Railfan.net Home Railfan Photos ABPR Archives Staff Safari Photos Railfan Links

Railfan.net Forums Railfan.net Forums Railfan.net Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please Sign In or Register. Sep 25th, 2017, 2:54pm
Categories •  FastIndex •  LongIndex •  Help •  Search •  Members  •  Sign In •  Register


GG1
   Railfan.net Web Forums
   Locomotives and Rolling Stock
   Electric Locomotives
(Moderators: Henry, ctempleton3)
   GG1
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2 3  ReplyReply     EMail TopicEMail Topic   PrintPrint
   Author  Topic: GG1  (Read 1569 times)
Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #20 on: Apr 19th, 2004, 2:21pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi Walt,
 
Correct about the MP-54's. LRV's have the same problem. You won't see two LRV's coupled head to head. You always have at least one car length between pantographs. The reason is that the Catenary bounces as the pantograph passes under it. If you had two pantographs passing under the same spot on the catenary in close proximity, you would lose contact with the second pantograph, briefly, and get a very nice arc as the following pantograph once again made contact with the catenary. This is a most undesirable condition, and is to be avoided. With the MP-54's you also had the option of separating pantographs with a trailer car, which has no pantograph.  
 
With electric engines, in the wintertime, both pantographs are raised. The lead pantograph acting as an Ice Scraper. The length of the engine, or the distance between pantographs, is sufficient to allow the catenary to return to normal after the "bounce".


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
CSX B40-8
Historian
Posts: 786
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #21 on: Apr 20th, 2004, 5:59pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

im not sure bout that Pennsy. Cleveland RTA has HRVs wit pantagraph power-ups and the 300 series,which are mated for life,have the pantagraphs at the end where both cars connect. i dont have any photos of these cars but next time i go to Cleveland,ill snap some just for ya. anyways,these pantagraphs stay up all the time.....no HRV in Cleveland runs with the pantagraph down unless its a dead roller. now when i say "mated for life" i ment they only have the control cabs on one side,which is why they stay connected as a pair. sometimes you'll see the 300 series units coupled to 100s or 200s but this is rare and they never stay connected long.

Logged

Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #22 on: Apr 21st, 2004, 9:20am »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

If CSX's observation is accurate, it may be a product of the difference between the newer Favely type pantograph and the older Stenson ( diamond) type used on both the GG 1 and the MP-54's. If the single armed Favely is able to move more with the wire than the Stenson type, then maybe the factors cited by Alan( Pennsy) are not as important.--- This is just speculation, however. Maybe someone with more knowledge of the limitations of pantograph operation can comment.

« Last Edit: Apr 21st, 2004, 9:21am by Walt_C » Logged

Please move to the rear and speed your ride-Regards, Walt
CSX B40-8
Historian
Posts: 786
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #23 on: Apr 21st, 2004, 7:53pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Dude ive seen what them pantagraphs on the 1985 HRV's can do. ive seen the wires jump up and down and the pantagraph simply moves with the wire....no arching of electricity or nothing. Cleveland's LRVs and HRV's bounce ALOT,and always bounce going over switches and bridges and the pantagraphs stay put.....its like that are glued to the wires. im not sure  of the manufactor that makes them pantagraphs,but they look like the ones off the E60CPs and E44s........

Logged

Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #24 on: Apr 22nd, 2004, 3:39pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

If the cars or locomotives were built after the mid 1960's, they have the newer type pantographs. The changeover from the diamond Stenson type to the several single arm types occurred at about that time. The 1958 PRR Pioneer III MU cars, which were the prototype for the later Silverliner series, had the diamond type pans. By the time the  first Silverliners, which were the direct result of the experimental operation of the Pioneer III's, were put into production in 1963, the switch had been made to the single arm type.
   Both the GG1 and the MP-54 cars, having been built long before the 1960's had the diamond type pans. Whether the single arm type follows the movement of the wire better than the Diamond type, others can indicate, but since we're talking about practices employed in the operation of the GG1 and MP 54, it is a possible explanation for why the newer equipment is sometimes operated with the pans closer together.


« Last Edit: Apr 22nd, 2004, 3:44pm by Walt_C » Logged

Please move to the rear and speed your ride-Regards, Walt
IronTie
Railfan
View Profile  

Posts: 104
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #25 on: May 5th, 2005, 12:14pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on Apr 13th, 2004, 4:24pm, Pennsy wrote:       (Click here for original message)
Hi All,
 
It should be borne in mind that the GG-1 had one air horn facing in each direction. All you heard was one loud, very loud, note, in the Bass range.  And then the engine was on top of you. The sound also had an interesting Doppler effect sound, and even more interesting was, because of the loud volume, the way the sound ricocheted off the buildings and hills producing multiple echoes.

