same time.

Any idea where that rule is printed?

So when an NJT train pulls into NY Penn on Track 14, someone has already cut off the third rail power, and after it leaves they cut off catenary power and restore third rail in preparation for the next LIRR train?

In the Amtrak Northeast Corridor safety rule book. There is a very real risk that the overhead could sag in warm/hot weather and make contact with a M.U. car on the third rail. Result: ZZZZZAAAPPPPP!  As to the second question, TimZ, that is precisely what happens. The computer in the power distribution office does it faster than any human being ever could and can screw it up faster, too! Look at the power disruptions they've had recently!

[PBenham]

Now, the reason NH engineers had been speeding with GG1s, was that they took getting used to. The EP5s could accelerate all right, but the engineers could gauge how fast they got started up to 70MPH. A GG1 was rougher riding, more confined, and quieter than an EP5, which took getting used to. But me suspects NH hogheads wanted to run at 80 with the GG1s while they had a handy excuse for doing it!

[timz]

"Are you sure about that 1932 - 1933 date [for the Trenton-NY electrification]?  Others say 1935."

What others?

1935 was the completion of NY-Washington electrification. PRR AC-electric trains started running to Jersey City in December 1932 and to NY Penn in 12/32 or maybe 1/33.

[daveklepper]

OK, so steam on some trains continued until 1929.   Fro, 1929 to the start of 1933 there was the AC electrification all the way to Harold Tower from New Haven, with all trains electrically powered.   During the period from 1929 to 1933 did all New Haven trains change power at Harold?  If so, why?  Crews could have changed, and the EP-2's and EP-3's had the third rail shoes to run into Penn Station.  They had a compatible train-stop inductive pickup sytem when they ran through after the start of 1933, and this signal system was standard in LIRR 3rd rail territory as well as on the PRR.  On the New Haven, the same system existed (in some areas) with one less aspect.  Of course if there were a pair of EP-1's on the train, then a power change to DD-1's would have been necdessary.

 

Does anybody know the exact dates of the start of the New Canaan branch original dc electrication?  (I guess I can also ask my fellow Branford members.)

[timz]

the EP-2's and EP-3's had the third rail shoes to run into Penn Station. 

Not denying it, but-- who says so?

[Tom Curtin]

Gentlemen, NH passenger trains continued to change to PRR power at "Harold"  (or somewhere near there) until 1933 as a number of previous posts have stated.  NH freight electrics began to operate over the Hell Gate freight tracks and all the way down to Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, in 1927.

The first NH electrics to operate into Penn were the EP-3s.  The EP-2s never did, because they were not cab signal-equipped to operate over PRR tracks.  All NH's newer passenger electrics (EP-4s, EP-5s) came equipped with cab signals for this operation also.  Some of the EF-3s --- normally freight motors --- were equipped with steam heat so they could pull passenger trains into Penn.  Being straight AC motors they could not run into GCT.

Now: no New Haven electric, AFAIK, ever operated into Penn on third rail because their shoes were not designed to run on LIRR third rail.  They always kept their shoes retracted and ran on AC overhead.

FL9s did operate into Penn on third rail.  Their shoes were sprung differently than the ones on the electrics and could handle either design of third rail.  The New Haven would prefer to use straight electrics (after 1961 only EP-5s were on the roster) on the Penn jobs as long as one was available when needed. IT was difficult to keep enough of the EP-5s serviceable to handle all the Penn jobs as well as the heaviest of the GCT commuter runs that couldn't maintain schedule with FL9s.  The EP-5s were extremely maintenance-intensive and often out of service --- but hey, when they ran, thay could run like hell!!

The reasons for preferring EP-5s to FL9s for Penn jobs were: 1) the Penn jobs tended to be long and heavy, particularly a couple of them that had a lot of head-end traffic; and 2) from Harold up to Hell Gate is quite a substantial grade --- from the bottom of the East River tunnels up to the mouth at Hunterspoint Avenue, Queens, is a pretty good uphill pull too.

Tom Curtin

Controller, New Haven Railroad Historical & Technical Association

 

 

 

 

[daveklepper]

Thank youi for a much-needed correction.   I was misinformed by a New Haven employee when I was a youngster.   Interesting that I was so absolutely certain about this "fact" for some many years.  If I remember correctly, I was told this "fact" when riding the front platform of one of the old mu's.

 

The FL-9 information was from personal experience and thanks for the corroboration.   Did you know about the interference-repression measures necessary for the PRR to allow the EP-5's into Penn?

[timz]

"The first NH electrics to operate into Penn were the EP-3s.  The EP-2s never did, because they were not cab signal-equipped to operate over PRR tracks."

NH Power says four EP-2s had PRR cab signals (305-308 was it?). FWIW the dustjacket painting of Middleton's book shows an EP-2 eastward beneath Queens Blvd. (Correctly numbered, too.)  Can't cite a photo, tho.