Originally posted by CHPENNSYLVANIA [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Modelcar Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania 13,456 posts Posted by Modelcar on Friday, July 1, 2005 9:10 AM ....I saw the one at the museum in Strasburg and if I remember correctly it was the original prototype unit....The rivited one. Quentin Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 1, 2005 6:11 PM I wi***hat it could be done, but will never happen. It was one of the greatest loco that was on the rails any where in the world. 50 years of service. RIP Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 1, 2005 9:52 PM Is the one at the PRR museum the actual unit that crashed thru the floor of the station in DC on the famous runaway? Correct me if I am wrong. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 1, 2005 11:55 PM People--forget HEP equipment: you have 11, 000 volts above your head. Get a transformer for the HEP equipment. It shouldn't use up too much room, and you might not have to remove the boiler. I know that you could get new transformers, and not all the frames are cracked. Sincerely, Daniel Parks Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 2, 2005 5:09 AM The solution to the cracked frames might well be to work on one single "runner" and swap components with others to get it working - swap frames around to get an undamaged set. Were any GG1s scrapped and were any parts saved? Over here, most preservation groups have developed a spares store by visiting scrapyards and recovering usable parts from classmates of their loco - everything from throttles to complete trucks and power units. Reply Edit paulsafety Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: NJ-NYC Area 192 posts Posted by paulsafety on Saturday, July 2, 2005 8:26 PM If steam engines that were lost at the bottom of a river can be hauled out and returned to operating condition, why couldn't a GG1 get a new transformer. It does seem very unlikely that I will live to see it happen, but if a new transformer was installed, couldn't it be one that operates on dual voltages so that it could run anywhere there is AC in the overhead? (if you're going to dream, dream big!) GG1 is one of my all time favorites, having ridden behind them as a child on trips to NYC and DC from Philly. Sure would be a fantastic fan trip if it could be done. Too bad we lost so many NH electrics to the scrappers torch![:(] Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 2, 2005 8:42 PM GG1 #4927 has been cosmetically at IRM in Union, Il. It looks beautiful. However, it will never be able to run on the IRM on the 600V DC cantenary. Enjoy what you see but don't expect to see it run on its own power. Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, July 3, 2005 3:11 AM Head end power for a GG-1 is absolutely no problem at all. The multi-tap transformer is necesary for the kind of acceleration control the GG-1 has, and it is not a problem to have the right voltage pull-off to run a rectifier to inverter electcronic system that can provide the necessary 480 volt three-phase for regular Amtrak head-end power. Not all frames are cracked, and additional welding and strengthening can assure that one in good shape stays that way. The idea is feasible, but where is the money to come from? If the money were provided, I am certain one of the commuter authorities and/or Amtrak would not hinder the operation in any way if they didn't loose money on it. Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sunday, July 3, 2005 6:44 AM Dave from your comments I can see you have never been on inside of a GG1, or operated one, there is no space at all. its so small you need to go outside to change your mind. Even if the Boiler were to be removed you would never be able to put that stuff in cab area. and even if you could the Unions would not accept the working space on a GG-1 anymore Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 3, 2005 11:09 AM UNIONS? Volunteers would be doing this, probably. I have a feeling that crews coming off of hot steam locomotives (with cramped cabs) (hand fired, too) in the muggy Washington area had NO COMPLAINTS when assigned to electrics. Really, a GG-1 would be pretty easy to run on excursions--it requires just the juice, so no special stops would have to be made, and they are bi-directional, so no turning would be required. Also, they are just as kind to track as any other electric. Those are complaints held by some about steam excursions, none of which would be grounded with GG-1's. Sincerely, Daniel Parks Reply Edit Rick Gates Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: Balto. MD 213 posts Posted by Rick Gates on Sunday, July 3, 2005 11:29 AM I've operated alot of GG-1's. I have never heard of the Unions taking issue to space inside the cab. Most ran freight and most in passenger service used steam generators and not boilers. Most also had the PCB coolant oil drained after it's enviromental issues came to light in the 1970's and were replaced with another mineral oil. If they were to be run again it might be only for nastolgia's sake, so why wouldn't it be coupled to freight, old style passenger , or mail cars? HEP would not be an issue. The frames were always cracking due to metal fatigue. Thay were constantly welded. I don't believe they would be put in working service anyway however; an excursion run would not be out of the realm of possibility. Oh, and Dutch....if you do want to remove the steam generator/boiler, remember to remove the water tanks in each nose too. Plenty more room. [2c] Railroaders do it on steel Reply adrianspeeder Member sinceMarch 2002 From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE 1,482 posts Posted by adrianspeeder on Sunday, July 3, 2005 2:21 PM The one is Stasburg PA is very nice looking. The Pennsy hit a home run with that loco. Adrianspeeder USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman Reply rtstasiak Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 129 posts Posted by rtstasiak on Sunday, July 3, 2005 7:29 PM If people were not too fussy, a GG-1 "Dash-2" could be built around a trailing power car with diesel alternators for traction and HEP. I'd rewire the controls of those lovely AC quill motors with solid-state thyristor "valves" and other goodies out of a modern AC traction locomotive. In fact, this would be an AC4400 stretched out between a cab and a tender, the former being the GG-1 body with motors and operating controls and the latter being where all the infernal combustion takes place. The pantographs would be dummies, but the unit could run--and earn money--anywhere the track could take the load. Rich Reply adrianspeeder Member sinceMarch 2002 From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE 1,482 posts Posted by adrianspeeder on Sunday, July 3, 2005 8:46 PM Sorry, but show me the money... Adrianspeeder USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 4, 2005 2:57 AM Of course I've been in GG-1 cabs, several times. If you think the cab of a GG-1 is tiny, you should share the "footplate" of some older British steam with the engineer and fireman. I rode the left side, Fireman's side, of a GG-1 from New Haven to Penn Station when returning from a stint at the Trolley Museum on the Sunday that happened to be the 75th Anniversary of the day that the amalgamation took place forming the New York New Haven and Hartford Railroad. Dutch, you have no idea how compact the rectifier-alternator electronic equipment can be. A unit about the size of a typical h-fi radio receiver amplifier can probably handle enough power for an eight car train. Remember, most of the weight and space is already provided by the new main transformer or transformers. You are just tapping off a small fraction of that power. I think the idea certainly is doable, but the money? Who? Reply Gunns Member sinceJanuary 2004 From: New Mexico <Red Chilli> 259 posts Posted by Gunns on Monday, July 4, 2005 7:02 AM The Issue would be getting title to the Locomotive. I am helping with the restoration of the AT&SF 2926, and our club worked 4 years to get title to the Locomotive. Money is not the real issue, determination is the issue. If you have a large group of committed volunteers the restoration will take place. Gunns http://www.nmslrhs.org/ Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Monday, July 4, 2005 7:31 AM for more details on GG-1's see: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/GG1/ Getting Title would not be to hard, but moving a locomotive out of date for more than 20 years is. To fix the frames with Volunteers is nearly impossible, you probably won't be able to get electrical parts anymore so you would be redisigning a new propulsion package for the unit . Cabsignal allone is not an option so add to that a $200 000 microcab Acses system. ps trainjunkie even if you own the locomotive it still has to be operated by the engineers of the railroad your running on. so if you run it on NJT you use NJT crews, you run on MNCR you use MNCR crews etc. unless you can find a museum line or abandoned line with 11.5 Kv overhead. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 4, 2005 9:47 AM The restored GG-1 could operate on Amtrak Harold Tower, Sunnyside Yard, Queens to Washington Union Station, the Princeton Shuttle of New Jersey Transit, and some of the SEPTA suburban lines out of Philadelphia that also still have 25Hz 11,000V ac power. I believe the clearances in the Center City Tunnel are sufficient, but this woudl require checking. Nearly all the electrical and signal parts needed to restore a GG-1 to operation are off-the-shelf industrial or diesel locomotive hardware. This assumes the quill motores and drives are in good condition. Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Monday, July 4, 2005 10:05 AM your talking about modifying a GG-1 Dave not restoring. No standard Locomotive hardware fits a GG-1, since standard locomotives in general are either DC or three phase AC. A GG-1 is singlephase motors in tandem at voltages to high to use standard locomotive swichgear. BTW how good do you think open frame motors are after sitting in open air and humidity after 20 years of non use ??? Reply Rick Gates Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: Balto. MD 213 posts Posted by Rick Gates on Monday, July 4, 2005 11:02 AM Since we were running these same GG-1's on 3 phase AC and the motors were rewound and maintained at the Wilmington Shops, I don't think there is a real problem running one were Dave is saying. Railroaders do it on steel Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Monday, July 4, 2005 1:40 PM GG-1's on 3 phase ?? yeah right, you must be the guy who got me my certification. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 4, 2005 2:16 PM Dutch, you are assuming an exact restoration. I am assume a sold restoration that uses existing state of the art equipment that one can purchase from reputable manufacturers to make the thing run and haul some fans under the overhead (yes, single-phase AC 50Hz 11,000volt) catenary. And look great and authentic doing it, even if the sounds are a bit off. The kind of thing that might have been done if say Amtrak had chosen to upgrade the GG-1 to GG-2! It might even go so far as to have those motors (of course dissassembled and insulation checked and perhaps even the motors rewould with the most modern insulation) run on dc instead of ac. And, as you well know, with the proper safe-guards against overload, this is perfectly feasible with an ac-commutator motor and there is no difference in this particular aspect between the motors that powered the NYNH&H EP-3 4-6-6-4 streamliner and the GG-1. So maybe off the shelf equipment might mean using rectifier technology! But maybe not. Maybe it can be all 25 cycle ac equipment and there are still industrial plants that use 25cycle ac. I bet Wilmington shops still has some 25 Hz equipment and the parts are avialable. As to motors and frames left out to rust for 20 years, what do you suppose trolley musems all over the country face when they find a Brill safety car sitting in the woods on its original trucks after being used as a hen house for 50 years? The museums I belong to have had many motors stripped down and rewired. People who have done this for them have included big outfits like the CTA, NYCTA, and EMD, and smaller industrial motor shops local to the areas. Wilmington could probably do it, but it would of course take MONEY. Reply rtstasiak Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 129 posts Posted by rtstasiak on Monday, July 4, 2005 2:23 PM Following up on previous remarks. If you're not too fussy, a G can run again. Step 1, Pair the G with an AC-4400 (or thereabouts) donated by GE, one of the original builders of the G. Get the running gear and frame up to snuff, add cab controls, ditch lights, and run it as a non powered push-pull cab car. Step 2, salvage, if possible, the AC motors. If salvage is not possible, repower each C-truck in A-1-A fashion with contemporary motors and gears to provide token propulsion. Each idler axle could be a freewheeling "zombie" quill for old times sake. The GG-1 becomes a GG-2 slug, highlighting the fine work done by GE and others. Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Monday, July 4, 2005 4:36 PM A GG-1 had 2 single phase motors per drive axle via a quill drive, not something any other railroad curently uses, for total of 12 motors. If it does not sound like GG-1 its not a GG-1. and may just as well sit dead in a museum with a sound system playing the sounds. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 5:03 AM If the ac propulsion system IS kept, and the locomotive does NOT use rectifier technology, regardless of what modern equipment is used in the control circuitry, the transformers, head-end power, you name it, if it takes 11,000V 25Hz from the overhead and the motors run on 25Hz, it will sound exactly like a GG-1 should sound. That would be the best modernization in my book. I'd go to rectifier technology only as a last resort. It was the 25Hz power in the motors that gave the GG-1 (and the MP-54 mu cars) their characteristic sounds. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 10:06 AM This is a doable project and just requires the money: The obvioius candidate is the standard one, not "Rivits", at the Pennsylvania Railroad Musuem. It is close to the home rails where it can operate, and the owners can continue ownership and sponser trips themselves. The arrangements can be similar to what Steamtown offers with Private Car Lehigh Valley 353. Strassburg can sell tickets for the one coach coupled behind the GG-1 when their 0-6-0 steamer pushes it to and from the Lehman Place interchange track with Amtrak's Philadelphia - Harrisburg line. If that line is converted to 60Hz, then of course, the GG-1 will have to be towed to and from Philadelphia to reach the power it needs to run. Obviously it have to be towed anyway on its first visit to Wilmington Shops which should do the work. The project probably has to wait until Amtrak sorts out the Acela problems and settles into a more normal routine. The project requires lots of money, possibly as much as ten million dollars to do it right. It also requires a person as dedicated as the one funding the project but who is a good locomotive man, familiar with current practices in diesel locomotives, enought so he (or she) can interface with the people at Wilmington Shops who know their stuff. If it is one and the same person, even better. The first step is to get a fee quote from Amtrak to thoroughly inspect the locomotive at Wilmington. Of course the costs of transportation to and from, on its own wheels, and getting it shape to role, have to be added. Then Wilmington Shops and Amtrak should come up with estimates for alternatives in restoration, but all alternatives should include: (1) meeting all FRA requirements, (2) head end power compatible with Amfleet, (3) boiler and water for it removed, (3) all necessary ATC and signal equipment, (4) no hazardess material during maintenance or future overhauls, The the options should be chosen and the work scheduled. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 11:52 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by Dutchrailnut The GG-1 was put to pasture mainly because all of them had cracked frames. Tthey did not have HEP so todays trains could not be powered. The cabs were so small the unions no longer accepted them, plus they need two persons in cab to look past long hood. Even to restore a GG-1 for any railroad operations it would need to be made compliant to all the above problems. pour new frames ?? nobody cast stuff that big anymore. HEP car , not allowed in Penn station. Make cab bigger ?? then it won't be a GG-1 anymore. The frame cracks are no big deal - weld them up and normalize and you're good to go! (Just what PRR did all those years) For excursion service, all you'd need is the cab signal system updated (~$30k) - other cab conditions wouldn't matter. A HEP car into Penn? Sure, why not? The GG1 hauled "Metroliners" did it all the time. Getting a new trasformer built would be the big ticket item. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 11:55 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29 People--forget HEP equipment: you have 11, 000 volts above your head. Get a transformer for the HEP equipment. It shouldn't use up too much room, and you might not have to remove the boiler. I know that you could get new transformers, and not all the frames are cracked. Sincerely, Daniel Parks Not so simple for the HEP. The HEP has to be 60Hz, not 25Hz. Can't do that with a transformer! You could use an HEP car (if you can find one) or an AEM7 to provide HEP. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 12:01 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Dutchrailnut for more details on GG-1's see: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/GG1/ Getting Title would not be to hard, but moving a locomotive out of date for more than 20 years is. To fix the frames with Volunteers is nearly impossible, you probably won't be able to get electrical parts anymore so you would be redisigning a new propulsion package for the unit . Cabsignal allone is not an option so add to that a $200 000 microcab Acses system. ps trainjunkie even if you own the locomotive it still has to be operated by the engineers of the railroad your running on. so if you run it on NJT you use NJT crews, you run on MNCR you use MNCR crews etc. unless you can find a museum line or abandoned line with 11.5 Kv overhead. Don't need full Amtrak boondoggle overblown ACSES cab signal system, just Harmon Ultracab or US&S EL plus LSL. Total cost about $30,000 (~$10K if you scrounge the old EL system that may still be on some) It could be operated by volunteers provided they held a valid locomotive engineer's licence and were either qualified on the territory or accompanied by a pilot who was. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 2:52 PM No, you cannot do it with only transformer, but the AEM-7 does iti very nicely with a transformer and a compact electronics package and that is what is needed, not another piece of difficult to maintain rolling stock. Obviously the compact package from the AEM-7 is what should be used, with the right tap on the new transformer. Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 2:56 PM An inverter vs a diesel eng. gen set? Either way, it's OK by me! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply cbq9911a Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Chicagoland 465 posts Posted by cbq9911a on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 4:23 PM Just my two cents.... PRR 4927 at IRM can be restored to run on IRM's 600v DC overhead. To make it a regular service locomotive you'd need to modify IRM's overhead to accommodate pantographs and trolley poles. You'd also need to add additional substation capacity to meet the engine's current demands. It's doable, but very expensive. Close to a million dollars. