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 22nd, 2017, 8:29pm
Categories •  FastIndex •  LongIndex •  Help •  Search •  Members  •  Sign In •  Register


GG-1: Tonnage hauler
   Railfan.net Web Forums
   Locomotives and Rolling Stock
   Electric Locomotives
(Moderators: Henry, ctempleton3)
   GG-1: Tonnage hauler
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2  ReplyReply     EMail TopicEMail Topic   PrintPrint
   Author  Topic: GG-1: Tonnage hauler  (Read 720 times)
W.G McAdoo
Former Member
GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« on: Nov 7th, 2006, 2:00pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

     Most of us (myself included) regard the the GG-1 as a "passenger" engine, when, in fact, they also hauled tonnage, particulary in their twilight years. What do you think of the mighty G as a freight hauler? Do you think it was worthwhile to re-gear them for freight service?  Also, do you think that the G's could have lasted longer in freight service than they actually did? How do you feel about their performances as freight engines? From what I've heard, if you put enough G's on a frieght, they'd haul EVERYTHING......INCLUDING the YARD!!  What are your views and opinions on the GG-1 as a freight engine?  W.G.M.

Logged
Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #1 on: Nov 7th, 2006, 2:17pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi All,
 
Okay, who let John out of the Rubber Room of the Funny Farm  
 
Most GG-1's hauled FREIGHT. Remember there were 139 of the beasts roaming the rails. They didn't have enough passenger trains for that number. Even so, the PRR really liked the E-44 electrics for hauling freight. Still and all, I have videos of FOUR GG-1's hauling the ENTIRE freight yard. That 100 % short term overload capability was well used. Four GG-1's could deliver 40,000 horsepower to the rails for at least 15 minutes. How many Diesels would it take to do the same I am still in shock that candy bars, Baby Ruths, had to be shipped in a Reefer. Never thought that refrigeration was needed for chocolate covered candy bars. I have met fellows that had to unload box cars in the heat of the summer. Pass the ice water, PLEASE !!!


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
W.G McAdoo
Former Member
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #2 on: Nov 7th, 2006, 3:23pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

    Hi, Pennsy: "Rubber Room" ...I only WISH my room had RUBBER walls....I'd be able to stretch them at will to accomodate all of my train stuff!! Though I'll always think of the G's as varnish haulers first and foremost, I have no doubt at all that these streamlined, electrified dinosaurs could haul the HEAVIEST freight with no problems whatsoever. Yep, PRR certainly liked the 44's for hauling tonnage; I still recall them in Conrail blue out in the Jersey Meadows, circa 1981. While the G's looked perfectly at home at the head of any string of varnish, the 44's, on the other hand, shouted "FREIGHT"!!

Logged
silver_champion
Historian
Posts: 888
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
  77.jpg - 110682 Bytes
« Reply #3 on: Nov 7th, 2006, 4:18pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

If God wanted a loco for pulling anything, he would have a GG1. Move the yard.  four GG1 could move the city that the yard is in.


Image exceeds display size of 900 pixels wide. (110682 bytes, 950x684 pixels)


Click Here to View Image 77.jpg - 110682 Bytes


Logged
W.G McAdoo
Former Member
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #4 on: Nov 7th, 2006, 8:42pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

on Nov 7th, 2006, 4:18pm, silver_champion wrote:       (Click here for original message)
If God wanted a loco for pulling anything, he would have a GG1. Move the yard.  four GG1 could move the city that the yard is in.

      AMEN TO THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Logged
green_elite_cab
Historian
Posts: 1212
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #5 on: Nov 9th, 2006, 8:31am »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

yeah, its to bad Conrail halted electirc freight in 1981.  what was the reasoning behind that?

Logged





TAB
Historian
Posts: 1910
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #6 on: Nov 9th, 2006, 9:15am »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hey Posters…I used to like to watch the GG1s as they negotiated the S curves at Elizabeth, NJ. The earth would shake when they came by. As to the GG1’s demise, someone once told me that they developed cracks in their frames that resembled magnetic lines of force generated by their traction motors. I don’t know how true this is but I do know that their transformers contained PCBs which, due to EPA regulations, made repairs increasingly difficult and costly. Perhaps the PCB issue was also why Conrail opted out of other electric freight as well….Tom

Logged

Moderator...Scratchbuilding and Kitbashing
RDG_4-8-4
Former Member
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #7 on: Nov 9th, 2006, 3:29pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

on Nov 9th, 2006, 8:31am, green_elite_cab wrote:       (Click here for original message)
yeah, its to bad Conrail halted electirc freight in 1981.  what was the reasoning behind that?

Since electric locomotives were limited to running only where there was 11,000v catenary, and since most of it was on the Amtrak Northeast Corridor, and since Amtrak charged Conrail exhorbantant amounts for using their power supplies, they decided to do away with the electrification.  By using all-diesel, you could start out of someplace like Enola, and then go over to the mostly non-electric Reading (at least as far as where most freights ran) and vice-versa.  It was more cost-effective to avoid the Northeast Corridor altogether and use locomotives that can run all over and not just where you had overhead.  Besides, the SD40-2 and the C30-7 were at that time considered to be very fuel-efficient and cost-effective compared to the older diesels.


Logged
W.G McAdoo
Former Member
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #8 on: Nov 25th, 2006, 11:55pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

  ....it's now over 23 years since the last of the G's pulled down its pans for the last time......

Logged
Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #9 on: Dec 3rd, 2006, 1:54am »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on Nov 25th, 2006, 11:55pm, W.G McAdoo wrote:       (Click here for original message)
                 ....it's now over 23 years since the last of the G's pulled down its pans for the last time......

 
 Time Marches On--- ( I believe that was the title of an OLD news reel series)--- Simply put, the GG1 was the finest locomotive--- of ANY type--- ever built.


