The Display in Union Station has also been discussed to death. If you are Amtrak and you're trying to keep afloat, and get as many possible passengers as you can, why would you want a display to remind passengers at one of your flagship stations, of the worst disaster in that station's history?

The unfortunate thing here is that there is no good answer to the question of the 4876. The B&O musuem (rightly so) has other priorities right now (you tell me how a GG1 is more historically significant than the Thatcher Perkins, or Davis Camel?), Amtrak doesn't want anything to do with it, and most of the pertinent museums to a GG1 already have one, or two.

You want to present the GG1 in good cosmetic shape, on the platform where the wreck took place, along with a complete pictorial of the wreck and reconstruction. You do this because of the place (Washington Union Station), location (the nation's capital), and time period.(the Eisenhower inauguration). People love to bash this idea, but this is what "living history" is all about. You don't get Amtrak to sponsor this, but the Smithsonian, with private funding.

Your still not answering the question.
Could you even restore a GG-1 to operating conditions? You can restore steam why not electric, when Steam is older.

Len.

RE: the Union Station idea

Ok, so the smithsonian sponsors it, how do you get Amtrak which owns (or leases not sure) the platforms to give you permission. Yes its an interesting story, but the general rail riding public won't want to see it before they board the train.

Anything is possible. But with no confirmed place to run it (and there's little sense in running a GG1 at 7 mph on what amounts to an electrified siding, when folks will insist on it running at 80 mph on the main line), there's no rational reason to.

Speaking as someone who's had hands-on experience with steam, diesel-mechanical, diesel-electric, and electric, steam is the easiest and most forgiving of the modes. If I want to compare it ineptly but succinctly, it's like the difference between blacksmithing, electrical shop, and electronics, with steam being the thing you can beat with a hammer, electrics being the things you can solder, and diesel-electrics being the things you have to take multimeters and oscilloscopes to. <:-)

Now, go win several Powerball lotteries, and then go buy the Black Mesa & Lake Powell or the BCOR Tumbler Ridge Branch or an electrified NJ Transit line, preferably the NY&LB. Then we'll resume the discussion. Until then, I motion for a closure of the discussion........

Seconded.

all in favor ?
AYYYYYYYYYYY !!!!!!

I can't resist ::



All I can say is this: based upon the above, no wonder the rest the world doesn't take this subject seriously. For starters, I wonder how IRM's resident engineering genius was going to get the air compressor motor ( a large AC induction motor) to run on 600VDC ? Edison would have been proud ....

DPK

Thanks for answering the question.

Now next question, how many E-44's are there still. I know of the one we have in the museum, but are there other's?

Len.

With the technologies of today don't you think you could design a locomotive to look like an GG-1, but have the modern electronic in it. The shell would look old but in fact it would be new.

Look at the new cars of today, there looking old but there bran new, ( PT cruiser ) Ect.

Len.

Okay, just how many winning Powerball lottery prizes are we up to by now? HUH?

Reiterate: IT'S THE *&#)+!@ FRAME.

Based on figures for the British A1 Tornado project and extrapolated for sheer size/complexity, I'm guessing a fabricated, non-cast "replica GG1 frame" and wheels would run someone about $2 million.

Then once you steal the electricals and electronics out of a $3 million AEM7 or ALP44:

WHERE DO YOU RUN IT?!?!?!?!?

Please, someone go repost the damned GIF of someone beating a dead horse!

You know, if I have to read one more article about how impossible it is for a GG-1 to run, I'll DO IT just to shut y'all up! :)

We all know a GG1 will operate at precisely one location, where 30mph is possible. That location won't care about the frame. Inverters are easy now, not cheap but you could do it last after you proved the concept. The hardest thing would be fortifying the overhead wire in that location for pans. It can be done, easier than the average restoration project.

Go for it! Seriously!

I do NOT say that restoring/running a G is "impossible". What I postulate is that a) the restoration that would be possible (IRM, Rockhill, wherever) won't be "accepted" by the faithful/possessed, because it isn't PRR territory and high speed; and b) that the restoration/operation that would satisfy or be desired/demanded by the zealous is not going to be permitted by those that control the trackage.

Actually last month CXT moved a GG-1 on its own wheels 20 miles or so in New Jersey, so short distances seem to be ok. Too bad the Northern Central (which connected Baltimore and York) is ripped up and/or converted to LRT use.

Wait a minute, there is hope! Isn't there a guy named Rifken who has claimed the common carrier rights on the Northern Central. Surely he will re-lay the rails and move the motor??

It's been forty years since I was "up close and personal" with GG1's while working for the PRR in Baltimore, but IIRC, most of them had the initials "SKF" on all the journal boxes. Wasn't SKF in North Philadelphia one of the early manufacturers of railroad roller bearings? G's have, and always have had, roller bearings, guys.

The idea of a GG-1 running interstellar me... While I am a Westerner, I did get to see them run in 1971... Impressive machines

With that being said, this tread is growing old. I have received several private emails complaining...

Good information still welcome...

Thanks, Your Friendly moderator