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 5:43 PM For those of us to young to have heard a GG-1 with our own ears, what did a GG-1 sound like? Was it a low hum or was it something else. Reply Edit Randy Stahl Member sinceJune 2004 From: roundhouse 2,747 posts Posted by Randy Stahl on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 5:54 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by cbq9911a Just my two cents.... PRR 4927 at IRM can be restored to run on IRM's 600v DC overhead. To make it a regular service locomotive you'd need to modify IRM's overhead to accommodate pantographs and trolley poles. You'd also need to add additional substation capacity to meet the engine's current demands. It's doable, but very expensive. Close to a million dollars. IRMs trolley is mostly compatable with pantographs, the GG1 motors will turn to carbon with direct current. The south shore little joe has and will run at IRM as well as the balence of the IRM south shore collection. They just run a little slower at half the voltage. South shore air compressors need armature changes so that at least you can pump air. A CTA 4000 series EL car is a suitable doner. With the GG1 there are no cheap easy fixes to get it running. As stated before you will need to buy 2 new transformers period, you are looking at a half a mil right there. All of the other issues can be dealt with cleverly but in the end is it worth it? Randy Reply rtstasiak Member sinceOctober 2002 From: US 129 posts Posted by rtstasiak on Tuesday, July 5, 2005 9:19 PM I love this thread. By the way, if one were to adapt the G to run from overhead again, AC, DC, HEP feed, or AC frequency REALLY isn't an issue, except for cost. A high-end inverter-controller-transformer setup can synthesize any kind of AC (or DC) desired, provided that you have sufficient kilowatt input where the wire meets the pants. You rectify your current to straight DC. Inside the inverter, a computer chip controls a pair of solid state valves or regulators, one (+) the other (-) and when you alternate between them, you get synthetic AC! Do this 25 times per second, and you get original GG-1 juice; 60 times per second, you get HEP or common household current. This setup is pricey because of the isolation needed between high and low voltage, the big banks of big semiconductors, and the high-efficiency power transformer needed to allow the critter to run on multiple voltages and even DC. Of course, you could still wire and run this as a slave unit to any mother diesel as well. I grew up downt the street from Tesla and that whole crowd so polyphase AC from generators or solid state inverters is second nature. Come on, ladies and germs! I know at least two well heeled railroaders/railfans who could sell a few stocks and bonds and get the project rolling within a week. How about it? Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 3:04 AM The big banks of semi-conductors are being reduced to more manageable size, but in addition to the rectification to dc and then chopping or inverting, another aproach is frequency doubling and then frequency shifting and phase shifting. It is a good question whether the rectification and then chopping or inverting or the second method are less expensive. With the boiler and water removed, there should be enough room in the GG-1 without the need to haul a special hotel power trailer. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 6:04 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by coasterjoe For those of us to young to have heard a GG-1 with our own ears, what did a GG-1 sound like? Was it a low hum or was it something else. Starting out it the loudest sound was the grind of the gears, which turned into a low growl as the speed built. Other than that the only sound was the constant woosh of the fans. If there were any other sounds around a G powered train could sneak up on you and you wouldn't know it until it was right on top of you. Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 6:38 AM The grind of the gears on starting up was not continuous but pulsed somehwat at 50Hz, 50 cycles per second, twice the power frequency. The pulsing was greater in the MP-54 mu cars but was also present with the GG-1. Reply traintownofcowee Member sinceJune 2005 From: Franklin, NC 166 posts Posted by traintownofcowee on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 9:13 AM This is a little odd. I never even thought of the idea to restore an electric locomotive. But the one in Strasburg sure is nice. A GG1 would obviously take shorter to restore than a steamer, but still..who would do it? Also, iv'e seen GG1s in Amtrak markings. I wonder if they would want to "borow" it or restore it.[?][#dots] P.S. nice joke drephpe! [(-D] C Ya All L8TER! [8D][:D][:)][:P][{(-_-)}][(-D][swg][8D] Take a Ride on the Scenic Line! Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 10:35 AM The basic problem with a restored GG1 is that it can only run one place - the NEC from NY to DC (and out to H'burg - at least for a while). That's pretty slim pickings for an excursion locomotive. Not a very viable "ambassador" for Amtrak, unlike the UP, CP and NS steamers that could travel the whole system. I have heard the idea of an "Amtrak" steam locomotive kicked around from time to time. How about this: Amtrak "rents" UP 844 and crew to use on the Sunset or Zephyr. Might get UP's attention, then! -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 11:28 AM NY - Washington is the heaviest market in USA passenger railroading. Can you imagine a weekly round trip, say Monday breakfast NY - Washington, Dinner Washington - NY, then Friday breakfast Washington - NY and dinner NY - Washington, with say six restored private cars, Mountain View (still operable in private hands, I think I am still a small part owner) bringing up the rear, the rest not end of train cars but still equipped like prvate cars, exteriors all matching the Mountain View, which is to say the exact Broadway Limited paint scheme, meals included, fairs double those of Acela first class, it might sell. Especially if the breakfasts and dinners were really super quality. You might find that this could really be the prestige train in the market. The question is would Amtrak allow this competition and provide the time slots in the critical NY-Newark 2-track zone. Electric locomotives will always be limited in their reach, until there is a nationwide electrification program, and then it won't be 25Hz. If it were a dc third rail locomotive, it would be restricted just to Metro North and LIRR (asuming it had the right shoes). However, I would say the if the Conecticut museum's E-33, EF-4 is ever restored, since it was rectifier locomotive anyway, it should be restored so it can run on both 60Hz and 25Hz, and that won't be a problem. I also have some very good news for this kind of restoration project. The April 2005 issue of Physics today, www.aip.org, of the American Institute of Physics, has an article on High Temperature Cuprate Superconductors, and I can assure you that soon transformers like those in the GG-1's will be a lot smaller and lighter, that switch gear may have zero moving parts and handle huge amounts of current like a transistor handles small amounts, etc. There is a real technological breakthrough coming soon in this area, and the article specifically mentions trains as an application. It is also clearly applicable to the head-end power issue. Reply Modelcar Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania 13,456 posts Posted by Modelcar on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 2:24 PM ...Am I correct from the above post mentioning pulsations in gearing sounds...and If I remember correctly, from the seat cushions, one could feel the pulses in the power as a GG-1 got under way and was putting the power to it's mission....{Pushing one back in the seat too..}. Quentin Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 4:19 PM SOME OF YOU PEOPLE POSSESS THE UNIQUE ABILITY TO DRIVE ME CRAZY!!!! (An ovservation, not an insult.) Firstly, the GG-1 is notable for the very fact that it has the longest service life of any mainline locomotive, ever. Let the thing run on its own juice from the overhead wires! Forget whatever AC somethingorather cow/calf/slug/thingy! The GG-1's used HEP cars, so why not just do that? Leave the boiler and tanks in. Out here in southern California, we connect our steam engine to the steam heat pipes on passenger cars, and it's nice to have on cold days. I'm sure it would be even nicer in the cold Northeast. Some cars belonging to museums or individuals still use steam heat, and having a power car would save a lot of replacing components on the locomotive--contrary to popular belief, it's better to restore a GG-1 than it is to take a GG-1 frame and build "Dream Locomotive." I'm not an electrical engineer, so I cannot claim to be an expert, but to my understanding, light bulbs (and I know heaters) usually powered by three-phase power will also run (perhaps outputing less energy) on normal AC, just like you can run a light bulb on 1-phase AC or DC. The only thing that the three phase power and 1-phase power aren't compatible on are motors, but I don't think that would be a problem (get yourself a battery powered mixer for the dining car and save ten grand on major design changes). Finally, HAVE ANY OF YOU HEARD OF AMTRAK'S BUDGET PROBLEMS???? Amtrak doesn't have enough money to replace ties, much less to operate excursioning locomotives! As to the idea of the "premium service," it might work, and I'm sure that if you gave them a big enough cut of the revenue pie, they would let you run it. Most respectfully yours, Daniel Parks Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, July 7, 2005 3:21 AM I may have been fooled by the Physics Today article. It may really be a spoof. I know this is possible because two letters on fuel cell Hydrogen in the May issue are cearly spoofs, getting much more electricity from the Hydrogen than put in. Among other spoofs, they suggest saving money and fuel by using your Hybrid to generate electricity for your home while the Hybrid is in the garage, connecting the generator output to the home electrical system and disconnecting your home from the grid. Now this is a mag read by top physisists and engineers of North Ameerica. The spoof: 1. Wrong output voltage, wrong current 2. Hybrids generate electricity in the braking mode. They are not "gas-electric" cars. 3. In most cases on a per horsepower-hour or Kilowatt-hour basis, your home electricity is cheaper than the power you buy at the gas station. This varies. So I went back and looked at the reference article and decided the claims for superconductivity must be wildly exaggerated. Again, the website for all this is www.aip.org Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 8, 2005 11:58 PM Sounds like a competition that budding B.S.E.E.'s and others in the NEC could engage in--restoring a GG-1 for mainline service at the lowest cost and the safest environmentally without totally ignoring esthetic factors (like whether the loco would need a "buddy" car behind it actually generating the power.) Where are some places to see a good "retired" GG-1? I really like the one at the RR Museum in Baltimore, but I'm sure there must be other places.... Reply Edit paulsafety Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: NJ-NYC Area 192 posts Posted by paulsafety on Saturday, July 9, 2005 12:39 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd The basic problem with a restored GG1 is that it can only run one place - the NEC from NY to DC (and out to H'burg - at least for a while). That's pretty slim pickings for an excursion locomotive. Not a very viable "ambassador" for Amtrak, unlike the UP, CP and NS steamers that could travel the whole system. I have heard the idea of an "Amtrak" steam locomotive kicked around from time to time. How about this: Amtrak "rents" UP 844 and crew to use on the Sunset or Zephyr. Might get UP's attention, then! The general population density in the NEC (even when including H'burg line) is quite high per square mile, and if measured in "previous/current/potential amtrak passengers" living within 25 miles of either side of ROW, then it is also very high as compared to the "high plains" or the "desert southwest". This area also supports a good enthusiast/fan base for excursions whether steam/diesel/hirailing, etc. Also, with such a density of urban areas that have historically, consistently supported passenger rail, there could be strong media coverage in varied markets. I respect, but don't understand, the opinion that this part of the country makes "slim pickins" for an excursion engine or an ambassador for Amtrak. Of course, I am highly biased, having grown up in Philly and ridden behind GG1's and other electrics. I realize that the likelihood of seeing a GG1 restored to operation is highly unlikely, but it would represent a fantastic "living history" exercise - like learning about our past thru steam restoration and operation. Wires/catenary ought to be a key part of the experience as much as coal/oil firing of a steamer (rather than converting the firebox to burn LPG or simply towing the steamer with a diesel and sending out "fake smoke", etc.) I couldn't imagine a GG1 in Chicago, powered by a motor generator set in the baggage car, etc. Just wouldn't seem "right" somehow (ie. "fake smoke" from a steamer that isn't really under steam) [:)] Paul F. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 9, 2005 6:36 AM You make it seem more complicated then it really is. 1. Get a GG1 2. Disassemble 3. Send frame/trucks to China for restoration 4. Send electricals to Europe for restoration 5. Scrap steam generator to gain space. 6. recieve frame from China 7. recieve electricals from europe 8. Install Transformer to change 25 kV to 11 kV - install instead of steam generator 9. Install frequency converter from 60 Hz to 25 Hz - with HEP from there. 10. Install other essentials, assemble the locomotive 11. GG1-2 ready to run in multifrequency/voltage version. GG1 tap transformer can be mineral oil cooled, no need for PCB, also frequency is irrelevant for the transformers - given it is big enough (the bigger frequency, the smaller the transformer!). So the system would look like this: 25/11 kV conversion transformer -> Main transformer -> frequency converter/hep -> motors. conversion transformer and frequency converter are optional - so the loco could run on any electricity on the NEC. Then all you need is FRA allowance, a few heavyweight coaches and Viola - Congressional Limited ready. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 9, 2005 4:22 PM I didn't understand much of the tech talk above but it sure sounded cool..... Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 9, 2005 10:09 PM Fifty years ago, scrappers were cutting up all of the NYC Hudsons, all the NYC Niagras, every D&RGW standard gauge steam locomotive, all the T1's, the S1, the Q1, the Q2, all the Milwaukee Road's [amazingly built] Atlantics and Hudsons, and something closer to your heart. Why? Because they thought that the locomotives were of no historic value. Please, oh please, I implore you! Let us not make the same mistake as those who cut up today's lost engines. It is not just the GG-1 which is historic, but also what MAKES UP A GG-1; this includes the steam generator, the water tanks, the electronics, the system.... Don't change out any more than you have to. A GG-1 was built to run on 11, 000 V--let it. There's still plenty of track using that voltage on the same frequecy. Leave well enough alone! I know people who would rather have a hotrod than a factual manifestation of a bygone era, and to take a GG-1 and make it into an XX-10, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000 is a wrong to the principles of historic preservation--the reason these locomotives were saved in the first place. Sincerely yours in defense of history, Daniel Parks Reply Edit paulsafety Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: NJ-NYC Area 192 posts Posted by paulsafety on Sunday, July 10, 2005 1:03 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29 Fifty years ago, scrappers were cutting up all of the NYC Hudsons, all the NYC Niagras, every D&RGW standard gauge steam locomotive, all the T1's, the S1, the Q1, the Q2, all the Milwaukee Road's [amazingly built] Atlantics and Hudsons, and something closer to your heart. Why? Because they thought that the locomotives were of no historic value. Please, oh please, I implore you! Let us not make the same mistake as those who cut up today's lost engines. It is not just the GG-1 which is historic, but also what MAKES UP A GG-1; this includes the steam generator, the water tanks, the electronics, the system.... Don't change out any more than you have to. A GG-1 was built to run on 11, 000 V--let it. There's still plenty of track using that voltage on the same frequecy. Leave well enough alone! I know people who would rather have a hotrod than a factual manifestation of a bygone era, and to take a GG-1 and make it into an XX-10, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000 is a wrong to the principles of historic preservation--the reason these locomotives were saved in the first place. Sincerely yours in defense of history, Daniel Parks I appreciate the restoration v. modification for operation argument; however, there are many GG1s preserved in "original" condition -- its hardly a "lost engine" like NYC Hudsons, etc. Modifcation of one or two of the dozen+ GG1s would enable a new generation to appreciate the sounds, motion and power of one in action with a real train (not a static, accurate display or a computer simulation, etc.) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 10, 2005 2:51 PM Dear paulsafety, If you replace your GG-1 traction motors with motors from an EMDGEMPIWHOMEVER model SDGPEFAEM 40-70-90-4400ACDC-2-7-9 whatever, with new US&S/somebody superelectrocabsignaling and HEP cross-bilateral-multisimplo-transreinducing-composite-solid-state whatevers, and all you save is the body what you are hearing is not the GG-1. What you are experiencing is not the GG-1 except to a small extent. Is what you are really experiencing much better than a tape player on an unmodified GG-1? I would be a fool to deny that certainly, for the good of the historic restoration, some things would need to be modified or replaced. However, much of what I have heard here in the way of restoration needs are really not needed to return a GG-1 to operation in a historic context, but rather to turn it in to "dream choo-choo [:)]." Sincerely, Daniel Parks Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, July 10, 2005 3:46 PM The modifications I would propose would not change the GG-1's character. The quill motors would stay. If at all possible it would remain an ac-commutator 25Hz locomotive and not use rectifiers. Switch gear would be modern, wiring would use the best insulation, and there would be on-board head-end power. If this could be fitted in while retaining a restored boiler, OK. It would be a reliable locomotive, except for the traction motors and pantograph (historic equipement) serviceable at any diesel locomotive maintenancne and repair center, but the essential sounds and operating charactreristics and engineer's control would be exactly the same as the original. And the transformers would be non-toxic and give the tap-off necessary to power the electronic conversion gear for head-end power. Reply paulsafety Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: NJ-NYC Area 192 posts Posted by paulsafety on Sunday, July 10, 2005 6:05 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29 Dear paulsafety, If you replace your GG-1 traction motors with motors from an EMDGEMPIWHOMEVER model SDGPEFAEM 40-70-90-4400ACDC-2-7-9 whatever, with new US&S/somebody superelectrocabsignaling and HEP cross-bilateral-multisimplo-transreinducing-composite-solid-state whatevers, and all you save is the body what you are hearing is not the GG-1. What you are experiencing is not the GG-1 except to a small extent. Is what you are really experiencing much better than a tape player on an unmodified GG-1? I would be a fool to deny that certainly, for the good of the historic restoration, some things would need to be modified or replaced. However, much of what I have heard here in the way of restoration needs are really not needed to return a GG-1 to operation in a historic context, but rather to turn it in to "dream choo-choo [:)]." Sincerely, Daniel Parks Thanks for the clarification - I missed your point the first time around - restore and operate, but let's not create a "frankenstein - abomination" in the process. Right? I can agree with that. Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Sunday, July 10, 2005 6:17 PM standard traction motors won't fit, the GG-1 has double ended Tractionmotors. Reply Kurn Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Akron,OH 229 posts Posted by Kurn on Sunday, July 10, 2005 7:16 PM This is bringing up the age-old question about restoring anything- how much "original" parts have to remain before its not what it was? Is Doyle McCormick's PA really a PA? To the purists,probably not, because just about everything has been replaced. The General? Most agree that nothing remains of the original locomotive. I vote for having a GG1 running in any way possible-minus,of course, the PCBs and the asbestos. If there are no dogs in heaven,then I want to go where they go. Reply 1shado1 Member sinceMay 2005 450 posts Posted by 1shado1 on Sunday, July 10, 2005 10:20 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 Where are some places to see a good "retired" GG-1? I really like the one at the RR Museum in Baltimore, but I'm sure there must be other places.... Here's a link posted earlier in this thread by Dutchrailnut: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/GG1/ PAY ATTENTION![:D] Jeff Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 10, 2005 11:55 PM Thank you for the post, 1shado1 and Dutchrailnut. What a wonderful site! I had no idea there was a GG-1 in Roanoke. Later this summer, when I visit my home planet of Southwestern Va., I shall visit said loco. In my favorite paint scheme! Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 11, 2005 3:51 AM When electric railroad equipment is restored at most trolley musuems, "restoration" does not mean rewiring the old armatures and field coils with cotton-insulated wire but using the most modern high temperature insulation available. Regardless of the condition of the quill motors, it should be possible to strip them to the iron cores, rewind them to factory specifications but with modern wire. This would be the general approach throughout the restoration, and indeed should be the approach for restoring a diesel or a sleeping or dining car, etc. In fact, research may proove that New Jersey Transit or even Amtrak adopted this approach in the last days of maintaining the GG-1's that were left operating. Parts and bearings of existing "trademark" itmes like whistle, the two pantographs, throttles, etc., should be renewed in kind. But hidden behind the scenes items like electrical contactors and relays and all wiring and air piping, heaters, should be as reliable as possible and replaceable from equipment available at maintenace locations today. Reply Dutchrailnut Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Brewster, NY 648 posts Posted by Dutchrailnut on Monday, July 11, 2005 8:04 AM Dave I never said it can't be done, but at what cost. I got 22 years in Railroad industry in both MofE and operation and sofar any locomotive re-manufactured with newer components whas a piece of S**T. Restoration/and remaufacturing do not mix. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 11, 2005 8:45 AM Visit any good trolley museum and you will ride mostly remanufactured equipment, some more reliable and better performing than when new. It is one thing to try to use an EMD diesel engine in an Alco or a Lilma or Faribanks Morse, but what I am proposing is very different. A lot of the GP-9's and SD-9's that are still running strong have been through exactly the same kind of program that I am describing and some are better locomotives than when new. Visit the Isle of Man, in the Irish Sea between Britain and Ireland and ride the 108 year old interurban cars of the Manx Electric (Douglas - Laxy - Ramsey) which have been through the kind of rebuilding process I've described. Also, of course, the St. Charles Streetcar line in New Orleans. In diesel equipment, didn't the UP "Executive E's" work just fine? How about the RDC's of Trinity Express? Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 11, 2005 12:01 PM Dear Dave, Careful.... I admit that something dangerous or patently unreliable must be replaced, but as restorers (and consequently executors of history today), we can't go replacing stuff that doesn't need to be replaced. I volunteer at a museum which also has a Union Pacific E (E-8 942). We didn't go trough a massive rebuilding like this, and the E works well enough. The Executive E's work so well because they have a world class shop to take care of them. I would like to think of the Orange Empire Railway Museum as a good trolley museum. We have almost all of the surviving equipment from the Los Angeles Railway and Pacific Electric. We are an operating museum, but when we do a restoration, we don't replace more than we have to. Certainly, we rewind coils in our motors, but we don't replace the resistor groups and contactors unless necessary. Historic veracity must come before "hot rod." Oh, and I don't think that GG-1's have cotton insulated wire :). With the modifications you propose, I feel like I should be hearing on the radio, "Sunday, Sunday, Sunday, at the Fairground Speedway Station, Station, see the massive GG-1 in action, action. Discount tickets are available, and kids under five are free, free." [:)][:D]. Sincerely and respectfully, Daniel Parks Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Monday, July 11, 2005 2:29 PM I'm not suggesting anything radical. As you say, when you rewind motors, you use the best possible wire and insulation available. As far as contactors and relays, however, you don't want the GG-1 to be stuck at Ivy City near Washington with a bad relay with the only replacement back at Wilmington or Strassburg or Harrisburg. And the restoration, to operate it in the NEC has to be equal in quality of workmaship and materials to those UP Executive E's. The transformers, if they are good and cooling flued can be non-toxic, keep them. Otherwise use the best transformers that can be bought, possibly requiring custom made. I stand by what I recommended as far as contactors and relays. And where current practice suggests not replacing exactly in kind (and if existing relays are still being manufacured, of course replace in-kind) then I'd want the current capacity at least 150% the capacity of the original and the insulation at least 150% the voltage of the original. Hopefully this can be true of new types of wiring. The locomotive must be reliable if it is to interface with other trains on the NEC. Incidentally, some of the "abortion" rebuilds were reliable good locomotives. Didn't the AT&SF have some switchers rebuilt from a combination of Alco and EMD components that gave good service for many years, some even being purchased by Amtrak for continued switcher service? Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 11, 2005 4:00 PM In Dallas we have a GG-1 at the Age of Steam Museum. I have never been able to figure this out as to my knowledge the Standard Railway of the World never extended their tracks or catenary this far south and west. I would love to see a GG-1 running again. Without a massive electrification project it can only run on the NE Corridor as far as New York. Yes, we could put new state of the art electronic equipment and new transformers, motors, controllers, and whatever in to get a running locomotive that could be operated under a multitude of voltages and frequencies and even go as far as being compatable with a 600 volt DC trolley.. While at it why not air condition the cab? It does get hot in the northeast. At the end of the day what do you have? You have an operating electrical locomotive. Good! But is it a restored GG-1? No! You have rebuilt the locomotive in the designs of the current variety of electrical locomotives. Why not just jack up the Raymond Loewy designed outer shell and slide in an AME or whatever current day electrical locomotive sans exterior shell will fit. You will not have a GG-1, but a look alike. to save money why not buy a Lionel GG-1? It does not have the same running gear, controls, etc as in the original GG-1, but it is a GG-1 look alike, abet a little smaller. Ok, assume that you meticously restored the locomotive to original builders specifications. Now, will Amtrak or NJT permit you to run it? They are in the business of running a real railroad on a very conjested corridor. How many unhapy commuters will you have if you tie up the line with a broken GG-1. Will the restored GG-1 meet todays FRA or other regulatory agencies rules? I do not know, but I would still love to see a GG-1 run again. Anyone have a spare ten million? *** Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 11, 2005 10:31 PM Upgrading transformers using non PCB oil is doable, requires engineering. Cab control to FRA requirements is doable. HEP, take out the steam generator and install a diesel generator, very doable. Why? Lots of money needed. 11,000 volts makes mistakes very costly. Now, using it as a dummy car with a diesel at the other end of the consist, that's doable. How would you feel about that? Reply Edit Paul Milenkovic Member sinceJuly 2004 2,741 posts Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Monday, July 11, 2005 10:34 PM Can anyone explain to me the quill drive? What I think is going on is that the axle is surrounded by a hollow tube, and that hollow tube transmits torque to the axle through springs that are like wheel spokes. The hollow tube is the quill as in hollow feather used as a pen. The quill is in turn connected by gears to a traction motor attached to the truck frame. This contrasts with the "nose hung" traction motor used on Diesels where one end of the traction motor is attached to the axle through a gear drive and the other end of the traction motor is attached to the truck frame through a journal bearing (it allows the traction motor to pivot, but it does not need to be a roller bearing because it does not rotate through full revolutions at wheel speed). The nose-hung design is a compromise between a fully sprung traction motor (objective of the quill drive) and an axle-hung motor like on the Milwaukee Road bipolar electrics. I am understanding the quill drive the right way? How big an advantage does this have over the usual Diesel-style traction motor setup? If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks? Reply PennsyHoosier Member sinceOctober 2004 From: Northern Indiana 1,000 posts Posted by PennsyHoosier on Monday, July 11, 2005 10:55 PM This is a great thread. It is making me very nostalgic. Unlikely as it is ($$$$$), I sure would love to see and hear a GG-1 running again. Remarkable piece of machinery! Lawrence, The Pennsy Hoosier Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 11, 2005 11:31 PM Not sure if any of this has had priar mention (Browsed, didn't read everything), but I thought I'd put in my 2 cents The GG1 that went into union station is sitting in old CR blue paint in a CSX yard in Baltimore deteriorating. The GG1 4935 at Strasburg ("Ole Rivets" is 4800) was restored in the mid to late eightys by Amtrak and a historical group, and run as a tourist draw to passenger train rides on the NEC for a short while (as I have read) And finally, to answer the second line in the opening post of this thread, yes. The GG1 in Altoona PA (I think she is 4913), has been transported from yard storage to museum dispay by NS over their mainline a few times. I have photos of her on display on a museum spur connecting to the mainline, and later I myself found her beside an abandoned warehouse in juniata yard about half a mile down the main. As for restoration to operation, I could see a power car running one on a scenic/tourist railroad, but I doubt any class 1, or Amtrak, would care to have one run on their tracks without some mileage payments for her space and time on their rail. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 12:53 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper I'm not suggesting anything radical. As you say, when you rewind motors, you use the best possible wire and insulation available. As far as contactors and relays, however, you don't want the GG-1 to be stuck at Ivy City near Washington with a bad relay with the only replacement back at Wilmington or Strassburg or Harrisburg. And the restoration, to operate it in the NEC has to be equal in quality of workmaship and materials to those UP Executive E's. The transformers, if they are good and cooling flued can be non-toxic, keep them. Otherwise use the best transformers that can be bought, possibly requiring custom made. I stand by what I recommended as far as contactors and relays. And where current practice suggests not replacing exactly in kind (and if existing relays are still being manufacured, of course replace in-kind) then I'd want the current capacity at least 150% the capacity of the original and the insulation at least 150% the voltage of the original. Hopefully this can be true of new types of wiring. The locomotive must be reliable if it is to interface with other trains on the NEC. Incidentally, some of the "abortion" rebuilds were reliable good locomotives. Didn't the AT&SF have some switchers rebuilt from a combination of Alco and EMD components that gave good service for many years, some even being purchased by Amtrak for continued switcher service? Dear Dave, One little thing: The GG-1 SOMEHOW managed to run for 50 YEARS on the "OLD" TECHNOLOGY. THE PENNSY'S mechanical department spent WAY MORE TIME than anyone here has in designing it. And you know what? THE GG-1 IS ONE OF THE MOST RELIABLE LOCOMOTIVES OF ALL TIME, and it was because of many of the very components you seek to replace as "unreliable." Please allow me to point out that making an already reliable locomotive into something else by putting in every high-tech gysmo might have "adverse effects on reliability." After all, when was the last time you saw a relay-driven CTC machine have a "fatal error"?! I agree with Mr. Watkins--if playing tech geek on a venerable piece of history is what we're after, then let's save some donors' money and buy a postwar Lionel, where we can put in TMCC, DCC, and all sorts of electronic goodies much more cheaply. Why increase current capacities by 50%--the originals already were well designed with adequate tolerances. Sir, I must say that though I have every belief that your intentions are good, some of the changes you propose do seem radical to me. Again, I ask, are we restoring a GG-1 or an XX-1, 000, 000, 000? If we know something's unreliable or dangerous, then replace it, but with the most historically similar equipment which is safe and dependable. If we can't find specific fault with a component, then let's defer to the Standard Railraod of the World with their own locomotive. Most sincerely and respectfully yours in service of history, Daniel Parks Reply Edit daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:59 AM Again, I am not suggestion changing anything that is reliable and repairable and/or replacable in kind. Quite the contrary. What I am suggestion is using the best off-the-shelf parts available to replace anything that is not reliable AND not repairable AND not replacable in kind. I agree that changing the GG1 to something else and just keeping the body shell would be a tragedy. What I would like is for the GG-1 to be restored, operational, and very reliable, the kind of restoration that Amtrak would welcome on its NEC for the good publicity it would draw and possibly even for the added revenue it would bring. It would still be a restoration and not a modernization or rebuilding. Does anyone know if there is a cashe of GG-1 spare parts anywhere? I also think that with some very clever planning and using state of the art technology, it should be possible to shoe-horn head-end power into the locomotive without removing the boiler and water tank. I think a diesel power unit is rediculous when there is all the power in the overhead wire. Whether or not the boiler and water tank have to be removed, it is entirely feasible to run a separate lead from each pantograph to run the new electronics to provide three-phase 60Hz 440V AC to the coaches. For the train to look authentic, no obvious power car, even a car with a pantograph, is a must. Also, 25Hz power will remain on the NEC south of Sunnyside for a long time to come, and I think most would rather restrict the GG-1 to operation on the lines for which it was built than to see it modified to run on electrifications with different characteristcs. If in 25 years, the power is changed to 60Hz, then a power car looking like a baggage car would be essential. Instead of its own pantograph, the GG-1's panatographs would still pick up the power, and there would be six fat jumper cables to the power car where the conversion solid state electronics would be located, with the power going from the GG-1 to the power car and back to the GG-1, again keeping the GG-1 as much like original as possible and the train looking as original as possible. In that case, of course, the head-end power electroncis would be relocated to the power car, and any boiler and water tank removed from the GG-1 (only if necessary) and preserved, would be restored to their original position. Reply inarevil Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: US 12 posts Posted by inarevil on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:08 AM In answer to HighIron2003ar's question early on in this thread, the GG1 at Strasburg is not the one that crashed through the floor at DC Union Station. The one involved in that crash is stored in the Mt. Clare Yard in Baltimore, MD and is in the possession of the B&O Museum. In order for the locomotive to be removed, it was cut into three pieces and hauled out, reassembled, and put back in service. It was one of the last G's in service and with that, I would love to see at least it operationally restored. I remember seeing one being towed from somewhere to somewhere else when I rode the train across PA in 1990. It sure is an impressive beast. From Ely, NV - Home of the world famous Nevada Northern Railway http://www.nevadanorthernrailway.net Reply owlsroost Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Cambridge, UK 419 posts Posted by owlsroost on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 5:56 AM QUOTE: Can anyone explain to me the quill drive? What I think is going on is that the axle is surrounded by a hollow tube, and that hollow tube transmits torque to the axle through springs that are like wheel spokes. The hollow tube is the quill as in hollow feather used as a pen. The quill is in turn connected by gears to a traction motor attached to the truck frame. This contrasts with the "nose hung" traction motor used on Diesels where one end of the traction motor is attached to the axle through a gear drive and the other end of the traction motor is attached to the truck frame through a journal bearing (it allows the traction motor to pivot, but it does not need to be a roller bearing because it does not rotate through full revolutions at wheel speed). The nose-hung design is a compromise between a fully sprung traction motor (objective of the quill drive) and an axle-hung motor like on the Milwaukee Road bipolar electrics. I am understanding the quill drive the right way? How big an advantage does this have over the usual Diesel-style traction motor setup? You understand it pretty well. There are other designs of 'flexible drives' in use around the world too - their purpose is to minimise the 'unsprung weight' (mass) of the axle assembly and hence reduce the dynamic forces on the track at speed. Otherwise locomotives running at high speeds would (almost literally) hammer the track to pieces as they pass over joints, switches, crossings etc. British Rail learnt this lesson the hard way back in the late 1960's when they built a fleet of 100mph electric locos with nose-hung traction motors and 20 ton axle loads. After the track started to suffer badly they had to retro-fit most of them with resilient wheels to reduce the track forces - the remainder were restricted to 75mph top speed and used for freight. All the electric passenger locos built in the UK after that have had fully sprung, frame-mounted motors with flexible drives..... Tony Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 8:42 AM I was briefly approached about serving on the Amtrak board a couple years ago. To date nothing has come of it like the 3-4 people put up for board membership have never been confirmed by the Senate. Who knows, it may come through, but I am not holding my breath. Should I be appointed there are some things I would seriously investigate: 1. Restore a steam enging and several vintage coaches to run excursion service. Think this would be a revenue producer. 