I was just taking a look at the GG-1 page on Steamlocomotive.com and found this bit of information on the IRM's GG-1:

"4927 has been stored indoors (Barn No. 9) for the past 5 years. In August of 1999 it received a new Brunswick Green/5 stripe paint job. It should probably be moved up in its current ranking. In 2001, the 4927 was run a short distance under 600 Volt DC trolley wires by using welding cables to connect the primary and secondary leads to the transformer. "

I was under the impression that all the surviving GG-1s were stripped out prior to retirement and that none were in any condition to be even close to operational. Does anyone know more about whether this is true or not?

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/GG1/
davelecount@juno.com

If this is so they should work out any bugs and make it an annual event. They would get people from all over to see or ride behind a running GG-1.

Tom Gears


Steam Railroading Message Board
tgears1@home.com

>In 2001, the 4927 was
> run a short distance under 600 Volt DC
> trolley wires by using welding cables to
> connect the primary and secondary leads to
> the transformer. "

As I understand it, the 4927 came to Union without transformer and switch group, but that another switch group had been obtained shortly after arrival at IRM (the switch group is attached to the transformer).

They probably wired several motors in series (there are two 380 volt series wound motors on each axle). DC would work n the traction motors but not the transformer, even it it was there. The air compressor is driven by an induction motor, which wouldn't work on DC either.

If I was close enough (West coast is a bit far), I would join and lend a hand to get this running.

PLEASE STOP spreading this rumor! After the GG-1 received its paint job in 1999, it was pushed out on the mainline for photographs, BUT it never operated under its own power!!! IRM does not run 11,000 volts...

It would require extensive modification and we have no intention of doing that.

beast@mc.net

> PLEASE STOP spreading this rumor! After the
> GG-1 received its paint job in 1999, it was
> pushed out on the mainline for photographs,
> BUT it never operated under its own power!!!
> IRM does not run 11,000 volts...

You'll probably want to get with Steamlocomotive.com about this one. Wes seems to have redone the GG-1 page within the past few months and that's probably when he added this bit of information. I'm sure if you identify who you are he'll remove it from his site.

davelecount@juno.com

Thanks, Dave...

I've already sent messages to 2 people there.

I don't know who sent out the erroneous information, but it could have started because of the pictures taken on the mainline. Someone may have assumed that it was under its own power and started speculating how we might have achieved that.

beast@mc.net

This is a pretty interesting rumor. If I remember correctly, several months ago there was a discussion on this board concerning how one would go about rebuilding a GG1 to operate. I was concluded that pretty much the only museum that would do that would be one with far too much time and money on its hands, a problem I know the folks on this board wish we had more often than we actually do!

It may not run, but it sure looks nice!


Frank@gats.com

I don't see why 600 VDC couldn't be used to power a couple of traction motors of the GG1. Probably would be enough power to run her without much of a trailing load on the IRM trackage.

It would take a little bit of experimentation, but I think would be worth it.

rickrailrd@aol.com

> I don't see why 600 VDC couldn't be used to
> power a couple of traction motors of the
> GG1. Probably would be enough power to run
> her without much of a trailing load on the
> IRM trackage.

> It would take a little bit of
> experimentation, but I think would be worth
> it.

Yikes. Where do I start?

1) The motors will need to be cleaned and inspected; if anything's wrong, they need to be pulled out. How do you access the motors on a GG1? By lifting the 80-foot long carbody straight up, with a huge travelling crane inside a gigantic shop building (see Middleton's book).
Easy for them, impossible for us.

2) You cannot apply 600V DC directly to a motor of any sort. The GG1 had an AC control system based on taps on the autotransformer, which is now gone. You need to create a whole new DC control system, then either replace the original controllers in the cab or screw them up. Can the original contactors be run on DC? I doubt it.

3) And part of the control system will be grids. Tons of them. Have fun mounting them inside the locomotive.

4) If we're going to apply power to the motors, we'd better have a working brake system. You'll have to replace the original AC compressor. And how many leaky brake cylinders and frozen levers and rusted out pipes does a GG1 have, anyhow?

5) IRM's trackage can handle a GG1, but its overhead can't. Want to install five miles of heavy-duty catenary?

But if you still think it's worth it, feel free to submit a proposal to the Board. However, I'm sure they will continue to feel it's much better to preserve the unmodified locomotive (sans transformer) than to start on some risky scheme of modification.

Sorry to be so negative. Getting so much as a streetcar to operate is a lot harder than it looks.

Randall Hicks (IRM)

How do you access the motors
> on a GG1? By lifting the 80-foot long
> carbody straight up, with a huge travelling
> crane inside a gigantic shop building (see
> Middleton's book).

There is an article in Trains magazine from 1973 about a PC GG1 that suffered a bearing failure near Lehman Place Jct. on the Harrisburg - Philadelphia main. PC realized that they could not move the locomotive to Wilmington, Phila, or Harrisburg, without causing much more damage. (As I remember from my breif reading of the article) The Strasburg was able to perform the work using their drop table in the steam shop. Perhaps it would be possible to do the same at IRM.

However, I think the museum's efforts would be better spent making CSS&SB 803 a member of the regularly operating fleet :-)

rrhistorian@hotmail.com

> Yikes. Where do I start?

