A Facebook user shared these wreck repair pictures from PRR's Altoona shops from the 1950s. Most of them are classic cab unit diesels, but of interest on the second page are several pictures of the remains of GG1 #4876 after it was retrieved from Washington Union Station in 1953. The pictures easily dispel the popular legend that #4876 was cut into three pieces and then welded back together. Very little in the pile of wreckage even resembles a locomotive of any kind, let alone a GG1. It's also interesting that in the shop report the repair cost is listed at $200,000. (According to Wikipedia, #4876 was actually reassembled with a new frame and superstructure.)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/barrigerl ... jxMvm5lSTk

Well that explains why when I Iooked closely at the frame after it arrived at the B&O Museum in 1992 I could see no evidence of weld repairs on the frame. Basically salvaged things like gauges and handrails (maybe the transformer?) and built a new unit around them.

Not only are the secrets of 4876 revealed, but around it is shown the extreme sadness of the scrapping of J1's, L1's and similar steam.

I do wish 4876, this very historic example of her breed, would get some cosmetic stabilization. Poor B&O Museum has its hands full.

So would that make #4876 the "newest" GG1 since its frame and carbody were built well after GG1 production was completed? There might be a somewhat interesting preservation story to tell there about why many "rebuilt" locomotives were actually mostly new construction with a few components reused. (I'm thinking of early EMD E-units, F40PHRs "rebuilt" from SDP40FS, etc.

What a treasure trove of details in those photos, thank you very much for sharing!

73
RwC

Judging by what is somewhat identifiable in the scrap pile, it would seem to me that they rebuilt a locomotive around an intact piece wire from somewhere in the car body. That must have been a heck of a kit-bash.

Those are all very, very interesting pictures of wreck repairs, including the data sheets about each locomotive - when it entered the shop, repair cost, etc.

However, I don't buy for a minute that those are pictures of the cut-up GG1 4876. It makes no sense. Why in the world would they not have been able to salvage much bigger sections of that "motor", like the legend has told us all these years? Those shots of piles of debris laying around sure look a lot more like parts of a scrapped locomotive than parts of that GG1. While I agree that a $200,000.00 tab for "repairs" or rebuilding looks about right considering that pile of debris (that's a lot of money for 1953) I can't see that they needed that one GG1 so bad for service that it was worth the cost of building an almost new locomotive from that junk we see in the pictures. Where are the wheels? Where are the transformers? Where are the cabs? They couldn't haul those parts out intact? Like I said, I don't buy it.

Thanks for sharing these, I have nothing to add to these comments, EXCEPT: One thing missing from these photos is the gruesome discoveries that no doubt were made in some of these cases. I'm talking about arms, legs, fingers, and worse that would be exposed as the mechanical dept employees salvaged the wreckage. This was routine in our Denver shops, but we didn't see it all the time. It must have happened daily in a giant shop like Altoona.

"There are none so blind as those who refuse to see."

I was able to match up two large pieces with where they would have been on the loco, thanks to the lettering (faint but there). Those are, indeed, chunks of a GG1.

When it comes to 'rebuilding' it seems that the only thing that needs to stay the same is the road number. Change everything else but call it the same engine number.

I'd like to point out that the six photos of the GG1 parts are marked with the number of the locomotive at bottom right, and are official PRR photos.

Richard - The year was 1953. I'm not saying that the Pennsy wasn't getting rid of steam at that time, but I also wonder if Altoona might have also been fixing some minor damage to some steamers considering that the railroad still had quite a bit of steam in active service at that time. Just not convinced that these particular photos show steam scrapings.


Les

@Topfuel, I actually had similar thoughts. I wonder if what we're seeing is actually the remains of the original locomotive AFTER they salvaged everything they could to put on the new frame/carbody. It all seems to be cut up into convenient gondola-sized chunks, and possibly mixed with scrap from other projects. And you're right- there are no wheels evident.

Les, I'm certain those steam locomotives were being parted out, perhaps only for spare parts. As far as the GG1 goes, my take would be the components were removed, evaluated, and applied to a spare frame. It would be difficult to re-weld those cuts and make them virtually invisible as well as strong. I recall after the space shuttle "Challenger" was destroyed, a replacement ("Endeavour") was built from a spare air frame and similar components in storage at Rockwell. A good detective would go to Baltimore and get permission to investigate the sad old girl where she stands today.

I do believe I spotted the 4876's trucks and drive wheels strewn amongst other pieces.

What these discussions don't explain is the very visible welded seams in 4876's carbody as preserved. These were holding up fairly well the last time I saw the locomotive, parked in the Public Service powerplant yard in Hackensack.

Part of the discussion also should involve why 4876 wasn't just retired and scrapped. As I heard the story, Lloyd's of London was a principal insurer, and their analysis dictated rebuilding rather than replacement. Whether that's the same order of semantics as the rebuilding of 2-8-0s into modern 2-8-2s on the Frisco "for tax reasons" may well apply...

If you want to see examples of cutting and welding damaged carbodies, consider the BP-20, with north of $186,000 gold dollars in stated damage, which appears to have had considerable frame work done as part. Note the Altoona-paper shot of the locomotive 'as received'.