IRM's GG1 in 2000. Looking good.

http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?june03/06-12-03/PRR-4927-IllinoisRailwayMuseum-17Sept00-MikeFarrell.jpg
ryarger@rypn.org

> IRM's GG1 in 2000. Looking good.

Dumb question:

Since IRM has catenary in place, could this GG1 be made operable? I'm guessing not as originally built but perhaps with smaller (lower HP) traction motors?



shawsinoly@aol.com

> Dumb question:

Not really, as this issue came up when someone posted a doctored photo of this GG1 with a computer-enhanced blurred background to give the impression that the locomotive is moving.

IRM has (correct me if I am wrong) 650 vold dc system that was used by most American trolley and interburban systems. Some mainline electification was done with this like the Milwaukee Road's western extenstion and the South Shore. I also seem to think that the New Haven used this for their pioneering mainline electrification. The Pennsylvania RR used a higher voltage AC system, something like 15,000 or 1,500 volts. I can't remember exactly, as it was a few months ago I read a book on the subject. Anyway, in its current configuration, no the IRM couldn't run it under their wire.

david.wilkins@bardstown.com

> The
> Pennsylvania RR used a higher voltage AC
> system, something like 15,000 or 1,500
> volts. I can't remember exactly, as it was a
> few months ago I read a book on the subject.
> Anyway, in its current configuration, no the
> IRM couldn't run it under their wire.

It was 11,000 volts AC. From what I understand, Amtrak may use a slightly higher voltage today -- I've heard ET (electric traction) department people refer to it as an even 12,000 volts.

Dan Cupper
Harrisburg, Pa.


cupper@att.net

> IRM has (correct me if I am wrong) 650 vold
> dc system that was used by most American
> trolley and interburban systems. Some
> mainline electification was done with this
> like the Milwaukee Road's western extenstion
> and the South Shore. I also seem to think
> that the New Haven used this for their
> pioneering mainline electrification. The
> Pennsylvania RR used a higher voltage AC
> system, something like 15,000 or 1,500
> volts.

11,000 volts 25 hz.

Getting a GG1 rebuilt to operate on any modern system, even if one were to somehow try and pump 11KV through the IRM wire, would not be for the faint of heart. Basically, the entire innards would have to be gutted, and modern (and not cheap) rectifiers/transformers substituted. All that, and we'd still have no guarantee that the frames would pass inspections, nor the traction motors, etc. In short, the project would be right up there with getting a major articulated steamer like an Allegany or Challenger running--possible, but unfeasible given a lack of places to run it.

However, if Bennett Levin were to win the lottery that I wager he doesn't play, and got a particular gleam in his eye......... <;-)

LNER4472-NOSPAM-@bcpl.net

If this GG1's like most others still in existence, it's either had its transformers removed or drained because of PCB's. This would be another barrier to operation. I think I've read elswhere the suggestion that the only marignally feasible way to see a GG1 "operating" these days would be to connect it to a trailing diesel to provide power to its traction motors.

> Not really, as this issue came up when
> someone posted a doctored photo of this GG1
> with a computer-enhanced blurred background
> to give the impression that the locomotive
> is moving.

> IRM has (correct me if I am wrong) 650 vold
> dc system that was used by most American
> trolley and interburban systems. Some
> mainline electification was done with this
> like the Milwaukee Road's western extenstion
> and the South Shore. I also seem to think
> that the New Haven used this for their
> pioneering mainline electrification. The
> Pennsylvania RR used a higher voltage AC
> system, something like 15,000 or 1,500
> volts. I can't remember exactly, as it was a
> few months ago I read a book on the subject.
> Anyway, in its current configuration, no the
> IRM couldn't run it under their wire.


davew833@yahoo.com

Am I correct that when the GG1s were retired, the northeast corridor was converted from 25 Hz to 60 Hz and thus even the complete ones could not run there again without major modifications?

ryarger@rypn.org

> Am I correct that when the GG1s were
> retired, the northeast corridor was
> converted from 25 Hz to 60 Hz and thus even
> the complete ones could not run there again
> without major modifications?

That was planned at the time the Gs were retired, but it never took place.

The GG1 Homepage
ebtrr@spikesys.com

It was planned to convert the ex-PRR in the NECIP reconstruction but was not done, probably because the money could be better spent elsewhere in the project. Of course the hardware is now 25 years older.

New construction (NHV-BOS) is 60 Hz as is the Hell Gate line. NJT's new construction is 60 Hz as well and MNCR from "SHELL" to NHV is 60 Hz.


Electric City Trolley Museum Association

With alteration to the basic electrical devices of the motor, probably yes.

The NH EP-1 thru EP-4 motors used similar AC traction motors and ran on both 11kv 25 Hz AC on NH, NYCONN and PRR, and 600v DC on NYC. Thus by installing 600v DC switchgear theoretically a GG1 could be made to run on IRM's power.

What alterations are necessary and whether such alterations to the historic artifact would be acceptable at a museum is another question.

Electric City Trolley Museum Association

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?

> That was planned at the time the Gs were
> retired, but it never took place.


ryarger@rypn.org

Edited to add volts:
New construction (NHV-BOS) is 60 Hz (25,000 volts), as is the Hell Gate line (might be about 12,500 volts). NJT's new construction is 60 Hz (25,000 volts) as well and MNCR from "SHELL" to NHV is 60 Hz (about 12,500 volts).

The PRR, and, I think, the Reading, are still 25 cycle, 11,000 volts.


TyburnRR@cs.com

> With alteration to the basic electrical
> devices of the motor, probably yes.

Isn't rebuilding a GG1 for 600v at IRM a little like taking a Jeff Gordon car and remotoring it with a Honda engine to drive down Main St for the 4th of July parade?

I would like to see a G restored as a "cab control". Put the diesels on the rear end in push mode and run her on the PRR at 80 or 90mph. It would look pretty convincing to me. Of course the frames and running gear are still a huge question. Come on Power Ball!

Tom in DE

S3261@aol.com

"Isn't rebuilding a GG1 for 600v at IRM a little like taking a Jeff Gordon car and remotoring it with a Honda engine to drive down Main St for the 4th of July parade?"

Absolutely, in some ways.

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.

I'm only 50 so I'm still learning :^).

Scott



shawsinoly@aol.com

> 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?

The *ALLEGEDLY* intact ones are 4800 (which, if the sources I heard years ago were accurate, still has cracks that make that dream impossible) and PRR 4917/Amtrak 4934, which at last report was up in Cooperstown, NY owned by the Leatherstocking NRHS along with Steamtown refugee GG1 Amtrak 4932.

Never say never, but I see the actual odds of getting a GG1 running again as extraordinarily long--unless someone's willing to strip one to the frame and rehab it completely, including possibly repairing frame cracks. I think the wheels and quill drives may be a problem as well.

LNER4472-NOSPAM-@bcpl.net