 
 
Here is a true story about some  GG1 horns:  
 
A group of GG1s were at Naparano Iron and Metal Exchange in Newark to be scrapped.  A supervisor left the laborers doing the scrapping a note for them to remove the GG1 horns first, which were made of solid brass and quite beautiful.  Later he returned to find the horns in pieces in a pile, having been carelessly cut off with a torch, and now useless.  He confronted the workers, who replied, unapologetically, "you say remove. you not say save."


Logged
Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #26 on: May 5th, 2005, 2:08pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi FeTie,
 
Really sad story. But here is something I only recently learned. The air horns on the GG-1 were Typhoon air horns, the same air horn used on the SP # 4449 Northern Steamer, the Daylight. Believe it or not. I played back some videotapes to prove that to myself and sure enough, same sound. So, if you want to hear what a GG-1 sounded like, listen to the Air Horn of # 4449 Northern. Same sound.


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
IronTie
Railfan
View Profile  

Posts: 104
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #27 on: May 5th, 2005, 3:56pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on May 5th, 2005, 2:08pm, Pennsy wrote:       (Click here for original message)
Hi FeTie,
 
Really sad story. But here is something I only recently learned. The air horns on the GG-1 were Typhoon air horns, the same air horn used on the SP # 4449 Northern Steamer, the Daylight. Believe it or not. I played back some videotapes to prove that to myself and sure enough, same sound. So, if you want to hear what a GG-1 sounded like, listen to the Air Horn of # 4449 Northern. Same sound.

 
 
Thats an interesting fact.  I grew up in Princeton Junction in the 70s and your description of the GG1 horn is right on the money.  thanks-


Logged
ErieAtlantic7597
Historian
Posts: 5838
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #28 on: May 13th, 2005, 4:43pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

  There is a cadre of my younger compadres that don't seem to know that the GG1s were still hauling trains at express speeds,  to their last days. And they were almost fifty years old to boot. Speaks well of the way we used to build stuff.
   On one of my trips in the early seventys from Fl. back to New Jersey, I went by Amtrack. As I waited for my train in the station in Newark for the return trip to Fl., I saw this hulking engine heading for the track next to the high level platform that I was standing at.  
I have to say this, that when a GG1 came into a station, with a substantial train still rolling pretty good to and you are that close, it was impressive, awe inspiring, and frieghtening all at the same time. That was my first expierience being that close to the famous GG1. I'll never forget it.
 
           Take care,
 
           Bruce


Logged
CSX B40-8
Historian
Posts: 786
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #29 on: May 16th, 2005, 2:38pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

ive never seen a GG-1 in action but boy id love to see one haul ass with some Amfleets running an express service. to me,the GG-1's horn sounds like a beefed up Mack Truck horn or a scaled down ship horn. i did hear  a sound clip of one and it sounds pretty neat. just imagine a GG-1 rebuilt to meet our newer standards and slapped with either a pair of P-5s or K5LAs blastin for a crossing or station. oh man!! not to mention the installation of ditch lights!

Logged

Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #30 on: May 16th, 2005, 4:06pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi CSX etc.,
 
Not too difficult to accomplish. Check out the Mark I Video website. They have videotapes of the GG-1 complete with all of its sounds, horn included.
 
Play the tape back in stereo, with decent speakers and sufficient amplifier power, and you should have the entire picture. One hint, don't have the wife or other women around when you do it, or they will probably kill you.


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
CSX B40-8
Historian
Posts: 786
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #31 on: May 16th, 2005, 4:26pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on May 16th, 2005, 4:06pm, Pennsy wrote:       (Click here for original message)
Hi CSX etc.,
 
Not too difficult to accomplish. Check out the Mark I Video website. They have videotapes of the GG-1 complete with all of its sounds, horn included.
 
.

 
 
 
kool kool yo...will do. gunna check it out.  
 
 
Quote:
Play the tape back in stereo, with decent speakers and sufficient amplifier power, and you should have the entire picture. One hint, don't have the wife or other women around when you do it, or they will probably kill you

 
i take it you went thru that and found dis out da hard way eh? lol!


Logged

Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #32 on: May 17th, 2005, 12:30pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on May 16th, 2005, 2:38pm, CSX_B40-8 wrote:       (Click here for original message)
ive never seen a GG-1 in action but boy id love to see one haul ass with some Amfleets running an express service. to me,the GG-1's horn sounds like a beefed up Mack Truck horn or a scaled down ship horn. i did hear  a sound clip of one and it sounds pretty neat. just imagine a GG-1 rebuilt to meet our newer standards and slapped with either a pair of P-5s or K5LAs blastin for a crossing or station. oh man!! not to mention the installation of ditch lights!

 
   GG1's could, and did, routinely run at 80 plus MPH heading a train consisting of 10 plus heavyweight passenger cars. I'd like to see one of the newer electrics do THAT!
 
