Unlike an EP-3, 4, or 5, GG1, or EF-3, one can "change ends" on an AEM7 easily without climbing down from the "motor." But switching passenger yards and terminals does not, in any case, involve quite the number of reverse movments that switching in a flat freight yard does.
B-1 box-cab electric switchers were used at Bay Ridge (freight), Sunnyside, Penn Station, NY, 30th St. Sation Philadelphia, and before closure, Broad Street, Philadelphia. Steam was used at Baltimore and Harrisburg, and the LIRR used steam at Sunhyside for freight. But the LIRR used DD1's on peddler freighs with set-outs and pick-ups.
The AEM7 works perfectly well as a switcher the way it is. USA diesels with full cabs don't work well as switchers BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE CAB!!!!
The standard PRR electric switcher, probably about 100 of them including the LIRR labeled ones at Bay Ridge, was an 0-6-0 BOX CAB B-1. Controls at both ends, just like an AEM-7.
With a three-man crew, one man in each cab and one on the ground, it would make a great switcher. A full-width carbody is no problem if each cab has a man in it. For that matter a two-man crew could make it work, with the ground man in the non-operating cab any time the loco is about to move or is moving. Obvoiusly, continuous communication between crew members is essential for the concept to work.
In fact, I saw an AEM7 being used as a switcher at Penn-NY about 19 years ago. They probably still do this. They do not use diesel switchers at Penn Sta. NYC.
The AEM7 with its full-width carbody would make a terrible switcher. However, I do think that it might be useful in transfer service between Penn Station and Sunnyside, a duty that PRR assigned to its L6's many years ago.
I agree about the AEN-7 AC's, and I doubt that Amtrak will want to get rid of all of them. They should keep four or five as switchers for Penn Station, Summyside, Philadelphia, and Washingtonton, possibly also Boston, to do all the switching that can be done under catenary, reducing the need for diesel switchers at these locatons, and particularly reducing the need to use road power to do swithing at Penn NY.
And again, I want the innards of three AEN-7 DC's to revfve a GG-1 and two more to revive the cosmetically restored EF-4/E-33.
IGN, this thread has gone so far of the (MIA) OP's original question that I doubt it matters anymore...
An E60 is at The Railroad Museum of Pennsylavania.
IIRC, only one SDP40F survives, and it is considerably altered since Santa Fe used it in freight service. Last I heard of it it was in Portland, OR?
I second the call to preserve an AEM-7.
daveklepperAnd the Electroliner?
The one at IRM has been fully restored, and is a delight.
The one at Rockhill Furnace is shabby, but runnable. It is in no danger.
I think I remember a Green Hornet at Union. Is that correct. Is there also a Blue Goose?
Is the red rocket (144?) still in good shape?
And the Electorliner?
And the Indana RR car?
CTA 6201-6720 and single-unit cars 1-50 were built using various salvaged parts from the traded-in postwar PCC streetcars (Green Hornets). None of the pre-war cars (Blue Geese) were included in the trade-in arrangement.
Thanks. Apparenly, the first 200, 6001-6200, were totally new, while 6201-6730 used the elecctricals, seats, windows, mecanicals from the streetcars,
daveklepperThe articulateds were 5000-5003?
5001-5004.
I find this to be a good resource.
The 2000 Pullmans and 2200 Budds must have duplicated the numbers of the CRT woodies that had been scrapped or were being scrapped. The early 6000's were built new. From what date and which number did they use componants from PCC streetcars? Must be after 1952. The articulateds were 5000-5003?
Aside from the aforementioned CRT 2717, the only steel cars operated by Chicago Rapid Transit were the various 4000 series cars, many of which were later converted to work motors by CTA. Baldies were the work motors that had various rooftop appurtenances removed so they could fit in the subway between Logan Square and the Kennedy Expressway, which had especially tight clearances, even for CTA.
The CTA 2000 series cars were built by Pullman-Standard in 1964 and were the first high-performance cars. They spent most of their service lives on the Lake and Lake-Dan Ryan lines.
The 6000 series cars were the PCC's built by St. Louis Car from 1950-1959 and lasted in service into the early 1990's.
Do I mean the 4000's? The plushies, the baldies, etc.? I guess I was confused because the BMT 2000's are "the steels, the B-types, but actually A's, B's, BT's, BX's. The wood BMT cars were all 0-1999 except for rebuilds into Q's and C's. But the Budds were the 2200's. The Pullman's? The Spam Cans were the 6000's, from my memory. Help!!! I left the two CERA CRT-CTA equipment books with the ERA in New York. A mistake?
CSSHEGEWISCH The only CRT steel heavyweight in the 2000 series of which I'm aware was CRT 2717, which was somewhat heavier than the USS Nevada. All of the other CRT 2000 series were woods.
The only CRT steel heavyweight in the 2000 series of which I'm aware was CRT 2717, which was somewhat heavier than the USS Nevada. All of the other CRT 2000 series were woods.
And the CTA 2000 series are all pretty lightweight!
Many interurban systems bought Birney's for their local streetcar systems, but that did not make these Birneys into interurban cars, since they provided only a local streetcar service. The Sacramento Northern's putting third rail shoes on their Chico and Marysville-Uba City Birneys to get them to and from the Sacramento Shops for overhaul did not make these Birneys into subway cars.
(And I am not implying that anybody did say so, just making the statements.)
Most fans and possibly the system itself did consider Key System and inteurban system, but in fact it probably was more a suburban electric railroad, like Philadelphia and Western and Red Arow and Shaker Heights, but much larger.
Again, it is "Docklands Light Rail: OFFICIALLY!! But high platforms, third rail, completely separated RofW with elevated structure, subway, underground stations, train operation, train-doors on cars, and three-truck articulated cars a bit heavier than any CTA car or any old CRT 2000-series steel heavyweight. Light Rail?
For the various styles, a pretty good article is here, although they classify the Red Arrow cars as PCCs.
A lot depends on what St. Louis used. Westinghouse and GE had a variety of controllers, both unit-switch and cam, that would fit in the space and even on the mounting brackets of a PCC controller. Chicago Transit Authority had a variety of experimental controls and truck types on their high speed cars (6127/8, 6129/30, 1-4) that all fit the basic St. Louis PCC body bolster - which was not covered by the PCC patents. Some of the Chicago cars had as many as 4 different control systems over their lifetimes.
anything is impossible if u try really hard not 2 do it!
I did not say the bodies of the three PCC designs were identacle. Check what I wrote. I said the Philly Suburban body, non-PCC, is identacle to the SF PCC body, and it is, except for some very very minor details of the exterior. But actually, you are right, because the body bolsters, under the car and not visable,, must be different to accept the S.Louis semi-MCB outside-frame truck instead of the PCC truck. Also mounting brackets under the car for very different control equipment.
The PCC car was an early example of modular construction, so you could get a lot of different appearances for cars with a mix-and-match approach.
But the bodies were identacle to SF's double-end PCC's and very close to the Illinois Terminal PCC's, somewhat wider than the Dallas-Boston double-end PCC's.
Well, the bodies for those three builds of double ended PCCs were based on the same design pattern, but they were all different enough that identical is not an appropriate term to apply to them.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.