> 1) The motors will need to be cleaned and
> inspected; if anything's wrong, they need to
> be pulled out. How do you access the motors
> on a GG1? By lifting the 80-foot long
> carbody straight up, with a huge travelling
> crane inside a gigantic shop building (see
> Middleton's book).
> Easy for them, impossible for us.

I'm sure two highway-style cranes (Link-Belt, Grove, etc.) of suitable capacity could do the job. Lift the carbody up, swing it aside and place it on sawhorses, send cranes away. Then when inspections and repairs are done, reverse the process. No doubt this would be expensive if the cranes had to come from Rockford or some place like that.

> 2) You cannot apply 600V DC directly to a
> motor of any sort.

You can to the traction motors but not the air compressor motor, blower motors, etc.

> Can the original
> contactors be run on DC? I doubt it.

You probably could because the main differences between AC contactors and DC ones are design considerations around the inductive effects of the AC, like extra laminations and shading windings in the pole pieces. DC more or less ignores these types of things. Even if it doesn't, shading windings are easily removed, and the operating coils can be rewound. Proper blow-out operation of the power contacts should be checked though.

The biggest problem with the contactors is that there probably aren't enough to construct a series/series-parallel/parallel set up and also have sufficient resistance steps for smooth operation.

> 3) And part of the control system will be
> grids. Tons of them. Have fun mounting them
> inside the locomotive.

Put them where the transformer was. When I looked in there you could set up a sizable poker game in the void.

> 4) If we're going to apply power to the
> motors, we'd better have a working brake
> system. You'll have to replace the original
> AC compressor.

Make a small 600 v DC/25 cycle AC chopper which puts out the correct voltage and amperage to run the air compressor.

>And how many leaky brake
> cylinders and frozen levers and rusted out
> pipes does a GG1 have, anyhow?

How is this different than getting any other piece of equipment running, like the NYC S-motor from Branford?

> 5) IRM's trackage can handle a GG1, but its
> overhead can't. Want to install five miles
> of heavy-duty catenary?

If you can run the Little Joe at upwards of 30-40 mph, you can run this, at the same speeds.

> But if you still think it's worth it, feel
> free to submit a proposal to the Board.
> However, I'm sure they will continue to feel
> it's much better to preserve the unmodified
> locomotive (sans transformer) than to start
> on some risky scheme of modification.

As I said, if I lived closer, I would join your outfit and try. If this one is made to run, it would be the only one ever to operate again, anywhere.

> Sorry to be so negative.

Don't blame you a bit; it would be a pricey and involved process. Worthwhile though.

>Getting so much as
> a streetcar to operate is a lot harder than
> it looks.

Usually, with streetcars, even if they haven't been operated for years, all you have to do is dry them out and apply electricity. This method isn't recommended for heavy usage though.

> However, I think the museum's efforts would
> be better spent making CSS&SB 803 a
> member of the regularly operating fleet :-)

I agree! I think there are a couple of very minor problems preventing 803 from operating right now, but they could be easily corrected. The "Little Joe" would be better for our operationg for many reasons: it wouldn't require an enormously costly rebuilding like the GG1; it is relevent to the Chicago area, and so would fit in with our other equipment better (we could even run it alongside South Shore passenger cars); and it does MUCH better than the GG1 on imperfect track, of which we have some. 8-)
The main reason that we don't run it, however (ignoring the fact that we could never find enough stuff to pull to put it to good use), is that our overhead wire isn't set up for pantograph operation. A few years ago we tried running our Illinois Central MU set, and managed to damage the pantographs in short order. We would need a lot of wire reconstruction.
It sure would be nice to see, though!


Frank@gats.com

Frank,

I just want to commend you on the outstanding job you have done. I was there on September 8, and thoroughly enjoyed the hospitality I received. If you are ever at the B&O Museum, I shall be happy to reciprocate for you or any of your fellow volunteers.

Kevin Gillespie

kevingillespie@usa.net

A GG1 should be able to run on 600vdc with appropriate modifications; after all, it is derived from NH's EP-3 motor, which was designed to run on both NH's 11kv AC and NYC's 600v DC. I'm sure a GG1 has AC-only components which would need either replaced or a DC-AC inverter superimposed.

That being said, what would you get? You would be modifying a museum artifact away from the original. You would get a GG1 moving, but on DC. 25 Hz. AC motors have a very distinctive sound when starting which would be lost on DC. The hum of the blowers would be different, and the performance would be different.

From a historical perspective the fear would be that the observed operation of the modified GG1 would be substituted for the much different operation of an original GG1 on 11kV 25Hz AC.

Like putting a diesel in the tender of a cold steam engine and pretending it's a real one. More subtle difference, yes, but still not the real thing.

The Electric City Trolley Museum Association

You could also make a chopper to make 25 cycle AC to run the traction motors (1/2 or full wave). And once you get above about 20 mph, the "AC sound" more or less dissappears.

Yes, this would be changing an artifact, but how much differently than regauging broad gage cars (like those from Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and New Orleans) which has already been done by various Museums? Halton County broad-gauged their L&PS car for the specific purpose of being able to run it on their TTC track.

How is this much different than putting a pantograph or trolley pole on an S-motor?

There are quite a few other GG1s around, none of which even have a prayer of ever running again.