2. REBUILD A GG-1 and run it on the NEC. Again think this would be a money maker. 3. Increase the frequency (and speed) of passenger trains. One train from Dallas to Austin per day taking 6 hours will not attract business riders. Four to 6 RTs per day traveling at a higher speed so you can be competative with airlines would be great. 4. Restore passenger service to additional core lines. What about a Sunset Limited connection at El Paso through Dallas-Fort Worth to Medidian Miss then on to DC? There are numerous lines like this that can be returned to service. 5. Market quality vacation travel. Look at our neighbors to the north (including Alaska). 6. Educate Congress on the benefits of Amtrak. Point out that there is no transit system, be it air, water or road, that pays its entire way through the fare box. Why should Amtrak be the only one to do it. (Mission Impossible???) Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 9:21 AM Having grown up with GG1's, E44's, E33's, Metroliners and E60's, I can tell you watching trains in the 60's and 70's was very exciting. When one first spotted a headlight in the distance, the question was, what kind of engine is on this train?It could be anything, but usually it was a G. It seemed every other train was powered by a G. Most people by the NEC got used to seeing the GG1.I always loved this engine, and never got tired of seeing her. Watching trains now with my son, I miss the old engines very much. If we were trackside now, and I saw a GG1 on the point, pulling ANYTHING, I would be in heaven! I don't care how it sounded, as long as it still had the Leslie Typhoon horn. It could be powered by briggs and stratton for all I care, as long as it was RUNNING! So, lets start a program to revive at least one of these magnificent machines before it is too late. What we need is a trainfan, but one who has experience within the Railroad shop area. A current or former RR employee would be great. I can and would donate cash as well as elbow grease to this cause. Lets not sit here and complain about the cost, money can be raised. This is America, money in not the issue! We can get the money. The real problem is getting the right kind of people to oversee this project. I have read all there is about the GG1, but I still don't know how to fix one! Take the guts out of the E60 sitting at Strasburg and swap it in. How? I dont know, but SOMEONE does. Please come forward. Lets do it! Reply Edit Modelcar Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania 13,456 posts Posted by Modelcar on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 9:26 AM ...Can we confirm the GG-1 at Strasburgh IS the first one produced....I took pic's of it right after the museum was opened but don't have my pic's in front of me....The one inside the building..{at my visit}, was the riveted body as opposed to welded. Believe it is: 4800 Quentin Reply Roger38 Member sinceMarch 2002 37 posts Posted by Roger38 on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 9:29 AM WRWATKINS line 6 is the whole key to the AMTRAK and other issues, educate congress. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts GG1 in PRR Federal Wreck Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 9:30 AM HighIron2003ar wrote: Is the one at the PRR museum the actual unit that crashed thru the floor of the station in DC on the famous runaway? GG1 4876 pulled the Federal that morning. I rode behind her and the 4877 in tuscan livery for a GG1 farewell special in June of 1981. Full roster and dispositions at: http://www.spikesys.com/GG1/roster.html -PRR 5711 Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 12:19 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by wrwatkins I was briefly approached about serving on the Amtrak board a couple years ago. To date nothing has come of it like the 3-4 people put up for board membership have never been confirmed by the Senate. Who knows, it may come through, but I am not holding my breath. Should I be appointed there are some things I would seriously investigate: 1. Restore a steam enging and several vintage coaches to run excursion service. Think this would be a revenue producer. 2. REBUILD A GG-1 and run it on the NEC. Again think this would be a money maker. 3. Increase the frequency (and speed) of passenger trains. One train from Dallas to Austin per day taking 6 hours will not attract business riders. Four to 6 RTs per day traveling at a higher speed so you can be competative with airlines would be great. 4. Restore passenger service to additional core lines. What about a Sunset Limited connection at El Paso through Dallas-Fort Worth to Medidian Miss then on to DC? There are numerous lines like this that can be returned to service. 5. Market quality vacation travel. Look at our neighbors to the north (including Alaska). 6. Educate Congress on the benefits of Amtrak. Point out that there is no transit system, be it air, water or road, that pays its entire way through the fare box. Why should Amtrak be the only one to do it. (Mission Impossible???) Could I add a seventh? 7. Work on employee courtesy. Almost all Amtrak employees I have met are very nice and will go out of their way to make you feel good, but every so often you meet one who isn't so nice.... It doesn't take much effort to treat each other well, but it takes even less work to ruin somebody's day. Anyway: Dear Dave, I'm sorry, I didn't fully understand your prior postings. Now that you've clarified, I can see that your changes aren't so radical, and I feel that I owe you an apology. Sincerely, Daniel Parks Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:31 PM [;)] I've been following this thread with interest and apologize if I missed an earlier reference. Was delighted and surprised to hear that the GG-1 that crashed into Union Station D.C. had been saved from the junk heap. This may be a dumb*** question but I've been dying to ask it: My understanding is that the crash occurred because the loco simply lost all its braking power. Why didn't the engineer just pan down? Wouldn't that have either thrown the trainset into emergency stop or let the loco coast to a stop?? Inquiring Minds... Moop Moop! [:D] Allen from Chicago Reply Edit ben10ben Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Frankfort, Kentucky 1,758 posts Posted by ben10ben on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 3:40 PM The crash occured because the brake line between two of the cars, I believe #4 and 5, had been left closed. This meant that when the engineer applied the brakes, they only applied in the locomotive and the first four cars. Most likely the engineer cut the throttle down all the way before doing this and then applied the brakes for the scheduled stop. When the train didn't slow, he applied the emergency brakes, which really didn't have any further effect on the speed. Brakes on a few cars aren't very effective when you have 20+ heavy cars behind you still traveling at close to their original speed. Ben TCA 09-63474 Reply choochin3 Member sinceJuly 2004 From: Bawlmer Hon 314 posts Posted by choochin3 on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 4:20 PM GG1 4876 is in Baltimores Mt Clare Yard,but is in seriously bad condition. It is allmost beyond any kind of restoration,she is really rusty,black paint peeling, graffitied,broken pantographs, missing most wiring,and controls. I think 4876 is a half step away from the scrappers torch. Apparently the B&O museum does not care about this locomotive for it has been sitting there for at least 10 years,and no effort to preserve her.[:(] Carl T. I'm out Choochin! Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:31 PM Having been a great fan of the old 611 and having rode it many times, and loving the experience, as well as most of the rail related attractions from Maine to NC I hate to rain on our parade, but one of the previous posts hit the spike right on the head. It would be unlikely that any railroad would permit any vintage equipment like that to run their rails anymore because of the liability issue. I remember when the 611 wrecked down here in Chesapeake and the N&W owned the locomotive, the tracks, the cars and the court settlements. Soon after 611 ended up in a shed in Roanoke, probably forever. Plus these excursions can block revenue producing traffic as well....so no matter how these excursions run, they can cost the host railroad a lot of money with little in return.... Reply Edit Fireflite Member sinceFebruary 2005 41 posts Posted by Fireflite on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:58 PM The RR Museum of Pennsylvania has three GG1's in its collection. Number 4935 is on display in the rolling stock hall. The 4935 has had a complete cosmetic restoration to its as-built 1943 appearance, including very shiny coat of Brunswick Green paint with the original 5 gold stripes. It was first restored in 1977, and donated to the museum by Russell Wilcox in 1983. If you think you don't like Brunswick Green, pay this motor a visit and it'll make you a believer. (Note that an electric locomotive was a 'motor' to PRR man.) The 4800, the prototype, aka "Old Rivits" is on display in the outside yard. It was owned by the Lancaster Chapter NHRS until donated to the museum in 2000, which explains why the 4935 had dibs in the spot inside. It was the only example with rivited rather than welded body, hence the nickname. I believe this engine is still wearing Tuscan Red with five stripes (somewhat faded now). I think most fans like this paint scheme best, though only 10 units ever wore it, and the 4800 wasn't one of them. Interestingly, this engine one of group re-geared for freight service. It went to PC, then Conrail, and wore both a unique Bicentennial scheme and Conrail Blue. The museum's third GG1 is 4859, currently on display in the Amtrak station in Lancaster, PA. Read more at http://www.rrmuseumpa.org/about/roster/gg1.htm. The 4877 was last operated by NJ Transit and was restored to Tuscan Red a few years before its retirement. Its now owned by the United Railway Historical Society, and is in storage in NJ Transit's Hoboken yard. Another unit is on display next to the fairgrounds in Syracuse, NY, and last I knew there was one at the National Railway Museum in St Louis. Tom Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 3:18 AM I think that a very reliable and thorough restoration of a GG-1 with the money to do the right job, and paying Amtrak for some time in the Wilmington shops regardless of where the actual restoration is done, and a thorough inspection and test runs by Amtrak's own mechanical people would allow railfans to use the GG-1 in charter service in the Corridor. It will take millions, certainly, but it can be done, with enough money behind it, Amtrak will be glad for the added revenue. They are not in position of NS to turn down something that is sure to add to the bottom line. If the excursions were initially restricted to weekends, and the four track territory between Philadelphia and Newark, Amtrak would note that track capacity exists and flexibility at crossover points, so any breakdowns (and the overhaul and inspection work should make this impossible) would not seriously affect schedules service by them or SEPTA or NJT. The rolling stock must be in similar fine condition. This can be use of weekend-surplus existing Amtrak, NJT, or SEPTA coaches or a fully restored classic PRR train. For the latter I would recommend first: rehabbing the ex-Congressional and ex-Senator Budd equipment of 1952. The coaches were built as beautifiul daytime recling seat coaches with about 20 double reversable seats in the main section, and about 14 facing inward semi-parlor seats in the smoking section at the end away from the single vestibule (platform). About 54 seats altogether. An etched glass partition divided the two sections, possbly without a door. The diners and parlors matched. And there were blunt-end parlor observations at the rear. Much of this equipment was reseated with high-density commuter-like seating, high-back but non-reclining, (some cars non-reversable!) by Amtrak when equipped for head-end power and used in Clocker (NY-Phila) and Keystone service, where some may still operatre. Some is at tourist operations. Another possibility would be genuine PRR smooth-side lightweight equipment or other equipment that can be painted to look like the genuine article in the PRR tuscan red and gold stripes scheme. And a third possibility would be classic railroad roof PRR P-70 coaches with a few six-wheel-truck heavywieght parlors and diner in tuscan red. All this can be found in existing tourist operations if one looks hard enough. The PRR heavyweight parlors last saw service in the LIRR weekend Montauk and Greenpoint trains. Reply Modelcar Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: Muncie, Indiana...Orig. from Pennsylvania 13,456 posts Posted by Modelcar on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:19 PM Tom: I must have done my visit {summer of '83}, right before the 4800 was moved outside at the Pennsylvania Museum....The place was almost new then and I'm almost certain the photos I took of the GG-1...{inside the building}, are of "old rivets"....... ....Welcome to the forum. Quentin Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 3:52 PM For Train Junky29 and Roger38 Agree fully with you. My thoughts were just made up quickly. I am sure that IF I were on the board I could come up with atleast 100 projects to work on. Thanks for your imput. Don't hold your breath waiting to read about me being appointed. Bush has had 6 years to get his act together to do it and I am a card carrying Republician. *** Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 15, 2005 6:03 AM Folks, don´t forget the GG1 in Green Bay, Wisc. Standing close to a BIG BOY!. It´s most unlikely that either one of them can run again. At least under own power. But I like the idea that a GG1 is "pushed around". This would come at least a bit close to old times, at least to see a GG1 running (or rather moving). For such special trips, the problem of the small cabs should be "forgotten" since this would be no regular(=often) trips. Reply Edit Eric Stuart Member sinceOctober 2004 33 posts Posted by Eric Stuart on Saturday, July 23, 2005 7:58 AM Hmm - are your unions that strict? Would they not agree to the occasional exceptional run? - we're not talking about frequent operations, I presume. One other possibility: don't the DOT have a test track somewhere, that would be off-line for TU activities. Or has that gone? I realise all these restrictions would make the expence of rehab less viable, but .... Just some ideas! Eric in the UK Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 23, 2005 12:18 PM Really, since volunteers would probably be running it, the Union thing only comes into play with the station you're going to in Washington. Reply Edit martin.knoepfel Member sinceDecember 2003 400 posts Posted by martin.knoepfel on Sunday, December 25, 2005 10:31 AM In a book I got for Christmas, the GG1 is mentioned. The author writes the GG1s have been sidelined becaus Penn Central changed juice (in the Northeast Corridor) from 11kV/25 Hz to 25 kV 60 Hz. Is that really true? I always thought, parts of the NEC still run with the 11kv/25Hz-system, and the PCB in the transformers plus increasing unreliability were the causes for the sidelining of the GG1's Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 1:38 PM Answering the question: Boston - New Haven 60Hz 25000V New Haven - New Rochelle (Metro North): 60Hz 12500V New Rochelle - Harold Tower (Suynnyside) 60Hz 25000V Harold Tower - Washington Union Station (the PRR tracks) 25Hz 11000V A restored GG1 can run between New York and Washington, but not east-north of New York. GG1's required more maintenance than the E60's and AEN7's that replaced them. They were last used in New Jersey Transit service, NY-South Amboy. I believe Rahway (junction of JerseyCoast line with NEC) to S. Amboy and beyond to Rewd Bank or Sea Girt is now 60Hz, 12500V prohibiting GG1 use. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:09 PM The GG1 that crashed into Union Station and fell into the basement was the 4876. This was one of the last GG1's that operated for New Jersey Transit. This motor still survives somewhere in a Baltimore area railyard and it's future is bleak. From what I understand it was supposed to go the the Baltimore RR Museum but they did not want it. I wish I had the room. Reply Edit ndbprr Member sinceSeptember 2002 7,486 posts Posted by ndbprr on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:10 PM The PRR used 50 cycle power that it generated itself primarily at Conowengo Dam on the Susquehana river. The idea was that people couldn't steal the power becasue it makes lights visibly flicker. AMtrak changed over to the new voltages around the time of the AEM-7. Reply emdgp92 Member sinceDecember 2002 From: Pittsburgh, PA 1,261 posts Posted by emdgp92 on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:11 PM I was in the cab of the GG1 in Altoona during the PCRRHS convention in 2004. I felt it was a bit cramped and very dark. I knew that Strasburg had 2 G's there...but I didn't know that they also had the one in Lancaster. Did any GG1s get painted in Amtrak's MoW scheme? I might have seen orange ones around Philadelphia years ago....but the memory is a little fuzzy there. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:12 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by ndbprr The PRR used 50 cycle power that it generated itself primarily at Conowengo Dam on the Susquehana river. The idea was that people couldn't steal the power becasue it makes lights visibly flicker. AMtrak changed over to the new voltages around the time of the AEM-7. I did not know about that little tidbit. Thanks! Reply Edit tmcc man Member sinceApril 2005 From: North of Philadelphia 2,372 posts Posted by tmcc man on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:26 PM I saw the GG1 at the Pennsylvania Railway museum a few year ago. That is on heck of a Loco and an engineering feat. Colin from prr.railfan.net Reply rrnut282 Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: MP CF161.6 NS's New Castle District in NE Indiana 2,148 posts Posted by rrnut282 on Tuesday, December 27, 2005 4:15 PM The website posted earlier listing GG1's did not mention #4882 at the NYC National RR Museum in Elkhart, IN. It is painted black with the PC "mating worms" logo. The picture makes it look in fair shape, but I believe it is stored outside an the photo may be old. Mike (2-8-2) Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:18 AM Not 50 cycle power. It was 25 cycle, or accurately 25 cycles per second. Many railfans assumed it was 50 cycles per second because the characteristic noise is 50 cycles per second since their are both a positive and a negative peak in power (peaks) every single cycle, so you get two peaks of power every 1/25th of a second, making the noise 50 Hz even though the current is 25 Hz. 50 Hz is the general frequency used in Europe, including most modern electrications, just as 60 Hz is used in the USA. The old AC electrifications in Europe, with lots remaining in Switzerland and Austria, are 16-2/3 Hz Hz stands for Herz, a pioneer scientist in ac power generation, and is an international standard for a short way of saying cycles per second. The New Haven generated its own 25 Hz power at Cos Cob. Today all electric railways use purchased power. I believe some of the old 60Hz to 25 Hz rotary converters are still in use by Amtrak, but most substations use efficient rectifier-inverter electronic converters. Regarding the North Jersey Coast electrification. I rode it many times when it was 25 Hz and used by GG-1's. (When I was at Fort Monmouth in 1951 and 1954, K-4's still hauled the trains form Penn Station south of South Amboy.) I had the pleasure of riding an MU trains which ran under the 25 Hz catenary to Rahway, and then the 60 Hz to Red Bank. I understand the electrification now goes beyond Red Bank, but someone should tell me how far: To Long Branch, to Sea Girt, or all the way to Bay Head Junction? Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 6:47 AM I was in that area a couple of years ago and the line was electified at least to Long Branch. Didn't chase the line, so can't say any more than that. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply spankybird Member sinceApril 2003 From: Willoughby, Ohio 5,231 posts Posted by spankybird on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 12:08 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by rrnut282 The website posted earlier listing GG1's did not mention #4882 at the NYC National RR Museum in Elkhart, IN. It is painted black with the PC "mating worms" logo. The picture makes it look in fair shape, but I believe it is stored outside an the photo may be old. I was at Elkhart several years ago and the GG1 is outside [:D] I am a person with a very active inner child. This is why my wife loves me so. Willoughby, Ohio - the home of the CP & E RR. OTTS Founder www.spankybird.shutterfly.com Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 1:13 PM Looks great for a locomotive stored outside! Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:25 PM No Amtrak GG1 was ever painted for MOW. There were several E44's painted Silver and black for MOW. Can anyone confirm if the E44's ever ran for Amtrak? Reply Edit martin.knoepfel Member sinceDecember 2003 400 posts Posted by martin.knoepfel on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:30 PM Thanks for the answer daveklepper. Do you know why there is a change in tension between New Haven and New Rochelle? It would be simpler, in my opinion, to have the whole line electrified with the same system. Has it to do with the system from New Haven into GCT? Reply StillGrande Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Alexandria, VA 847 posts Posted by StillGrande on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 2:58 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed [My son said there is one at the RR Museum of Penn in Strasburg PE. He sent me a T-shirt from their with the GG-1 on it in PRR colors. Originally posted by CHPENNSYLVANIA [ There are 2 there. One inside in display condition. One outside rusting away. Dewey "Facts are meaningless; you can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true! Facts, schmacks!" - Homer Simpson "The problem is there are so many stupid people and nothing eats them." Reply emdgp92 Member sinceDecember 2002 From: Pittsburgh, PA 1,261 posts Posted by emdgp92 on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 3:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by msernak No Amtrak GG1 was ever painted for MOW. There were several E44's painted Silver and black for MOW. Can anyone confirm if the E44's ever ran for Amtrak? Here's an E44 in 1987: http://www.geocities.com/su_carbs/trainpix/e44.jpg ...and the one in Strasburg in 1992: http://www.geocities.com/su_carbs/trainpix/e44.gif The one at Strasburg has since been moved inside the museum, and painted in its original PRR colors. Reply art11758 Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Mastic, N.Y. 51 posts Posted by art11758 on Thursday, December 29, 2005 4:25 PM Dave wrote: I believe some of the old 60Hz to 25 Hz rotary converters are still in use by Amtrak, but most substations use efficient rectifier-inverter electronic converters. I think they just removed one of those from Sunnyside yard in the last two or three months. There were several structures beside the LIRR tracks that were razed and one of them had what appeared to be a large electric motor inside it. Could that have been one?? Reply screamingman13 Member sinceFebruary 2006 10 posts Posted by screamingman13 on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 6:27 PM Back to the topic of running a GG1, here's my idea of the best resteration: 1) Change the transformer coolant from mineral oil or PCBs to silicone oil or liquid glycol, the same coolant as used in the Acelas. 2) Repair any frame defects or other rust/corrosion problems. 3) replace what is probably cloth-insulated wire with rubber insulated wire. 4) Who said anything about a HEP plant, we're talking about excursion runs, not a full-time return to revenue service. 5) Upgrade cab signaling, although the NYC-DC line hasn't changed much, probably still has the position light signals (yes it does, i've got a picture of it, next to an E60) I also heard that there is a 25Hz line somewhere in the Gulf Coast region, or what about the electrical outfit in Arizona, the NEC isn't the US's only electrified line. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 6:47 PM As Tom said, 4935 looks great in Brunswick Green: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61935 Dave Fireflite wrote:The RR Museum of Pennsylvania has three GG1's in its collection. Number 4935 is on display in the rolling stock hall. The 4935 has had a complete cosmetic restoration to its as-built 1943 appearance, including very shiny coat of Brunswick Green paint with the original 5 gold stripes. It was first restored in 1977, and donated to the museum by Russell Wilcox in 1983. If you think you don't like Brunswick Green, pay this motor a visit and it'll make you a believer. (Note that an electric locomotive was a 'motor' to PRR man.) The 4800, the prototype, aka "Old Rivits" is on display in the outside yard. It was owned by the Lancaster Chapter NHRS until donated to the museum in 2000, which explains why the 4935 had dibs in the spot inside. It was the only example with rivited rather than welded body, hence the nickname. I believe this engine is still wearing Tuscan Red with five stripes (somewhat faded now). I think most fans like this paint scheme best, though only 10 units ever wore it, and the 4800 wasn't one of them. Interestingly, this engine one of group re-geared for freight service. It went to PC, then Conrail, and wore both a unique Bicentennial scheme and Conrail Blue. The museum's third GG1 is 4859, currently on display in the Amtrak station in Lancaster, PA. Read more at http://www.rrmuseumpa.org/about/roster/gg1.htm. The 4877 was last operated by NJ Transit and was restored to Tuscan Red a few years before its retirement. Its now owned by the United Railway Historical Society, and is in storage in NJ Transit's Hoboken yard. Another unit is on display next to the fairgrounds in Syracuse, NY, and last I knew there was one at the National Railway Museum in St Louis. Tom Reply Edit StillGrande Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Alexandria, VA 847 posts Posted by StillGrande on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 3:04 PM adrianspeeder wrote:The one is Stasburg PA is very nice looking. The Pennsy hit a home run with that loco. Adrianspeeder There are 2 at the PRR museum in Strassburg. One is inside and is really nice. The other is outside and is rusting quietly. Dewey "Facts are meaningless; you can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true! Facts, schmacks!" - Homer Simpson "The problem is there are so many stupid people and nothing eats them." Reply motor Member sinceDecember 2001 102 posts Posted by motor on Friday, November 10, 2006 12:22 PM spbed wrote:I was at the train station in Matawan NJ when it departed on it last trip. My son said there is one at the RR Museum of Penn in Strasburg PE. He sent me a T-shirt from their with the GG-1 on it in PRR colors. [ There is. I saw it when I visited the RRMofPA 18 months ago. My first AMTK ride (PHL to NYP in 1973) was pulled by a black GG1 with Penn Central markings. motor Reply zugmann Member sinceJanuary 2002 From: Canterlot 9,575 posts Posted by zugmann on Friday, November 10, 2006 2:04 PM StillGrande wrote: There are 2 at the PRR museum in Strassburg. One is inside and is really nice. The other is outside and is rusting quietly.There's 3 if you count the one they own at the Harrisburg Amtrak station. But I hear the 4800 is getting a new coat of paint, and one of them is getting a fixed and repainted interior. (I think 4935, but don't quote me)Now, can we find a home for the two at Cooperstown Jct? It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any Reply alphas Member sinceAugust 2006 575 posts Posted by alphas on Friday, November 10, 2006 3:38 PM I saw thousands of trains being hauled by them in my time. I preferred the solid yellow stripe Pennsy went to rather than the original. The solid stripe really brought out the colors in the keystone design and definitely got your attention. Whoever had them changed to the Penn Central worms design should have been required to spend the rest of their life cleaning up the graffiti on all railroad equipment. Reply penncentral2002 Member sinceMay 2006 From: Richmond, VA 200 posts Posted by penncentral2002 on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 8:07 AM Although it would be wonderful to see a GG1 running again, I'd just settle for seeing some of the preserved GG1's getting at least comestic restorations. For example, the one at the Virginia Museum of Transportation would look great with a fresh coat of paint. The B&O Museum should realize how many people on their train rides comment on the GG1 there - maybe they would treat it better then if they realized how popular it was (especially given its unique history). Would love to see it restored (if only comestically) and put on display at Union Station! Zack http://penncentral2002.rrpicturearchives.net/ Reply kevikens Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 110 posts Posted by kevikens on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:12 PM God alone knows how many GG1 s I rode behind or paced along side US route 13 in my father's car (yes you could get that Nash Ambassador up over 90mph). I always thought that the G was the locomotive that won WW II for the US. Considering how much wartime traffic was carried by the Pennsy and how much of that traffic wound up on the electrified lines of Eastern ports for overseas shipment I can imagine no single locomotive that did as much for the war effort. In addition to all that critical freight think of all the military and government personnel who moved on that Washington NYC corridor almost always pulled along by a G. The Pennsy worked those motors almost to death. They could and did haul enormous passenger and freight consists day in and day out with the sparsest of maintenance. Nothing seemed capable of halting the GG1 ( ok, the occasional fine snow flake could short them out) until the DEP was created. They could easily excede their rated horsepower and could move a lot faster than the PRR would ever like to publically admit. I don't know if any of your readers ever heard this story but as I got it there was an engineer working for NJT on the North Coast Line where the last G's served out their final years in the early 1980's. He was undoubtedly as close to retirement as his former pennsy motor because he and his engine went out in a blaze of glory. As the G hauled commuter train joined the NEC near Rahway it encountered a NYC bound clocker pulled by one of the new AEM 7's easily doing 100mph plus. I guess the old guy wanted to show that Swedish meatball what the old girl could do and opened her up. The two drew along side each other and the G stayed with the AEM 7 all the way through Elizabeth to Newark. Shortly after this both the engine and engineer ended long distinguished careers. In my mind the Pennsy and the GG1 are forever linked as the railroad and locomotive that made the rail industry the major means of moving people and goods in the mid 20th Century America. As for restoring one to running condition there is a gentleman named Bennet Levin who beautifully restored two former PRR E8s that have run excursions of PRR varnish here in the Northeast. He owns a rail car rebuilding plant that sits right along side the NEC in Philly, the Juniata Terminal. If anybody could restore a GG1 it would be this person. I wish I could persuade him to try. Anyway I nominate the GG1 as the most significant locomotive to ever move a train in America and if any locomotive deserves to rise from the scap heap and run again it's the G. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 26, 2006 4:40 AM art11758, I think that you have seen one of the rotary converters which is usually a 60Hz polyphase motor driving an alternator with different pole pairs so a frequency change can be obtained. The lower frequencies, especially in the early French, German and Swiss days were, because a low frequency AC motor has less sparking then the conventional AC motor running at 50 or 60 Hz. DC was mostly used before and experiments were done with laminated steel in AC motors but sparking at the brushes caused extra stress and premature insulation breakdown which was somewhat reduced with the lower frequency. In Europe 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz was and is still used in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and parts of Norway, also with rotary motor alternator sets although in switzerland certain hydro stations provided the 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz for the railways I believe. Some may have been replaced with solid state. France has gone to 25 kV 50 Hz while Italy, Belgium have 3 kV DC and The Netherlands 1500 V DC. The GG1 was a fantastic locomotive, unfortunately i have never seen one at work but read about these masters of engineering with amazing high power output and reliability. It would be fantastic to see one in working order although the costs and manhours are probably prohibitive to realise it. edited for typo's Reply Edit NATEDAGR8 Member sinceNovember 2020 1 posts Posted by NATEDAGR8 on Friday, November 13, 2020 11:43 AM I agree, a new tranformer is the big problem, however, GE could probably scrape up a comparable transformer for it. Reply BaltACD Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 25,292 posts Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:01 AM NATEDAGR8I agree, a new tranformer is the big problem, however, GE could probably scrape up a comparable transformer for it. Fund it and it will get built. No funds, no build. Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply samfp1943 Member sinceJune 2003 From: South Central,Ks 7,170 posts Posted by samfp1943 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:32 AM BaltACD NATEDAGR8 Fund it and it will get built. No funds, no build. SPOT ON, BaltACD1 Reading the comments on just this Thread alone.... Might not the History, of the Pennsy's GG-1's, and their subject matter; be fodder for a 'new' Kalmbach publication/booK? Just a thought! Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Saturday, November 14, 2020 10:16 AM Kalmbach already did the GG1 exhaustively enough, many years ago now: remember that layered exploded-view drawing that was so good? And before that, the founder of my high-school railroad club, Karl Zimmermann, wrote a better book on the GG1 than anyone currently at Kalmbach could even approximate. You could add a couple of pages to update things to 2020, but there is precious little of positive interest to add... Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 10:57 AM One of the two GG1s at Cooperstown was rumored to be headed to Michigan and the Henry Ford (museum). To my knowledge, even that hasn't happened. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply zugmann Member sinceJanuary 2002 From: Canterlot 9,575 posts Posted by zugmann on Saturday, November 14, 2020 10:58 AM tree68One of the two GG1s at Cooperstown was rumored to be headed to Michigan and the Henry Ford (museum). To my knowledge, even that hasn't happened. Was that the one that was supposed to go to FLorida, or was that the other one? Will they be scrapped or rust away into nothing first? It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 11:42 AM zugmannWas that the one that was supposed to go to FLorida, or was that the other one? Will they be scrapped or rust away into nothing first? Dunno - I'm working from social media reports on this one. There's one in Syracuse which is being kept up at least cosmetically. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply zugmann Member sinceJanuary 2002 From: Canterlot 9,575 posts Posted by zugmann on Saturday, November 14, 2020 11:45 AM There's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950. It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 12:29 PM zugmannThere's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950. One might opine that the reason so many GG1s were "preserved" was because they are environmental disasters waiting to happen, if you will. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply Flintlock76 Member sinceJanuary 2019 From: Henrico, VA 9,728 posts Posted by Flintlock76 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 2:32 PM tree68One might opine that the reason so many GG1s were "preserved" was because they are environmental disasters waiting to happen, if you will. That's entirely possible, but another reason could be they were lucky enough to survive into the preservation era and had homes waiting for them when they were retired. I don't remember when this happened, but I recall reading the PRR did a study sometime in the post-war era where they considered ending electric operations and going completely with diesel power. In the end they decided against it, but if they ended electric operations, say in the early 50's, there might not have been any GG1's preserved at all. They'd have been as extinct as the T1's. Reply Electroliner 1935 Member sinceSeptember 2010 2,515 posts Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 3:58 PM My concept would be to take a transformer from an AE-7 and redesign the power modules to provide single phase 25 Hz output. Motors would not have to be rewound, just cleaned. Whether this is feasible and could be funded is beyond my pay grade. Also, mentioning T-1s. I have never forgotten seeing over 20 dead T-1s awaiting the torch in Columbus OH on a Cincinnati Railroad Club fan trip. What a sad sight. We did see J-1s in service for the coal to Sandusky and in ’56 I saw the Santa Fe “Texas” class 2-10-4s and PRR J-1s when I went to Worthington OH. They were BIG. Not as big as a Big Boy but they were notable. YOUTUBE has a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5zOCNNw6t0 Reply 54light15 Member sinceDecember 2008 From: Toronto, Canada 2,560 posts Posted by 54light15 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 5:36 PM GG1s in Syracuse, Cooperstown and maybe Dearborn? That sounds kind of odd to me that they would be preserved in areas that never had them when they were active. Along the NEC, sure. It would be nice to see one run again. Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 6:59 PM 54light15 GG1s in Syracuse, Cooperstown and maybe Dearborn? That sounds kind of odd to me that they would be preserved in areas that never had them when they were active. Along the NEC, sure. It would be nice to see one run again. Many locomotives are preserved in areas they never served. While C&O ran in MI, I doubt the Alleghany in the Henry Ford ever ran there. I would presume the effort would be a reflection of the technology, as opposed to a reflection of what ran in MI. There are a number of locomotives in the museum as well as the adjoining Greenfield Village. https://www.thehenryford.org/visit/henry-ford-museum/exhibits/railroads. The GG1 in Syracuse is property of the Central New York Railroad Historical Society. I'm not sure who owns the Cooperstown locomotives. Probably the Cooperstown and Charlotte Valley. Most likely, they were available, cheap, and the railroad at the time was glad to get rid of them... Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply MidlandMike Member sinceSeptember 2011 6,449 posts Posted by MidlandMike on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:35 PM Wiki has a list of all 16 preserved GG-1's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Railroad_class_GG1#cite_ref-Palmateer_37-0 Reply MidlandMike Member sinceSeptember 2011 6,449 posts Posted by MidlandMike on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:48 PM zugmann There's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950. While 16 GG-1's were preserved, not a single electric loco built for the New Haven was saved. Only a couple of EF-4's originally built for VGN were saved. I would loved to have seen an EP-5 saved. I don't know if it had transformers with PCB, but it did have rectifiers with Mercury. https://www.flickr.com/photos/alcomike/20129122985/sizes/l/ Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:02 AM Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. No reason a GG1 could not be rebuilt as a regular rectifier locomtive, with its original motors, using standard, off-the-shelf equipment, and have its full horsepower and tractive effort capabilities. With the appropriate transformer, it could run on 25Hz. 50Hz. or 60Hz, 12,000 (11.000 - 12,500) or 25,000 volts. With some additional equipment, it could even be equipped with third-rail shoes and run on 600 or 750V DC. Reply BaltACD Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 25,292 posts Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:07 AM daveklepper Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. No reason a GG1 could not be rebuilt as a regular rectifier locomtive, with its original motors, using standard, off-the-shelf equipment, and have its full horsepower and tractive effort capabilities. With the appropriate transformer, it could run on 25Hz. 50Hz. or 60Hz, 12,000 (11.000 - 12,500) or 25,000 volts. With some additional equipment, it could even be equipped with third-rail shoes and run on 600 or 750V DC. Money, Money, Money - who has the money to make it happen? Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply charlie hebdo Member sinceSeptember 2017 5,636 posts Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:05 PM Electroliner 1935 My concept would be to take a transformer from an AE-7 and redesign the power modules to provide single phase 25 Hz output. Motors would not have to be rewound, just cleaned. Whether this is feasible and could be funded is beyond my pay grade. Also, mentioning T-1s. I have never forgotten seeing over 20 dead T-1s awaiting the torch in Columbus OH on a Cincinnati Railroad Club fan trip. What a sad sight. We did see J-1s in service for the coal to Sandusky and in ’56 I saw the Santa Fe “Texas” class 2-10-4s and PRR J-1s when I went to Worthington OH. They were BIG. Not as big as a Big Boy but they were notable. YOUTUBE has a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5zOCNNw6t0 But where could it run? Those few stretches of electrification aren't likely to allow it. Reply Electroliner 1935 Member sinceSeptember 2010 2,515 posts Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:41 PM charlie hebdoBut where could it run? Those few stretches of electrification aren't likely to allow it. So true. No cat except on AMTRAK and I doubt they would touch it. I was supprised when they took IRM's Nebraska Zephyr. Which performed flawlessly and magnificently. Reply Erik_Mag Member sinceJanuary 2019 1,686 posts Posted by Erik_Mag on Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:58 PM daveklepper Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. For the appropriate AC commutator motor, they will run even more efficiently on DC than AC. There are some AC commutator motors that are fed via a field winding (equivalent to a transformer) where commutator is either shorted or connected to another field winding. IIRC, the motors for the initial MU cars used in Philly had such motors, but IIRC the GG1's motor were fed through the commutator and thus could run on DC. Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 2:48 PM If one was serious about getting a GG1 (or any such preserved electric) actually running, I should think it wouldn't be difficult to build a mobile power source (ie, generator in a boxcar or maybe a baggage car) to make the locomotive run. Perhaps it would even be possible to build an ersatz catenary so the power came through the pantographs. Anything is possible if you have the money... Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply Falcon48 Member sinceDecember 2007 1,307 posts Posted by Falcon48 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 8:41 PM AnonymousI heard a rumor that someone had sequestered a GG-1 at the Illinois Railway Museum in Union, IL. Sounds pretty tall to me, but then stranger things have happened at Union.....in a delightful way. I'm a long time member of IRM. IRM owns a GG1 which is on static display. To my knowledge, there are no plans to restore it to operating condition, nor could it be operated on IRM's rail line or anywhere else in the midwest. I'm not sure what is meant by the term "sequestered" in this context. Reply SD70Dude Member sinceDecember 2017 From: I've been everywhere, man 4,269 posts Posted by SD70Dude on Sunday, November 15, 2020 8:50 PM tree68 If one was serious about getting a GG1 (or any such preserved electric) actually running, I should think it wouldn't be difficult to build a mobile power source (ie, generator in a boxcar or maybe a baggage car) to make the locomotive run. Perhaps it would even be possible to build an ersatz catenary so the power came through the pantographs. Anything is possible if you have the money... IRM runs their 'Little Joe' on the same 600vDC overhead power supply that is used by all their interurbans and streetcars, perhaps it would be possible to do something similar to a GG1 if one absolutely wanted to move it under its own power. Of course, such a conversion would likely result in a neutered shell of the former beast that would have nowhere near the pulling power of the original design. As for the idea of a towable genset, I'd look into what SP/UP and BNSF have done with those 'snails' that power their rotary snowplows. Greetings from Alberta -an Articulate Malcontent Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:38 PM SD70DudeAs for the idea of a towable genset, I'd look into what SP/UP and BNSF have done with those 'snails' that power their rotary snowplows. Or any mother/slug set, for that matter... Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply MMLDelete Member sinceMay 2019 1,768 posts Posted by MMLDelete on Sunday, November 15, 2020 11:22 PM I was in the cab of a GG1 once, somewhere. Maybe the Railroaders Museum in Altoona? It was outdoors, and not spiffy. I was shocked at how little space there was in the cab. Made me think of early submarines. But what a cool loco! An awesome beast. If one could be run sans catenary, do most folks here envision retaining the pantographs? It's probably heresy to say this, but it would look really cool without them; and maybe silly to keep them. But I guess if one can play "air guitar," why not air cables? Reply Flintlock76 Member sinceJanuary 2019 From: Henrico, VA 9,728 posts Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, November 16, 2020 8:05 AM Lithonia OperatorI was shocked at how little space there was in the cab. Made me think of early submarines. That was kind of the "Dirty little secret" of the GG1's, if that's the proper term, and maybe it isn't. As futuristic as they looked on the outside they were kind of on the primative side inside, again if that's the proper term. "Flash Gordon" on the outside, but regular 1930's electric on the inside. I remember reading years back one rail museum with a GG1 kicked around the idea of running it powered by a generator on a flatcar, but nothing ever came of it. I don't remember who it was. Reply CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, November 16, 2020 2:06 PM The Little Joe at the IRM was rebuilt for or by South Shore in 1949 to operate on 1500 volts DC, quite different for the 11000 volts 25 cycle AC for the GG1. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Monday, November 16, 2020 4:47 PM We covered this exhaustively, and so did Trains in their discussion of the GG1. The 387A motors are essentially the same construction as the New Haven design from which the twin-motor quill drive was derived. On the New Haven these operated quite happily on 750V DC from New Rochelle all the way into GCT, not just in '20mph mode' like the auxiliary electrics on the '50s 'lightweights' or the UA TurboTrain. One might easily assume, as I do, that a twin motor might be wound and insulated so that the two armatures are in series for 750V each, and run 'native' on 1500V instead of having to be connected in series pairs (i.e. three of them for a complete locomotive) which might tend to produce a giant sucking sound at any museum substation -- not that you'd need the full horsepower for any museum's logical operation. The only relevance of 11kV (or 12.5kV) or 25-cycle AC is in the transformer, and those are irrevocably gone, Pyranol-contaminated paper and all. There is utterly no need to replicate any part of that for DC operation, as it involved complicated tap-changing arrangements for speed control. The point of Mr. Klepper's use of AEM-7 components (the wheel diameter is technically very close, although of course the construction is not) is that you obtain a locomotive easily capable of 125mph performance from basically obsolescent and costed-down parts. The earlier problem was that Amtrak was highly reluctant to sell those parts for any operating purpose; the current problem is that I believe there are very few AEM-7s or components still available for the purpose, assuming you could manage the systems integration and inspection to convince all the 'powers that be' to let you play. And then there's the question of redissolving the crystallization in the frames ... not particularly difficult, but not particularly trivial and not cheap, either. All this before we come to the MP54-level corrosion damage in the upperworks and welded casing metal; by now I'd expect even the bridge members to be suffering, particular around the concrete deck. Reply 123456 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Quentin
USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman
QUOTE: Originally posted by Dutchrailnut The GG-1 was put to pasture mainly because all of them had cracked frames. Tthey did not have HEP so todays trains could not be powered. The cabs were so small the unions no longer accepted them, plus they need two persons in cab to look past long hood. Even to restore a GG-1 for any railroad operations it would need to be made compliant to all the above problems. pour new frames ?? nobody cast stuff that big anymore. HEP car , not allowed in Penn station. Make cab bigger ?? then it won't be a GG-1 anymore.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29 People--forget HEP equipment: you have 11, 000 volts above your head. Get a transformer for the HEP equipment. It shouldn't use up too much room, and you might not have to remove the boiler. I know that you could get new transformers, and not all the frames are cracked. Sincerely, Daniel Parks
QUOTE: Originally posted by Dutchrailnut for more details on GG-1's see: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/GG1/ Getting Title would not be to hard, but moving a locomotive out of date for more than 20 years is. To fix the frames with Volunteers is nearly impossible, you probably won't be able to get electrical parts anymore so you would be redisigning a new propulsion package for the unit . Cabsignal allone is not an option so add to that a $200 000 microcab Acses system. ps trainjunkie even if you own the locomotive it still has to be operated by the engineers of the railroad your running on. so if you run it on NJT you use NJT crews, you run on MNCR you use MNCR crews etc. unless you can find a museum line or abandoned line with 11.5 Kv overhead.
QUOTE: Originally posted by cbq9911a Just my two cents.... PRR 4927 at IRM can be restored to run on IRM's 600v DC overhead. To make it a regular service locomotive you'd need to modify IRM's overhead to accommodate pantographs and trolley poles. You'd also need to add additional substation capacity to meet the engine's current demands. It's doable, but very expensive. Close to a million dollars.
QUOTE: Originally posted by coasterjoe For those of us to young to have heard a GG-1 with our own ears, what did a GG-1 sound like? Was it a low hum or was it something else.
Take a Ride on the Scenic Line!
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd The basic problem with a restored GG1 is that it can only run one place - the NEC from NY to DC (and out to H'burg - at least for a while). That's pretty slim pickings for an excursion locomotive. Not a very viable "ambassador" for Amtrak, unlike the UP, CP and NS steamers that could travel the whole system. I have heard the idea of an "Amtrak" steam locomotive kicked around from time to time. How about this: Amtrak "rents" UP 844 and crew to use on the Sunset or Zephyr. Might get UP's attention, then!
QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29 Fifty years ago, scrappers were cutting up all of the NYC Hudsons, all the NYC Niagras, every D&RGW standard gauge steam locomotive, all the T1's, the S1, the Q1, the Q2, all the Milwaukee Road's [amazingly built] Atlantics and Hudsons, and something closer to your heart. Why? Because they thought that the locomotives were of no historic value. Please, oh please, I implore you! Let us not make the same mistake as those who cut up today's lost engines. It is not just the GG-1 which is historic, but also what MAKES UP A GG-1; this includes the steam generator, the water tanks, the electronics, the system.... Don't change out any more than you have to. A GG-1 was built to run on 11, 000 V--let it. There's still plenty of track using that voltage on the same frequecy. Leave well enough alone! I know people who would rather have a hotrod than a factual manifestation of a bygone era, and to take a GG-1 and make it into an XX-10, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000 is a wrong to the principles of historic preservation--the reason these locomotives were saved in the first place. Sincerely yours in defense of history, Daniel Parks
QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29 Dear paulsafety, If you replace your GG-1 traction motors with motors from an EMDGEMPIWHOMEVER model SDGPEFAEM 40-70-90-4400ACDC-2-7-9 whatever, with new US&S/somebody superelectrocabsignaling and HEP cross-bilateral-multisimplo-transreinducing-composite-solid-state whatevers, and all you save is the body what you are hearing is not the GG-1. What you are experiencing is not the GG-1 except to a small extent. Is what you are really experiencing much better than a tape player on an unmodified GG-1? I would be a fool to deny that certainly, for the good of the historic restoration, some things would need to be modified or replaced. However, much of what I have heard here in the way of restoration needs are really not needed to return a GG-1 to operation in a historic context, but rather to turn it in to "dream choo-choo [:)]." Sincerely, Daniel Parks
If there are no dogs in heaven,then I want to go where they go.
QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 Where are some places to see a good "retired" GG-1? I really like the one at the RR Museum in Baltimore, but I'm sure there must be other places....
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper I'm not suggesting anything radical. As you say, when you rewind motors, you use the best possible wire and insulation available. As far as contactors and relays, however, you don't want the GG-1 to be stuck at Ivy City near Washington with a bad relay with the only replacement back at Wilmington or Strassburg or Harrisburg. And the restoration, to operate it in the NEC has to be equal in quality of workmaship and materials to those UP Executive E's. The transformers, if they are good and cooling flued can be non-toxic, keep them. Otherwise use the best transformers that can be bought, possibly requiring custom made. I stand by what I recommended as far as contactors and relays. And where current practice suggests not replacing exactly in kind (and if existing relays are still being manufacured, of course replace in-kind) then I'd want the current capacity at least 150% the capacity of the original and the insulation at least 150% the voltage of the original. Hopefully this can be true of new types of wiring. The locomotive must be reliable if it is to interface with other trains on the NEC. Incidentally, some of the "abortion" rebuilds were reliable good locomotives. Didn't the AT&SF have some switchers rebuilt from a combination of Alco and EMD components that gave good service for many years, some even being purchased by Amtrak for continued switcher service?
QUOTE: Can anyone explain to me the quill drive? What I think is going on is that the axle is surrounded by a hollow tube, and that hollow tube transmits torque to the axle through springs that are like wheel spokes. The hollow tube is the quill as in hollow feather used as a pen. The quill is in turn connected by gears to a traction motor attached to the truck frame. This contrasts with the "nose hung" traction motor used on Diesels where one end of the traction motor is attached to the axle through a gear drive and the other end of the traction motor is attached to the truck frame through a journal bearing (it allows the traction motor to pivot, but it does not need to be a roller bearing because it does not rotate through full revolutions at wheel speed). The nose-hung design is a compromise between a fully sprung traction motor (objective of the quill drive) and an axle-hung motor like on the Milwaukee Road bipolar electrics. I am understanding the quill drive the right way? How big an advantage does this have over the usual Diesel-style traction motor setup?
QUOTE: Originally posted by wrwatkins I was briefly approached about serving on the Amtrak board a couple years ago. To date nothing has come of it like the 3-4 people put up for board membership have never been confirmed by the Senate. Who knows, it may come through, but I am not holding my breath. Should I be appointed there are some things I would seriously investigate: 1. Restore a steam enging and several vintage coaches to run excursion service. Think this would be a revenue producer. 2. REBUILD A GG-1 and run it on the NEC. Again think this would be a money maker. 3. Increase the frequency (and speed) of passenger trains. One train from Dallas to Austin per day taking 6 hours will not attract business riders. Four to 6 RTs per day traveling at a higher speed so you can be competative with airlines would be great. 4. Restore passenger service to additional core lines. What about a Sunset Limited connection at El Paso through Dallas-Fort Worth to Medidian Miss then on to DC? There are numerous lines like this that can be returned to service. 5. Market quality vacation travel. Look at our neighbors to the north (including Alaska). 6. Educate Congress on the benefits of Amtrak. Point out that there is no transit system, be it air, water or road, that pays its entire way through the fare box. Why should Amtrak be the only one to do it. (Mission Impossible???)
QUOTE: Originally posted by ndbprr The PRR used 50 cycle power that it generated itself primarily at Conowengo Dam on the Susquehana river. The idea was that people couldn't steal the power becasue it makes lights visibly flicker. AMtrak changed over to the new voltages around the time of the AEM-7.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrnut282 The website posted earlier listing GG1's did not mention #4882 at the NYC National RR Museum in Elkhart, IN. It is painted black with the PC "mating worms" logo. The picture makes it look in fair shape, but I believe it is stored outside an the photo may be old.
