> Does this mean, then, that a GG1 could still
> run below NYC or to Harrisburg? I'm told at
> least one (4935?) at Strasburg is still
> pretty much intact. Is that true?

Even though the NEC from NY to Washington and out to Harrisburg is still electrified at 11 KV, 25 cycles it would not be possible to operate a GG1 there any more. The reason is that the main transformers in GG1s used PCB transformer oil. I think all of the extant GG1s have long since had their main transformers removed and scrapped by a PCB processing facility. Otherwise, they could not have been sold for preservation.

aeriola@adelphia.net

I think all of the
> extant GG1s have long since had their main
> transformers removed and scrapped by a PCB
> processing facility. Otherwise, they could
> not have been sold for preservation.

That is what was *supposed* to have happened. Again, there is "urban legend" (which I got straight from the "horse's mouth") that at least one G--specifically, the one that went to the Wilmington & Western and later to Leatherstocking NRHS--had the transformers flushed instead of removed.

Short of someone crawling into the GG1s and looking, do we have any way of verifying this, or putting it to rest forever? $800? 4935? 4859? 4917? Anyone?


LNER4472-NOSPAM-@bcpl.net

> I asked the original question because for
> some reason I thought that IRM had catenary
> over part of their "main line" as
> well as over their trolley track. These were
> very significant locomotives in the East and
> there are very few places where you have
> both a GG1 and catenary.

Well, yes we have over six miles of wire in the air and it is used at a nominal 660 v DC to run our equipment. A lot is simple suspension and some is catenary suspension but those distinctions really apply to the mechanical fastenings and geometry rather than to what electricity they carry.

There are NO plans to even put together a program to try to run our GG1. And yes the transformers have been removed. As to adding gear to make it use the low voltage DC, what is the plan? Construct some type of invertor to take 660 v DC and somehow make 11,000 v 25 cycle AC?? I suppose you could do this in a shoebox to demonstrate the principle, but to carry the type of current and load to even move the GG1 at walking speed?? The above vision of course supposes that the rest of the GG1 is ready to run and we would want to make the fewest changes possible to it and the design to preserve as much as possible. That is, put this new 'black box' hidden somewhere inside and run an extension cord into it and a cord out to the existing high voltage side.

I do not know a lot about these locomotives, but the quill drive is a type of system where the motor is basically constructed around the axle and the axle in effect is the armature shaft. There is no way you could change motors or replace AC with DC or use 'smaller' motors as one earlier post suggested. Same goes for the possible use of a GG1 as a control cab for trailing diesel power, since operating systems and controls were never designed to be MU'd to ANY type of diesel. Maybe akin to trying to use an SD90MAC to power an NJT cab car???? DEFINITELY APPLES AND ORANGES.

So let us revel in the fact that the GG1's were not forgotten in the rush to the scrappers torch, and try to devote our energies toward more preservation progress on so many of the projects now pending, in progress and which need funding and volunteer resources. NUFF SAID.

Bob Kutella



68trolley@comcast.net

What a great closing statement to my neophyte opening question.

Thanks to all the responses. I've learned a lot in this thread and I hope it was not all wasted time for others.

I'm thankful for this board. I never would have had the answer without it.

Hope to meet you someday, Bob.

Scott



shawsinoly@aol.com

> I do not know a lot about these locomotives,
> but the quill drive is a type of system
> where the motor is basically constructed
> around the axle and the axle in effect is
> the armature shaft. There is no way you
> could change motors or replace AC with DC or
> use 'smaller' motors as one earlier post
> suggested.

Isn't "the axle in effect is the armature shaft"
what the Milwaukee Road "Bi-Polar" and some other
locos of that earlier era used?
The "Quill" is a hollow cylinder with the axle
running through it. Prongs (quills?) on the ends
of it engage spring cushioned "cups" inserted
into the driving wheels. The motor armature can,
but does not have to, use the "quill" as its core.
Wasn't the advantage of the GG1 that it used 12
small motors, possibly like the ones in PRR MU
cars? Each pair turned gears mounted on a hollow
quill (12 motors, 6 driven axles). Is it
possible that the competing R1 (4-8-4), only one
of which was built because "Old Rivets" tested
better, was the electric loco with the large
motors that you mentioned?

> SD90MAC to power an NJT cab car???? DEFINITELY
APPLES AND ORANGES. <

But probably possible, as many modern diesels are
backwards compatable for many generations.

Thanks for expaining about your loco's
transformer. Now, when will your "Little Joe" be
running?


TyburnRR@cs.com

> Isn't "the axle in effect is the
> armature shaft"
> what the Milwaukee Road "Bi-Polar"
> and some other
> locos of that earlier era used?

Yes; Bob was just slightly off on that (although IRM does have a bi-polar locomotive, an NYC S-Motor). Your explanation of a "Quill" drive sounds right to me. I don't know how small those 12 motors are; by most other standards they're probably pretty big! Also, I suspect that their casings are of a different design from your standard nose-hung traction motor so they would be very difficult to replace with anything else.

> Thanks for expaining about your loco's
> transformer. Now, when will your
> "Little Joe" be
> running?

The "Little Joe" (South Shore purists will insist on it being called not a "Joe", which was a Milwaukee Road term, but an "800") actually runs now, however there are two things preventing it from being used. The first is a number of leaks in the air piping; probably easy but time-consuming to fix. The second is that our overhead needs to be rebuilt to allow for operation of equipment with pantographs; until that happens you probably won't see much of the "Joe," the South Shore interurbans or the IC MU cars.