  And Erie Atlantic's description of getting "up close and personal;" with a GG1, in service, is right on. In addition to the factors he describes was being up close ( on the platforms at Phila's 3oth Street Station) and experiencing the massive appearance of those HUGE ( especially to a nine year old) smooth sides as the GG1 came into the station.


Logged

Please move to the rear and speed your ride-Regards, Walt
Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #33 on: May 17th, 2005, 12:51pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi Walt,
 
The last time I looked at a brochure for the Congressional running from NYC, Penn Station, to Union Station, Washington, DC, it was advertised as averaging 70 mph. That works out to speeds in spots in excess of 80 mph in order to average 70 mph.  
 
So, if you were standing on a station that was bypassed by the Congressional, it probably whizzed by you at speeds approaching 100 mph. With the horn blowing, that would have to be awe inspiring. The ground definitely shook.


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
RDG484
Former Member
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #34 on: May 17th, 2005, 12:52pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

on May 17th, 2005, 12:51pm, Pennsy wrote:       (Click here for original message)
Hi Walt,
 
The last time I looked at a brochure for the Congressional running from NYC, Penn Station, to Union Station, Washington, DC, it was advertised as averaging 70 mph. That works out to speeds in spots in excess of 80 mph in order to average 70 mph.  
 
So, if you were standing on a station that was bypassed by the Congressional, it probably whizzed by you at speeds approaching 100 mph. With the horn blowing, that would have to be awe inspiring. The ground definitely shook.

 
 
GG-1's were used also on Metroliner schedules.  You KNOW they had to run at 100+ MPH speeds then.


Logged
Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #35 on: May 17th, 2005, 3:16pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on May 17th, 2005, 12:51pm, Pennsy wrote:       (Click here for original message)
Hi Walt,
 
The last time I looked at a brochure for the Congressional running from NYC, Penn Station, to Union Station, Washington, DC, it was advertised as averaging 70 mph. That works out to speeds in spots in excess of 80 mph in order to average 70 mph.  
 
So, if you were standing on a station that was bypassed by the Congressional, it probably whizzed by you at speeds approaching 100 mph. With the horn blowing, that would have to be awe inspiring. The ground definitely shook.

 
 True, but the present day Congressional consists of lightweight Amfleet Cars---- In the early days, GG1's pulled heavyweight P-70 coaches---- BIG difference in weight.


Logged

Please move to the rear and speed your ride-Regards, Walt
Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #36 on: May 17th, 2005, 4:09pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi Walt,
 
At one time, the GG-1's pulled lightweight, stainless steel streamliners. You are right, it made a big difference in the speeds available. The Air Conditioning was also very nice.


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #37 on: May 17th, 2005, 4:18pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on May 17th, 2005, 4:09pm, Pennsy wrote:       (Click here for original message)
Hi Walt,
 
At one time, the GG-1's pulled lightweight, stainless steel streamliners. You are right, it made a big difference in the speeds available. The Air Conditioning was also very nice.

 
 That was later in the life of the GG1--- In the 1930's, one of the incentives for the development of the "G" was to create a locomotive that could pull heavy trains of those pre-streamlined P-70 coaches, at high speeds, without having to double up on the power as was necessary with the P-5a's. When the lightweight coaches came into use, it just made the GG1's job that much easier.
  BTW I remember, in 1962, riding on a train of the PRR's tubular coaches. A VERY interesting consist.


Logged

Please move to the rear and speed your ride-Regards, Walt
CSX B40-8
Historian
Posts: 786
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #38 on: Jun 3rd, 2005, 2:28pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on May 17th, 2005, 3:16pm, Walt_C wrote:       (Click here for original message)

 
 True, but the present day Congressional consists of lightweight Amfleet Cars---- In the early days, GG1's pulled heavyweight P-70 coaches---- BIG difference in weight.

 
 
has any GG-1s yanked any AmFleets before? and when did the Amfleet come out anyway?
 
imagine 3 to 4 GG-1s pulling a nice string of Intermodal and piggyback cars at 90mph.....man that'll be awesome!


« Last Edit: Jun 3rd, 2005, 2:31pm by CSX B40-8 » Logged

RDG484
Former Member
Re: GG1
 
« Reply #39 on: Jun 3rd, 2005, 2:58pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

As a kid, I've seen many times GG-1's in black and in Amtrak "Bloody Nose" pulling strings of Amfleets.  The catch is that they had to haul a baggage car converted to a generator car in order to supply power to the HEP-equipped Amfleets.  In fact, I once rode in an Amfleet consist pulled by a GG-1 running on a Metroliner schedule.

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3  ReplyReply     EMail TopicEMail Topic   PrintPrint

« Previous topic | Next topic »