I am a person with a very active inner child. This is why my wife loves me so. Willoughby, Ohio - the home of the CP & E RR. OTTS Founder www.spankybird.shutterfly.com
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed [My son said there is one at the RR Museum of Penn in Strasburg PE. He sent me a T-shirt from their with the GG-1 on it in PRR colors. Originally posted by CHPENNSYLVANIA [ There are 2 there. One inside in display condition. One outside rusting away. Dewey "Facts are meaningless; you can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true! Facts, schmacks!" - Homer Simpson "The problem is there are so many stupid people and nothing eats them." Reply emdgp92 Member sinceDecember 2002 From: Pittsburgh, PA 1,261 posts Posted by emdgp92 on Wednesday, December 28, 2005 3:47 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by msernak No Amtrak GG1 was ever painted for MOW. There were several E44's painted Silver and black for MOW. Can anyone confirm if the E44's ever ran for Amtrak? Here's an E44 in 1987: http://www.geocities.com/su_carbs/trainpix/e44.jpg ...and the one in Strasburg in 1992: http://www.geocities.com/su_carbs/trainpix/e44.gif The one at Strasburg has since been moved inside the museum, and painted in its original PRR colors. Reply art11758 Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Mastic, N.Y. 51 posts Posted by art11758 on Thursday, December 29, 2005 4:25 PM Dave wrote: I believe some of the old 60Hz to 25 Hz rotary converters are still in use by Amtrak, but most substations use efficient rectifier-inverter electronic converters. I think they just removed one of those from Sunnyside yard in the last two or three months. There were several structures beside the LIRR tracks that were razed and one of them had what appeared to be a large electric motor inside it. Could that have been one?? Reply screamingman13 Member sinceFebruary 2006 10 posts Posted by screamingman13 on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 6:27 PM Back to the topic of running a GG1, here's my idea of the best resteration: 1) Change the transformer coolant from mineral oil or PCBs to silicone oil or liquid glycol, the same coolant as used in the Acelas. 2) Repair any frame defects or other rust/corrosion problems. 3) replace what is probably cloth-insulated wire with rubber insulated wire. 4) Who said anything about a HEP plant, we're talking about excursion runs, not a full-time return to revenue service. 5) Upgrade cab signaling, although the NYC-DC line hasn't changed much, probably still has the position light signals (yes it does, i've got a picture of it, next to an E60) I also heard that there is a 25Hz line somewhere in the Gulf Coast region, or what about the electrical outfit in Arizona, the NEC isn't the US's only electrified line. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 6:47 PM As Tom said, 4935 looks great in Brunswick Green: http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61935 Dave Fireflite wrote:The RR Museum of Pennsylvania has three GG1's in its collection. Number 4935 is on display in the rolling stock hall. The 4935 has had a complete cosmetic restoration to its as-built 1943 appearance, including very shiny coat of Brunswick Green paint with the original 5 gold stripes. It was first restored in 1977, and donated to the museum by Russell Wilcox in 1983. If you think you don't like Brunswick Green, pay this motor a visit and it'll make you a believer. (Note that an electric locomotive was a 'motor' to PRR man.) The 4800, the prototype, aka "Old Rivits" is on display in the outside yard. It was owned by the Lancaster Chapter NHRS until donated to the museum in 2000, which explains why the 4935 had dibs in the spot inside. It was the only example with rivited rather than welded body, hence the nickname. I believe this engine is still wearing Tuscan Red with five stripes (somewhat faded now). I think most fans like this paint scheme best, though only 10 units ever wore it, and the 4800 wasn't one of them. Interestingly, this engine one of group re-geared for freight service. It went to PC, then Conrail, and wore both a unique Bicentennial scheme and Conrail Blue. The museum's third GG1 is 4859, currently on display in the Amtrak station in Lancaster, PA. Read more at http://www.rrmuseumpa.org/about/roster/gg1.htm. The 4877 was last operated by NJ Transit and was restored to Tuscan Red a few years before its retirement. Its now owned by the United Railway Historical Society, and is in storage in NJ Transit's Hoboken yard. Another unit is on display next to the fairgrounds in Syracuse, NY, and last I knew there was one at the National Railway Museum in St Louis. Tom Reply Edit StillGrande Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Alexandria, VA 847 posts Posted by StillGrande on Wednesday, November 8, 2006 3:04 PM adrianspeeder wrote:The one is Stasburg PA is very nice looking. The Pennsy hit a home run with that loco. Adrianspeeder There are 2 at the PRR museum in Strassburg. One is inside and is really nice. The other is outside and is rusting quietly. Dewey "Facts are meaningless; you can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true! Facts, schmacks!" - Homer Simpson "The problem is there are so many stupid people and nothing eats them." Reply motor Member sinceDecember 2001 102 posts Posted by motor on Friday, November 10, 2006 12:22 PM spbed wrote:I was at the train station in Matawan NJ when it departed on it last trip. My son said there is one at the RR Museum of Penn in Strasburg PE. He sent me a T-shirt from their with the GG-1 on it in PRR colors. [ There is. I saw it when I visited the RRMofPA 18 months ago. My first AMTK ride (PHL to NYP in 1973) was pulled by a black GG1 with Penn Central markings. motor Reply zugmann Member sinceJanuary 2002 From: Canterlot 9,575 posts Posted by zugmann on Friday, November 10, 2006 2:04 PM StillGrande wrote: There are 2 at the PRR museum in Strassburg. One is inside and is really nice. The other is outside and is rusting quietly.There's 3 if you count the one they own at the Harrisburg Amtrak station. But I hear the 4800 is getting a new coat of paint, and one of them is getting a fixed and repainted interior. (I think 4935, but don't quote me)Now, can we find a home for the two at Cooperstown Jct? It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any Reply alphas Member sinceAugust 2006 575 posts Posted by alphas on Friday, November 10, 2006 3:38 PM I saw thousands of trains being hauled by them in my time. I preferred the solid yellow stripe Pennsy went to rather than the original. The solid stripe really brought out the colors in the keystone design and definitely got your attention. Whoever had them changed to the Penn Central worms design should have been required to spend the rest of their life cleaning up the graffiti on all railroad equipment. Reply penncentral2002 Member sinceMay 2006 From: Richmond, VA 200 posts Posted by penncentral2002 on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 8:07 AM Although it would be wonderful to see a GG1 running again, I'd just settle for seeing some of the preserved GG1's getting at least comestic restorations. For example, the one at the Virginia Museum of Transportation would look great with a fresh coat of paint. The B&O Museum should realize how many people on their train rides comment on the GG1 there - maybe they would treat it better then if they realized how popular it was (especially given its unique history). Would love to see it restored (if only comestically) and put on display at Union Station! Zack http://penncentral2002.rrpicturearchives.net/ Reply kevikens Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 110 posts Posted by kevikens on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:12 PM God alone knows how many GG1 s I rode behind or paced along side US route 13 in my father's car (yes you could get that Nash Ambassador up over 90mph). I always thought that the G was the locomotive that won WW II for the US. Considering how much wartime traffic was carried by the Pennsy and how much of that traffic wound up on the electrified lines of Eastern ports for overseas shipment I can imagine no single locomotive that did as much for the war effort. In addition to all that critical freight think of all the military and government personnel who moved on that Washington NYC corridor almost always pulled along by a G. The Pennsy worked those motors almost to death. They could and did haul enormous passenger and freight consists day in and day out with the sparsest of maintenance. Nothing seemed capable of halting the GG1 ( ok, the occasional fine snow flake could short them out) until the DEP was created. They could easily excede their rated horsepower and could move a lot faster than the PRR would ever like to publically admit. I don't know if any of your readers ever heard this story but as I got it there was an engineer working for NJT on the North Coast Line where the last G's served out their final years in the early 1980's. He was undoubtedly as close to retirement as his former pennsy motor because he and his engine went out in a blaze of glory. As the G hauled commuter train joined the NEC near Rahway it encountered a NYC bound clocker pulled by one of the new AEM 7's easily doing 100mph plus. I guess the old guy wanted to show that Swedish meatball what the old girl could do and opened her up. The two drew along side each other and the G stayed with the AEM 7 all the way through Elizabeth to Newark. Shortly after this both the engine and engineer ended long distinguished careers. In my mind the Pennsy and the GG1 are forever linked as the railroad and locomotive that made the rail industry the major means of moving people and goods in the mid 20th Century America. As for restoring one to running condition there is a gentleman named Bennet Levin who beautifully restored two former PRR E8s that have run excursions of PRR varnish here in the Northeast. He owns a rail car rebuilding plant that sits right along side the NEC in Philly, the Juniata Terminal. If anybody could restore a GG1 it would be this person. I wish I could persuade him to try. Anyway I nominate the GG1 as the most significant locomotive to ever move a train in America and if any locomotive deserves to rise from the scap heap and run again it's the G. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 26, 2006 4:40 AM art11758, I think that you have seen one of the rotary converters which is usually a 60Hz polyphase motor driving an alternator with different pole pairs so a frequency change can be obtained. The lower frequencies, especially in the early French, German and Swiss days were, because a low frequency AC motor has less sparking then the conventional AC motor running at 50 or 60 Hz. DC was mostly used before and experiments were done with laminated steel in AC motors but sparking at the brushes caused extra stress and premature insulation breakdown which was somewhat reduced with the lower frequency. In Europe 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz was and is still used in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and parts of Norway, also with rotary motor alternator sets although in switzerland certain hydro stations provided the 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz for the railways I believe. Some may have been replaced with solid state. France has gone to 25 kV 50 Hz while Italy, Belgium have 3 kV DC and The Netherlands 1500 V DC. The GG1 was a fantastic locomotive, unfortunately i have never seen one at work but read about these masters of engineering with amazing high power output and reliability. It would be fantastic to see one in working order although the costs and manhours are probably prohibitive to realise it. edited for typo's Reply Edit NATEDAGR8 Member sinceNovember 2020 1 posts Posted by NATEDAGR8 on Friday, November 13, 2020 11:43 AM I agree, a new tranformer is the big problem, however, GE could probably scrape up a comparable transformer for it. Reply BaltACD Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 25,292 posts Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:01 AM NATEDAGR8I agree, a new tranformer is the big problem, however, GE could probably scrape up a comparable transformer for it. Fund it and it will get built. No funds, no build. Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply samfp1943 Member sinceJune 2003 From: South Central,Ks 7,170 posts Posted by samfp1943 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:32 AM BaltACD NATEDAGR8 Fund it and it will get built. No funds, no build. SPOT ON, BaltACD1 Reading the comments on just this Thread alone.... Might not the History, of the Pennsy's GG-1's, and their subject matter; be fodder for a 'new' Kalmbach publication/booK? Just a thought! Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Saturday, November 14, 2020 10:16 AM Kalmbach already did the GG1 exhaustively enough, many years ago now: remember that layered exploded-view drawing that was so good? And before that, the founder of my high-school railroad club, Karl Zimmermann, wrote a better book on the GG1 than anyone currently at Kalmbach could even approximate. You could add a couple of pages to update things to 2020, but there is precious little of positive interest to add... Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 10:57 AM One of the two GG1s at Cooperstown was rumored to be headed to Michigan and the Henry Ford (museum). To my knowledge, even that hasn't happened. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply zugmann Member sinceJanuary 2002 From: Canterlot 9,575 posts Posted by zugmann on Saturday, November 14, 2020 10:58 AM tree68One of the two GG1s at Cooperstown was rumored to be headed to Michigan and the Henry Ford (museum). To my knowledge, even that hasn't happened. Was that the one that was supposed to go to FLorida, or was that the other one? Will they be scrapped or rust away into nothing first? It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 11:42 AM zugmannWas that the one that was supposed to go to FLorida, or was that the other one? Will they be scrapped or rust away into nothing first? Dunno - I'm working from social media reports on this one. There's one in Syracuse which is being kept up at least cosmetically. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply zugmann Member sinceJanuary 2002 From: Canterlot 9,575 posts Posted by zugmann on Saturday, November 14, 2020 11:45 AM There's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950. It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 12:29 PM zugmannThere's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950. One might opine that the reason so many GG1s were "preserved" was because they are environmental disasters waiting to happen, if you will. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply Flintlock76 Member sinceJanuary 2019 From: Henrico, VA 9,728 posts Posted by Flintlock76 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 2:32 PM tree68One might opine that the reason so many GG1s were "preserved" was because they are environmental disasters waiting to happen, if you will. That's entirely possible, but another reason could be they were lucky enough to survive into the preservation era and had homes waiting for them when they were retired. I don't remember when this happened, but I recall reading the PRR did a study sometime in the post-war era where they considered ending electric operations and going completely with diesel power. In the end they decided against it, but if they ended electric operations, say in the early 50's, there might not have been any GG1's preserved at all. They'd have been as extinct as the T1's. Reply Electroliner 1935 Member sinceSeptember 2010 2,515 posts Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 3:58 PM My concept would be to take a transformer from an AE-7 and redesign the power modules to provide single phase 25 Hz output. Motors would not have to be rewound, just cleaned. Whether this is feasible and could be funded is beyond my pay grade. Also, mentioning T-1s. I have never forgotten seeing over 20 dead T-1s awaiting the torch in Columbus OH on a Cincinnati Railroad Club fan trip. What a sad sight. We did see J-1s in service for the coal to Sandusky and in ’56 I saw the Santa Fe “Texas” class 2-10-4s and PRR J-1s when I went to Worthington OH. They were BIG. Not as big as a Big Boy but they were notable. YOUTUBE has a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5zOCNNw6t0 Reply 54light15 Member sinceDecember 2008 From: Toronto, Canada 2,560 posts Posted by 54light15 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 5:36 PM GG1s in Syracuse, Cooperstown and maybe Dearborn? That sounds kind of odd to me that they would be preserved in areas that never had them when they were active. Along the NEC, sure. It would be nice to see one run again. Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Saturday, November 14, 2020 6:59 PM 54light15 GG1s in Syracuse, Cooperstown and maybe Dearborn? That sounds kind of odd to me that they would be preserved in areas that never had them when they were active. Along the NEC, sure. It would be nice to see one run again. Many locomotives are preserved in areas they never served. While C&O ran in MI, I doubt the Alleghany in the Henry Ford ever ran there. I would presume the effort would be a reflection of the technology, as opposed to a reflection of what ran in MI. There are a number of locomotives in the museum as well as the adjoining Greenfield Village. https://www.thehenryford.org/visit/henry-ford-museum/exhibits/railroads. The GG1 in Syracuse is property of the Central New York Railroad Historical Society. I'm not sure who owns the Cooperstown locomotives. Probably the Cooperstown and Charlotte Valley. Most likely, they were available, cheap, and the railroad at the time was glad to get rid of them... Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply MidlandMike Member sinceSeptember 2011 6,449 posts Posted by MidlandMike on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:35 PM Wiki has a list of all 16 preserved GG-1's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Railroad_class_GG1#cite_ref-Palmateer_37-0 Reply MidlandMike Member sinceSeptember 2011 6,449 posts Posted by MidlandMike on Saturday, November 14, 2020 9:48 PM zugmann There's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950. While 16 GG-1's were preserved, not a single electric loco built for the New Haven was saved. Only a couple of EF-4's originally built for VGN were saved. I would loved to have seen an EP-5 saved. I don't know if it had transformers with PCB, but it did have rectifiers with Mercury. https://www.flickr.com/photos/alcomike/20129122985/sizes/l/ Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:02 AM Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. No reason a GG1 could not be rebuilt as a regular rectifier locomtive, with its original motors, using standard, off-the-shelf equipment, and have its full horsepower and tractive effort capabilities. With the appropriate transformer, it could run on 25Hz. 50Hz. or 60Hz, 12,000 (11.000 - 12,500) or 25,000 volts. With some additional equipment, it could even be equipped with third-rail shoes and run on 600 or 750V DC. Reply BaltACD Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 25,292 posts Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:07 AM daveklepper Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. No reason a GG1 could not be rebuilt as a regular rectifier locomtive, with its original motors, using standard, off-the-shelf equipment, and have its full horsepower and tractive effort capabilities. With the appropriate transformer, it could run on 25Hz. 50Hz. or 60Hz, 12,000 (11.000 - 12,500) or 25,000 volts. With some additional equipment, it could even be equipped with third-rail shoes and run on 600 or 750V DC. Money, Money, Money - who has the money to make it happen? Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply charlie hebdo Member sinceSeptember 2017 5,636 posts Posted by charlie hebdo on Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:05 PM Electroliner 1935 My concept would be to take a transformer from an AE-7 and redesign the power modules to provide single phase 25 Hz output. Motors would not have to be rewound, just cleaned. Whether this is feasible and could be funded is beyond my pay grade. Also, mentioning T-1s. I have never forgotten seeing over 20 dead T-1s awaiting the torch in Columbus OH on a Cincinnati Railroad Club fan trip. What a sad sight. We did see J-1s in service for the coal to Sandusky and in ’56 I saw the Santa Fe “Texas” class 2-10-4s and PRR J-1s when I went to Worthington OH. They were BIG. Not as big as a Big Boy but they were notable. YOUTUBE has a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5zOCNNw6t0 But where could it run? Those few stretches of electrification aren't likely to allow it. Reply Electroliner 1935 Member sinceSeptember 2010 2,515 posts Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:41 PM charlie hebdoBut where could it run? Those few stretches of electrification aren't likely to allow it. So true. No cat except on AMTRAK and I doubt they would touch it. I was supprised when they took IRM's Nebraska Zephyr. Which performed flawlessly and magnificently. Reply Erik_Mag Member sinceJanuary 2019 1,686 posts Posted by Erik_Mag on Sunday, November 15, 2020 1:58 PM daveklepper Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. For the appropriate AC commutator motor, they will run even more efficiently on DC than AC. There are some AC commutator motors that are fed via a field winding (equivalent to a transformer) where commutator is either shorted or connected to another field winding. IIRC, the motors for the initial MU cars used in Philly had such motors, but IIRC the GG1's motor were fed through the commutator and thus could run on DC. Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 2:48 PM If one was serious about getting a GG1 (or any such preserved electric) actually running, I should think it wouldn't be difficult to build a mobile power source (ie, generator in a boxcar or maybe a baggage car) to make the locomotive run. Perhaps it would even be possible to build an ersatz catenary so the power came through the pantographs. Anything is possible if you have the money... Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply Falcon48 Member sinceDecember 2007 1,307 posts Posted by Falcon48 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 8:41 PM AnonymousI heard a rumor that someone had sequestered a GG-1 at the Illinois Railway Museum in Union, IL. Sounds pretty tall to me, but then stranger things have happened at Union.....in a delightful way. I'm a long time member of IRM. IRM owns a GG1 which is on static display. To my knowledge, there are no plans to restore it to operating condition, nor could it be operated on IRM's rail line or anywhere else in the midwest. I'm not sure what is meant by the term "sequestered" in this context. Reply SD70Dude Member sinceDecember 2017 From: I've been everywhere, man 4,269 posts Posted by SD70Dude on Sunday, November 15, 2020 8:50 PM tree68 If one was serious about getting a GG1 (or any such preserved electric) actually running, I should think it wouldn't be difficult to build a mobile power source (ie, generator in a boxcar or maybe a baggage car) to make the locomotive run. Perhaps it would even be possible to build an ersatz catenary so the power came through the pantographs. Anything is possible if you have the money... IRM runs their 'Little Joe' on the same 600vDC overhead power supply that is used by all their interurbans and streetcars, perhaps it would be possible to do something similar to a GG1 if one absolutely wanted to move it under its own power. Of course, such a conversion would likely result in a neutered shell of the former beast that would have nowhere near the pulling power of the original design. As for the idea of a towable genset, I'd look into what SP/UP and BNSF have done with those 'snails' that power their rotary snowplows. Greetings from Alberta -an Articulate Malcontent Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,020 posts Posted by tree68 on Sunday, November 15, 2020 9:38 PM SD70DudeAs for the idea of a towable genset, I'd look into what SP/UP and BNSF have done with those 'snails' that power their rotary snowplows. Or any mother/slug set, for that matter... Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply MMLDelete Member sinceMay 2019 1,768 posts Posted by MMLDelete on Sunday, November 15, 2020 11:22 PM I was in the cab of a GG1 once, somewhere. Maybe the Railroaders Museum in Altoona? It was outdoors, and not spiffy. I was shocked at how little space there was in the cab. Made me think of early submarines. But what a cool loco! An awesome beast. If one could be run sans catenary, do most folks here envision retaining the pantographs? It's probably heresy to say this, but it would look really cool without them; and maybe silly to keep them. But I guess if one can play "air guitar," why not air cables? Reply Flintlock76 Member sinceJanuary 2019 From: Henrico, VA 9,728 posts Posted by Flintlock76 on Monday, November 16, 2020 8:05 AM Lithonia OperatorI was shocked at how little space there was in the cab. Made me think of early submarines. That was kind of the "Dirty little secret" of the GG1's, if that's the proper term, and maybe it isn't. As futuristic as they looked on the outside they were kind of on the primative side inside, again if that's the proper term. "Flash Gordon" on the outside, but regular 1930's electric on the inside. I remember reading years back one rail museum with a GG1 kicked around the idea of running it powered by a generator on a flatcar, but nothing ever came of it. I don't remember who it was. Reply CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, November 16, 2020 2:06 PM The Little Joe at the IRM was rebuilt for or by South Shore in 1949 to operate on 1500 volts DC, quite different for the 11000 volts 25 cycle AC for the GG1. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Overmod Member sinceSeptember 2003 21,669 posts Posted by Overmod on Monday, November 16, 2020 4:47 PM We covered this exhaustively, and so did Trains in their discussion of the GG1. The 387A motors are essentially the same construction as the New Haven design from which the twin-motor quill drive was derived. On the New Haven these operated quite happily on 750V DC from New Rochelle all the way into GCT, not just in '20mph mode' like the auxiliary electrics on the '50s 'lightweights' or the UA TurboTrain. One might easily assume, as I do, that a twin motor might be wound and insulated so that the two armatures are in series for 750V each, and run 'native' on 1500V instead of having to be connected in series pairs (i.e. three of them for a complete locomotive) which might tend to produce a giant sucking sound at any museum substation -- not that you'd need the full horsepower for any museum's logical operation. The only relevance of 11kV (or 12.5kV) or 25-cycle AC is in the transformer, and those are irrevocably gone, Pyranol-contaminated paper and all. There is utterly no need to replicate any part of that for DC operation, as it involved complicated tap-changing arrangements for speed control. The point of Mr. Klepper's use of AEM-7 components (the wheel diameter is technically very close, although of course the construction is not) is that you obtain a locomotive easily capable of 125mph performance from basically obsolescent and costed-down parts. The earlier problem was that Amtrak was highly reluctant to sell those parts for any operating purpose; the current problem is that I believe there are very few AEM-7s or components still available for the purpose, assuming you could manage the systems integration and inspection to convince all the 'powers that be' to let you play. And then there's the question of redissolving the crystallization in the frames ... not particularly difficult, but not particularly trivial and not cheap, either. All this before we come to the MP54-level corrosion damage in the upperworks and welded casing metal; by now I'd expect even the bridge members to be suffering, particular around the concrete deck. Reply 123456 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by CHPENNSYLVANIA [
QUOTE: Originally posted by msernak No Amtrak GG1 was ever painted for MOW. There were several E44's painted Silver and black for MOW. Can anyone confirm if the E44's ever ran for Amtrak?