« Last Edit: Dec 3rd, 2006, 1:57am by Walt_C » Logged

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

Posts: 4586
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #10 on: Dec 3rd, 2006, 2:14pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi All,
 
What is needed is a modern day F. Nelson Blount, to fund and get a GG-1 back in operation on some excursion or short line. Bottom line is MONEY. Given sufficient funds and a driving force and you could have a GG-1 running once again, not economically, but running.


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
chuchubob
Historian
Posts: 885
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
  75_04-30_4868.jpg - 133489 Bytes
« Reply #11 on: Dec 7th, 2006, 2:22pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Westbound: Radnor, PA; April 30, 1975

http://Forums.Railfan.net/Images/Juice/75_04-30_4868.jpg
Click Image to Resize

Logged
chuchubob
Historian
Posts: 885
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
  79_03-21_4894.jpg - 75319 Bytes
« Reply #12 on: Dec 7th, 2006, 2:24pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Eastbound: Radnor, PA; March 31, 1979

http://Forums.Railfan.net/Images/Juice/79_03-21_4894.jpg
Click Image to Resize

Logged
silver_champion
Historian
Posts: 888
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #13 on: Dec 7th, 2006, 2:34pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

TAB, I never was at trackside at Elizabeth, NJ but on many trains there. I used to look out the window to see the GG1 pull trains around that S curve. I have been at trackside to see the S curve at Frankford JCT and at Darby Station.  To any trains there was a blessing

Logged
Henry
Moderator
Historian
Posts: 6115
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #14 on: Dec 7th, 2006, 5:03pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

I spent a little time on the ground at Frankford Jct back around 1993 (with permission!), but all I saw were Toasters with Amfleets. I would love to have seen GG1's in action.
 
Henry


Logged
Pennsy
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 4586
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #15 on: Dec 7th, 2006, 6:08pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Hi All,
 
Sign of the times, I'm afraid.
 
Spent the day at the Orange Empire RR Museum, Perris, CA. Spoke to some of the top brass about some GG-1's languishing in Northern NY state on a siding, just rusting away. They said that it would be impossible to get one of these engines for display in Southern California, even if the engine was donated to their museum. Price of transporting the engine to Perris, CA would break them. Incidentally, by way of their own shops, and volunteers, restoring the GG-1 to pristine condition did not present a problem to them  
 
As an aside, one mentioned that the 600 vdc they use for their trolleys probably could power the GG-1's traction motors. I reminded him that the GG1 had TWELVE traction motors. It undoubtedly would overwhelm their power supply. I also mentioned that if they only used six of the traction motors they just might get away with it.


Logged

Dyed in the wool PRR fan.
atlpete
Historian
View Profile  

Posts: 408
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #16 on: Dec 14th, 2006, 12:01am »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Nelson Blount? more like Bill Gates or Larry Ellison, sadly the prospect of returning one to operation is slim to none; the electrical supply, suitable catenary and physical plant, coupled with the transformer dioxin issues and difficulty of restoring one of these birds back to service after long term storage even at a indoor facility like the Pennsylvannia State Museum sounds as formidable as bringing a dinosaur back to life. Unless of course you could turn the whole effort into a massive pork project like Steamtown, somehow though, an equivalent effort around retired mainline motors doesn't seem quite as likely to fly, I don't think "Joe-Sixpack" gets as misty eyed over GG1's as say K-4's, M-1's etc  
Sad about those GG1's in upstate NY though, best chance they have is a very short trip to any on-line local museum in the area, if they are lucky.  
Help me out here if I'm wrong but the only operation in North America with at least the facility for restoring and running one of these beasts would be the IRM at Union? Think they have one too, actually thanks to their original fleet size and longevity the G's have a better than representive list of survivors anyway, Little Joe's have done well too, wish someone could have saved an EP-5 though.  


Logged
W.G McAdoo
Former Member
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #17 on: Dec 16th, 2006, 4:34pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify   Remove

      Recall the plot of "Jurassic Park"........bringing dinosaurs back to life?? Well.......if we could only find a fellow who is not only a GG-1 buff, but also, almost as rich as Donald Trump........ Man, could you imagine a FULLY-RESTORED GG-1 hauling a string of classic coaches up and down the NEC??  Smudge and blazes, that would make for one AWESOME, HEART-STOPPING SIGHT!!!! Hey, BTW....what IS The Donald doing these days??

Logged
Walt_C
Historian
Posts: 2934
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #18 on: Dec 18th, 2006, 8:45pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

on Dec 16th, 2006, 4:34pm, W.G McAdoo wrote:       (Click here for original message)
    Hey, BTW....what IS The Donald doing these days??

 
 He's firing people------on television.


Logged

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

Posts: 2463
Re: GG-1: Tonnage hauler
 
« Reply #19 on: Dec 19th, 2006, 3:19pm »
Quick-Jump   Reply w/Quote   Modify

Quote:
yeah, its to bad Conrail halted electirc freight in 1981.  what was the reasoning

 
I heard that there was a move afoot to increase the voltage in the wires, and the GG-1 would have been too expensive to upgrade.  Along with all of the other considerations mentioned here, like the PCBs and Amtrak fees.  I get the feeling that now GG-1s would have so many code violations they could never be run.  
 
Interestingly enough, the change in voltage never happened.
 
The GG-1s were astounding.  Again, like others have said, the ground would literally shake when they rolled by.  I rode a few when I was a kid, and that station platform would shake like crazy.  They also had this cool deep bass horn.  
 
Even Steam Lovers love the GG-1.  It was in a class all by herself.


Logged

Steam Locomotives have a tender behind!
Pages: 1 2  ReplyReply     EMail TopicEMail Topic   PrintPrint

« Previous topic | Next topic »