Northeast Corridor Service Pre-Amtrak

1947 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • 1,673 posts
Posted by timz on Tuesday, November 28, 2017 7:24 PM

Sure-- for all I know they ran 200 mph. But GG1 limit in the Special Instructions was 100.

(Offhand guess: the Metroliner MU cars were limited to 105 mph by then.)

(Edit: in 10/77 GG1s were 90 mph, Metroliner MUs were 105; in 10/78, 100 and 110.)

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 13,279 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 9:50 AM

Until more Federal oversight became common, there were always cases of supervisors and engineers collaborating on overspeeding.

Recounted before on a Forum:  Riding the obs of the Silver Metior north from Jacksonville around 1961.  Mile-after-mile in eactly 36 seconds = 100mph.  Rear brakeman in the opposite rear-viewing seat.  I:  Do you know how fast we are going?  He:  The ICC speed limit for this line is 79 miles-per-hour, and that is as fast as we are going.  I:  But I see each mile in 36 seconds.  He:  The ICC speed limit for this line is 79 miles-per-hour, and that is as fast as we are going.

And go back to the 120mph T1 thread.

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,719 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 12:55 PM

timz
Sure-- for all I know they ran 200 mph. But GG1 limit in the Special Instructions was 100.

(Offhand guess: the Metroliner MU cars were limited to 105 mph by then.)

Those that didn't live through the 40's 50's and 60's can't comprehend how legitigous our society has become in the following 50 years.  Back in the day there were paper restrictions and there was reality - they rarely agreed!

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 8,585 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 1:17 PM

BaltACD

 

 
timz
Sure-- for all I know they ran 200 mph. But GG1 limit in the Special Instructions was 100.

(Offhand guess: the Metroliner MU cars were limited to 105 mph by then.)

 

Those that didn't live through the 40's 50's and 60's can't comprehend how legitigous our society has become in the following 50 years.  Back in the day there were paper restrictions and there was reality - they rarely agreed!

 

Balt, I agree with you fully. As to sueing, people were more willing to take responsibility for their own mistakes. As to train speeds, the engineers usually knew what was safe and what their engines could do. 

As to the account of fast running in Florida, the trainman was not going to admit that the engineer was disregarding the ICC's dictum. And, when I witnessed fast running on track with nothing more than ABS, I said nothing to any railroad employee--even when I was sitting right beside the engineer.

Johnny

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • 1,054 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 4:56 PM

Somewhere I have a photo I took back in the sixties, in the front vestibule on a metroliner that shows the digital speedometer indicating 115 mph. This was when it was PC. 

We could not have stopped for any obstrucing thing that we could have seen. Cab signals said we had the ROW and a clear track. If a track gang had been working and fouled the track, as happened last year, the engineer could not have seen it in time to stop. 

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • 1,054 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 5:08 PM

Deggesty
As to the account of fast running in Florida, the trainman was not going to admit that the rngineer was disregarding the ICC's dictum. And, when I witnessed fast running on track with nothing more than ABS, I said nothing to any railroad employee--even when I was sitting right beside the engineer.

Also, when I rode the Roanoke NRHS, Independence Limited between Portsmouth and Ft. Wayne behind 611 with Mr. G Clayter at the throttle west of Belville, I clocked us at under 50 seconds between mileposts and the TT speed limit for passenger trains was 60. On the bus to the motel, I asked some of the crew how fast we had gone, and got back the answer "sixty". 

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 12,719 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 9:55 PM

Electroliner 1935
Somewhere I have a photo I took back in the sixties, in the front vestibule on a metroliner that shows the digital speedometer indicating 115 mph. This was when it was PC. 

We could not have stopped for any obstrucing thing that we could have seen. Cab signals said we had the ROW and a clear track. If a track gang had been working and fouled the track, as happened last year, the engineer could not have seen it in time to stop. 

When operating at anything faster than Restricted Speed, trains cease being vehicles that can safely operate on the their line of sight.  When the signal indicates CLEAR and your 15K ton train is moving at it's allowed 50 MPH, your stopping distance is well beyond your line of sight on tangent track and the reality is that there is a awful lot of curvature built into lines that were laid out to follow the various creeks, streams and rivers by their founding engineering personnel riding on horse back with their transits and rods.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 4,346 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, November 29, 2017 10:23 PM

As I recall, there were six G's picked out for the best frames in Spring '78 that were "improved" for the 110mph service; the number was raised by two later.  Is there a note in the timetable instructions on specific engines allowed 100mph?

The tire problem was not manifested in 100mph operation as I recall, but I was not carefully discriminating the effect of inadequate Amfleet consist braking from that of higher speed.  If someone can find the pictures of the locomotives with loose tires we can confirm what kind of service they were in.

Had I not known the explicit work to make the locomotives capable of running at higher speed, I would have thought the "110mph" referred to 10%-over testing to confirm stability at the normal timetable instructions, which would make sense explaining the 110 story if Amtrak were satisfied with the 3:20 timing and no more than 100 peak.

Part of the issue involved 'snubbers', which on the Gs were not hydraulic or friction devices but tuned (more appropriately, mistuned) springs that would break resonance in the primary suspension.  They were removed from the fleet fairly early but with the advent of 100mph operation I for one thought they, or some other device like them, needed to be provided again.  For speed much in excess of 100mph I'd begin to expect hydraulic damping...

  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • 1,673 posts
Posted by timz on Friday, December 01, 2017 12:10 PM

Overmod
Is there a note in the timetable instructions on specific [GG1] engines allowed 100mph?

In 10/78 ten GG1s (including 4935) were allowed 100-- the rest were 90.

In October 1967, when GG1s were first allowed 100, it was 4883 and up-- 4800 to 4882 were 90.

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 13,279 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, December 03, 2017 3:09 AM

Were not GG-1s as orginally setup, allowed 100mph if that was track speed?  With the break-resonance springs as original?  Except for a minority which, although equipped with boilers, were regarded as "freight  GG1s"  with a different gear ratio, for a maximum of 90 mph?

  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • 1,673 posts
Posted by timz on Sunday, December 03, 2017 5:10 PM

Until 1967, "track speed" in the timetable was never more than 80 mph. Don't think the engine-speed-limit section of the timetable showed more than 80 for any engine.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy

Search the Community