Frank Hicks

Preserved North American Electric Railway Cars
F-Hicks@wiu.edu

Perhaps our overhead will allow pantographs in the future. Aside from that, the larger problem with our Little Joe is the air compressors do not like to run on the 600VDC, the motors are tearing themselves up at the lower voltage. A few minor modifications, er, I mean corrections, and we could move it around more often on the special days. The air piping isn't too bad to deal with, just like any other loco with rotted pipes going through the floor plates.

Later,
Jamie

> The "Little Joe" (South Shore
> purists will insist on it being called not a
> "Joe", which was a Milwaukee Road
> term, but an "800") actually runs
> now, however there are two things preventing
> it from being used. The first is a number of
> leaks in the air piping; probably easy but
> time-consuming to fix. The second is that
> our overhead needs to be rebuilt to allow
> for operation of equipment with pantographs;
> until that happens you probably won't see
> much of the "Joe," the South Shore
> interurbans or the IC MU cars.


Illinois Railway Museum

> transformers have been removed. As to adding
> gear to make it use the low voltage DC, what
> is the plan? Construct some type of invertor
> to take 660 v DC and somehow make 11,000 v
> 25 cycle AC?? I suppose you could do this in

The motors are single-phase AC commutator
motors which will work with DC. One could
create a brand new control system using the
various series/parallel combinations and some
heavy grid resistors to make it a 600VDC
locomotive. A lot of work, plus the current
draw would trip out even IRM's mondo substation.
That's the one thing that one can't around:
no matter how you play with the volts and amps,
you still need a lot of watts to make a GG-1
move itself, more than most museums would have.

webmaster@bera.org

> Perhaps our overhead will allow pantographs
> in the future. Aside from that, the larger
> problem with our Little Joe is the air
> compressors do not like to run on the
> 600VDC, the motors are tearing themselves up
> at the lower voltage.

Huh?

Pete

>
A lot of work, plus the current
> draw would trip out even IRM's mondo
> substation.
> That's the one thing that one can't around:
> no matter how you play with the volts and
> amps,
> you still need a lot of watts to make a GG-1
> move itself, more than most museums would
> have.

YES! I believe our breakers are set to trip on overload at 2000 amps at a nominal 600 volts. That works out to 1.2 MILLION watts, and some days that is not enough. Long range plans include additional substation capacity for IRM.

Bob Kutella


68trolley@comcast.net

> A lot of work, plus the current

> YES! I believe our breakers are set to trip
> on overload at 2000 amps at a nominal 600
> volts. That works out to 1.2 MILLION watts,
> and some days that is not enough. Long range
> plans include additional substation capacity
> for IRM.

> Bob Kutella

Wow. That sounds like an awful lot of juice. It's amazing that with that kind of power available you still need more!

I know nothing of the inner workings of a GG-1 but would it be possible to only power one axle? Just to move itself around for special events of course? (probably a crazy question!)


SJHussar@aol.com

> I know nothing of the inner workings of a
> GG-1 but would it be possible to only power
> one axle? Just to move itself around for
> special events of course? (probably a crazy
> question!)

Maybe it's me (and heaven knows I am on the side of running your equipment) but what is the fascination of going through all that effort and money to observe a crippled locomotive creep around in a fashion that in no way represents what it was. Maybe in our spare time we could put a traction motor or two in the tender trucks of a steam locomotive and if nobody noticed the trolley pole we could go cruisin' down the line and save all that FRA work ... and burn up our trash to boot!


lamontdc@adelphia.net

> Wow. That sounds like an awful lot of juice.
> It's amazing that with that kind of power
> available you still need more!

Well, we have about five miles of mainline railroad, and perhaps almost two miles more in the form of a local loop and yard and terminal tracks, under wire. Every year, on July 4th, we put on a special event, the Trolley Pagaent. About 35 cars come out and operate for this parade, including some mu trains of interurbans and el cars. It is quite a sight, a lot of work to set up, and it requires radio communication and a 'load supervisor' in the substation to synchronise and orchestrate the movements. Some other special events on our operating schedule require a lot of 'transporation', with up to nine separate sets of equipment being dispatched and operating. Typically six or more may be electrically operated and you need to avoid all of them trying to start from a standstill at once. A nice problem to have!

Bob Kutella


68trolley@comcast.net

Bob:

Since I assume you have demand metering, what does a special event do to your power bill? We have a policy at PTM of trying to use our low powered cars when we have multiple car operation, both to limit the load on our aging substation and to reduce the demand component of our power bill. It has worked rather well.

> Well, we have about five miles of mainline
> railroad, and perhaps almost two miles more
> in the form of a local loop and yard and
> terminal tracks, under wire. Every year, on
> July 4th, we put on a special event, the
> Trolley Pagaent. About 35 cars come out and
> operate for this parade, including some mu
> trains of interurbans and el cars. It is
> quite a sight, a lot of work to set up, and
> it requires radio communication and a 'load
> supervisor' in the substation to synchronise
> and orchestrate the movements. Some other
> special events on our operating schedule
> require a lot of 'transporation', with up to
> nine separate sets of equipment being
> dispatched and operating. Typically six or
> more may be electrically operated and you
> need to avoid all of them trying to start
> from a standstill at once. A nice problem to
> have!

> Bob Kutella


artschwartz@sprintmail.com

A couple of years ago I had the privilege of taking in the July 4th event, and I'll never forget it! Be assured that all the work that goes into this exhibition is very well worth it! Your collection is remarkable, and so is the excellent condition of so much of it.

One of the most exhilarating features was being able to ride on one of the streetcars at full speed, which says volumes about the condition of your equipment and the 5-mile roadbed on which it runs. (The same kind of experience I also found at the East Troy Electric Railroad.) So often I've found that museum trolleys have to creep along, never being able to perform as they were meant to do. So thanks to all the IRM - and East Troy - people whose dedicated work makes for outstanding enjoyment for all visitors!