Back to the topic of running a GG1, here's my idea of the best resteration:
1) Change the transformer coolant from mineral oil or PCBs to silicone oil or liquid glycol, the same coolant as used in the Acelas.
2) Repair any frame defects or other rust/corrosion problems.
3) replace what is probably cloth-insulated wire with rubber insulated wire.
4) Who said anything about a HEP plant, we're talking about excursion runs, not a full-time return to revenue service.
5) Upgrade cab signaling, although the NYC-DC line hasn't changed much, probably still has the position light signals (yes it does, i've got a picture of it, next to an E60)
I also heard that there is a 25Hz line somewhere in the Gulf Coast region, or what about the electrical outfit in Arizona, the NEC isn't the US's only electrified line.
As Tom said, 4935 looks great in Brunswick Green:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=61935
Dave
Fireflite wrote:The RR Museum of Pennsylvania has three GG1's in its collection. Number 4935 is on display in the rolling stock hall. The 4935 has had a complete cosmetic restoration to its as-built 1943 appearance, including very shiny coat of Brunswick Green paint with the original 5 gold stripes. It was first restored in 1977, and donated to the museum by Russell Wilcox in 1983. If you think you don't like Brunswick Green, pay this motor a visit and it'll make you a believer. (Note that an electric locomotive was a 'motor' to PRR man.) The 4800, the prototype, aka "Old Rivits" is on display in the outside yard. It was owned by the Lancaster Chapter NHRS until donated to the museum in 2000, which explains why the 4935 had dibs in the spot inside. It was the only example with rivited rather than welded body, hence the nickname. I believe this engine is still wearing Tuscan Red with five stripes (somewhat faded now). I think most fans like this paint scheme best, though only 10 units ever wore it, and the 4800 wasn't one of them. Interestingly, this engine one of group re-geared for freight service. It went to PC, then Conrail, and wore both a unique Bicentennial scheme and Conrail Blue. The museum's third GG1 is 4859, currently on display in the Amtrak station in Lancaster, PA. Read more at http://www.rrmuseumpa.org/about/roster/gg1.htm. The 4877 was last operated by NJ Transit and was restored to Tuscan Red a few years before its retirement. Its now owned by the United Railway Historical Society, and is in storage in NJ Transit's Hoboken yard. Another unit is on display next to the fairgrounds in Syracuse, NY, and last I knew there was one at the National Railway Museum in St Louis. Tom
adrianspeeder wrote:The one is Stasburg PA is very nice looking. The Pennsy hit a home run with that loco. Adrianspeeder
There are 2 at the PRR museum in Strassburg. One is inside and is really nice. The other is outside and is rusting quietly.
spbed wrote:I was at the train station in Matawan NJ when it departed on it last trip. My son said there is one at the RR Museum of Penn in Strasburg PE. He sent me a T-shirt from their with the GG-1 on it in PRR colors. [
There is. I saw it when I visited the RRMofPA 18 months ago.
My first AMTK ride (PHL to NYP in 1973) was pulled by a black GG1 with Penn Central markings.
motor
StillGrande wrote: There are 2 at the PRR museum in Strassburg. One is inside and is really nice. The other is outside and is rusting quietly.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
art11758, I think that you have seen one of the rotary converters which is usually a 60Hz polyphase motor driving an alternator with different pole pairs so a frequency change can be obtained.
The lower frequencies, especially in the early French, German and Swiss days were, because a low frequency AC motor has less sparking then the conventional AC motor running at 50 or 60 Hz.
DC was mostly used before and experiments were done with laminated steel in AC motors but sparking at the brushes caused extra stress and premature insulation breakdown which was somewhat reduced with the lower frequency.
In Europe 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz was and is still used in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and parts of Norway, also with rotary motor alternator sets although in switzerland certain hydro stations provided the 15 kV 16 2/3 Hz for the railways I believe.
Some may have been replaced with solid state.
France has gone to 25 kV 50 Hz while Italy, Belgium have 3 kV DC and The Netherlands 1500 V DC.
The GG1 was a fantastic locomotive, unfortunately i have never seen one at work but read about these masters of engineering with amazing high power output and reliability.
It would be fantastic to see one in working order although the costs and manhours are probably prohibitive to realise it.
edited for typo's
I agree, a new tranformer is the big problem, however, GE could probably scrape up a comparable transformer for it.
NATEDAGR8I agree, a new tranformer is the big problem, however, GE could probably scrape up a comparable transformer for it.
Fund it and it will get built. No funds, no build.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD NATEDAGR8 Fund it and it will get built. No funds, no build.
NATEDAGR8
Kalmbach already did the GG1 exhaustively enough, many years ago now: remember that layered exploded-view drawing that was so good? And before that, the founder of my high-school railroad club, Karl Zimmermann, wrote a better book on the GG1 than anyone currently at Kalmbach could even approximate.
You could add a couple of pages to update things to 2020, but there is precious little of positive interest to add...
One of the two GG1s at Cooperstown was rumored to be headed to Michigan and the Henry Ford (museum). To my knowledge, even that hasn't happened.
tree68One of the two GG1s at Cooperstown was rumored to be headed to Michigan and the Henry Ford (museum). To my knowledge, even that hasn't happened.
Was that the one that was supposed to go to FLorida, or was that the other one? Will they be scrapped or rust away into nothing first?
zugmannWas that the one that was supposed to go to FLorida, or was that the other one? Will they be scrapped or rust away into nothing first?
Dunno - I'm working from social media reports on this one.
There's one in Syracuse which is being kept up at least cosmetically.
There's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950.
zugmannThere's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950.
One might opine that the reason so many GG1s were "preserved" was because they are environmental disasters waiting to happen, if you will.
tree68One might opine that the reason so many GG1s were "preserved" was because they are environmental disasters waiting to happen, if you will.
That's entirely possible, but another reason could be they were lucky enough to survive into the preservation era and had homes waiting for them when they were retired.
I don't remember when this happened, but I recall reading the PRR did a study sometime in the post-war era where they considered ending electric operations and going completely with diesel power. In the end they decided against it, but if they ended electric operations, say in the early 50's, there might not have been any GG1's preserved at all. They'd have been as extinct as the T1's.
My concept would be to take a transformer from an AE-7 and redesign the power modules to provide single phase 25 Hz output. Motors would not have to be rewound, just cleaned.
Whether this is feasible and could be funded is beyond my pay grade.
Also, mentioning T-1s. I have never forgotten seeing over 20 dead T-1s awaiting the torch in Columbus OH on a Cincinnati Railroad Club fan trip. What a sad sight.
We did see J-1s in service for the coal to Sandusky and in ’56 I saw the Santa Fe “Texas” class 2-10-4s and PRR J-1s when I went to Worthington OH. They were BIG. Not as big as a Big Boy but they were notable. YOUTUBE has a video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5zOCNNw6t0
GG1s in Syracuse, Cooperstown and maybe Dearborn? That sounds kind of odd to me that they would be preserved in areas that never had them when they were active. Along the NEC, sure. It would be nice to see one run again.
54light15 GG1s in Syracuse, Cooperstown and maybe Dearborn? That sounds kind of odd to me that they would be preserved in areas that never had them when they were active. Along the NEC, sure. It would be nice to see one run again.
Many locomotives are preserved in areas they never served. While C&O ran in MI, I doubt the Alleghany in the Henry Ford ever ran there. I would presume the effort would be a reflection of the technology, as opposed to a reflection of what ran in MI. There are a number of locomotives in the museum as well as the adjoining Greenfield Village. https://www.thehenryford.org/visit/henry-ford-museum/exhibits/railroads.
The GG1 in Syracuse is property of the Central New York Railroad Historical Society.
I'm not sure who owns the Cooperstown locomotives. Probably the Cooperstown and Charlotte Valley.
Most likely, they were available, cheap, and the railroad at the time was glad to get rid of them...
Wiki has a list of all 16 preserved GG-1's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Railroad_class_GG1#cite_ref-Palmateer_37-0
zugmann There's enoguh GG1s preserved, so even as a fan I'd rather see efforts go to thing like dash-7s, dash-8s, dash-9s, -- well pretty much anything built after 1950.
While 16 GG-1's were preserved, not a single electric loco built for the New Haven was saved. Only a couple of EF-4's originally built for VGN were saved. I would loved to have seen an EP-5 saved. I don't know if it had transformers with PCB, but it did have rectifiers with Mercury.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alcomike/20129122985/sizes/l/
Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC.
No reason a GG1 could not be rebuilt as a regular rectifier locomtive, with its original motors, using standard, off-the-shelf equipment, and have its full horsepower and tractive effort capabilities.
With the appropriate transformer, it could run on 25Hz. 50Hz. or 60Hz, 12,000 (11.000 - 12,500) or 25,000 volts. With some additional equipment, it could even be equipped with third-rail shoes and run on 600 or 750V DC.
daveklepper Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC. No reason a GG1 could not be rebuilt as a regular rectifier locomtive, with its original motors, using standard, off-the-shelf equipment, and have its full horsepower and tractive effort capabilities. With the appropriate transformer, it could run on 25Hz. 50Hz. or 60Hz, 12,000 (11.000 - 12,500) or 25,000 volts. With some additional equipment, it could even be equipped with third-rail shoes and run on 600 or 750V DC.
Money, Money, Money - who has the money to make it happen?
Electroliner 1935 My concept would be to take a transformer from an AE-7 and redesign the power modules to provide single phase 25 Hz output. Motors would not have to be rewound, just cleaned. Whether this is feasible and could be funded is beyond my pay grade. Also, mentioning T-1s. I have never forgotten seeing over 20 dead T-1s awaiting the torch in Columbus OH on a Cincinnati Railroad Club fan trip. What a sad sight. We did see J-1s in service for the coal to Sandusky and in ’56 I saw the Santa Fe “Texas” class 2-10-4s and PRR J-1s when I went to Worthington OH. They were BIG. Not as big as a Big Boy but they were notable. YOUTUBE has a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5zOCNNw6t0
But where could it run? Those few stretches of electrification aren't likely to allow it.
charlie hebdoBut where could it run? Those few stretches of electrification aren't likely to allow it.
So true. No cat except on AMTRAK and I doubt they would touch it. I was supprised when they took IRM's Nebraska Zephyr. Which performed flawlessly and magnificently.
daveklepper Electroliner, 25Hz-commutator motors can run on DC just as efficiently as they can on 25Hz AC.
For the appropriate AC commutator motor, they will run even more efficiently on DC than AC. There are some AC commutator motors that are fed via a field winding (equivalent to a transformer) where commutator is either shorted or connected to another field winding. IIRC, the motors for the initial MU cars used in Philly had such motors, but IIRC the GG1's motor were fed through the commutator and thus could run on DC.
If one was serious about getting a GG1 (or any such preserved electric) actually running, I should think it wouldn't be difficult to build a mobile power source (ie, generator in a boxcar or maybe a baggage car) to make the locomotive run.
Perhaps it would even be possible to build an ersatz catenary so the power came through the pantographs.
Anything is possible if you have the money...
AnonymousI heard a rumor that someone had sequestered a GG-1 at the Illinois Railway Museum in Union, IL. Sounds pretty tall to me, but then stranger things have happened at Union.....in a delightful way.
I'm a long time member of IRM. IRM owns a GG1 which is on static display. To my knowledge, there are no plans to restore it to operating condition, nor could it be operated on IRM's rail line or anywhere else in the midwest. I'm not sure what is meant by the term "sequestered" in this context.
tree68 If one was serious about getting a GG1 (or any such preserved electric) actually running, I should think it wouldn't be difficult to build a mobile power source (ie, generator in a boxcar or maybe a baggage car) to make the locomotive run. Perhaps it would even be possible to build an ersatz catenary so the power came through the pantographs. Anything is possible if you have the money...
IRM runs their 'Little Joe' on the same 600vDC overhead power supply that is used by all their interurbans and streetcars, perhaps it would be possible to do something similar to a GG1 if one absolutely wanted to move it under its own power.
Of course, such a conversion would likely result in a neutered shell of the former beast that would have nowhere near the pulling power of the original design.
As for the idea of a towable genset, I'd look into what SP/UP and BNSF have done with those 'snails' that power their rotary snowplows.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70DudeAs for the idea of a towable genset, I'd look into what SP/UP and BNSF have done with those 'snails' that power their rotary snowplows.
Or any mother/slug set, for that matter...
I was in the cab of a GG1 once, somewhere. Maybe the Railroaders Museum in Altoona? It was outdoors, and not spiffy.
I was shocked at how little space there was in the cab. Made me think of early submarines.
But what a cool loco! An awesome beast.
If one could be run sans catenary, do most folks here envision retaining the pantographs? It's probably heresy to say this, but it would look really cool without them; and maybe silly to keep them. But I guess if one can play "air guitar," why not air cables?
Lithonia OperatorI was shocked at how little space there was in the cab. Made me think of early submarines.
That was kind of the "Dirty little secret" of the GG1's, if that's the proper term, and maybe it isn't. As futuristic as they looked on the outside they were kind of on the primative side inside, again if that's the proper term. "Flash Gordon" on the outside, but regular 1930's electric on the inside.
I remember reading years back one rail museum with a GG1 kicked around the idea of running it powered by a generator on a flatcar, but nothing ever came of it. I don't remember who it was.
The Little Joe at the IRM was rebuilt for or by South Shore in 1949 to operate on 1500 volts DC, quite different for the 11000 volts 25 cycle AC for the GG1.
We covered this exhaustively, and so did Trains in their discussion of the GG1.
The 387A motors are essentially the same construction as the New Haven design from which the twin-motor quill drive was derived. On the New Haven these operated quite happily on 750V DC from New Rochelle all the way into GCT, not just in '20mph mode' like the auxiliary electrics on the '50s 'lightweights' or the UA TurboTrain. One might easily assume, as I do, that a twin motor might be wound and insulated so that the two armatures are in series for 750V each, and run 'native' on 1500V instead of having to be connected in series pairs (i.e. three of them for a complete locomotive) which might tend to produce a giant sucking sound at any museum substation -- not that you'd need the full horsepower for any museum's logical operation.
The only relevance of 11kV (or 12.5kV) or 25-cycle AC is in the transformer, and those are irrevocably gone, Pyranol-contaminated paper and all. There is utterly no need to replicate any part of that for DC operation, as it involved complicated tap-changing arrangements for speed control.
The point of Mr. Klepper's use of AEM-7 components (the wheel diameter is technically very close, although of course the construction is not) is that you obtain a locomotive easily capable of 125mph performance from basically obsolescent and costed-down parts. The earlier problem was that Amtrak was highly reluctant to sell those parts for any operating purpose; the current problem is that I believe there are very few AEM-7s or components still available for the purpose, assuming you could manage the systems integration and inspection to convince all the 'powers that be' to let you play.
And then there's the question of redissolving the crystallization in the frames ... not particularly difficult, but not particularly trivial and not cheap, either. All this before we come to the MP54-level corrosion damage in the upperworks and welded casing metal; by now I'd expect even the bridge members to be suffering, particular around the concrete deck.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.