Eastern Railroad Discussion > Can a GG-1 still run on the North East Corridor?

I know they have mostly disappeared but did they change the voltage on the Northeast corridor? I have heard that the voltage change was the reason for getting rid of the famous Pennsylvania GG-1. Do any of these engines still survive or have they all been scrapped? If one survived,I wonder if it could still run on it's former line.

There's a few left. I've seen two myself, one at Elkhart IN and one at the Illinois
Railway Museum in Union IL.

Googling on GG-1 voltage says they were desgned for 11kV at 25Hz, which is what is still in use Washington-NYC. The two main problems for the GG-1, as I understand it, right now are the fact that the transformers are bathed in PCB oil -- which means serious hazmat problems if you need to do anything with the transformers, and the fact that those costs plus the costs of doing anything else electrically to them price restoration out of reach.

The GG-1 would not be ergonomicly acceptable to engineers anymore.
The GG-1's were sidelined due to extreeme frame cracks.
The GG-1's Lack HEP to power todays coaches.
The GG-1's were not designed to handle todays voltage other than 11.5 Kv at 25 Hz

And the cosmetically restored PRR 4935 at
the RR Museum of PA in Straburg.

Dave
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=920


> There's a few left. I've seen two myself, one at
> Elkhart IN and one at the Illinois
> Railway Museum in Union IL.

---

An operational GG-1 could still run. I don't know if any are still operational, though. As mentioned above, there was a PCB problem so the interiors were stripped of transformers. If you could restore the locomotive and there were no structural problems a GG-1 could still run, in theory.

NO a GG1 could not run on today's Northeast Corridor unless major major modifications were made.

The GG1 electrical systems were all based on 11,000 volt 25-cycle AC power from the catenary. The 25-cycle AC power was common for railroad electrifications in the first half of the 20th century. "Commercial frequency" 60-cycle per second (60 hertz) power was not used for railroad electrifications because the technology did not exist to convert (manage) that high of a frequency onboard locomotives.

Today's Northeast Corridor catenary supplies 25,000 volt 60-cycle AC power (i.e., "commercial frequency" power).

If you took one of those "runnable" GG1s and lifted the pan up to today's Northeast Corridor wires ... PPPppppFFFFFfffffTTTTTttttt zzzzzttttTTTTT!

Could a GG1 be converted to operate on today's 25K 60-hertz power? Sure. It all depends on how many millions of $s you want to spend converting a 1930's technology locomotive into something which is 70 years different.

You CAN do this today with modern power electronics. Basically, you take the 60 Hz input, convert it to DC, then have an inverter to change from DC to AC, at whatever frequency you want. So you set the inverter to deliver AC 25 Hz electricity. Throw in a transformer to step down the voltage (you could also do this when the electricity is DC using another converter) and you're good to go.

The only issue is available space inside the locomotive for this gear.

Jaap Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The GG-1 would not be ergonomicly acceptable to
> engineers anymore.
> The GG-1's were sidelined due to extreeme frame
> cracks.
> The GG-1's Lack HEP to power todays coaches.
> The GG-1's were not designed to handle todays
> voltage other than 11.5 Kv at 25 Hz


[null] Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Googling on GG-1 voltage says they were desgned for
> 11kV at 25Hz, which is what is still in use Washington-
> NYC. The two main problems for the GG-1, as I understand
> it, right now are the fact that the transformers are
> bathed in PCB oil -- which means serious hazmat problems
> if you need to do anything with the transformers, and the
> fact that those costs plus the costs of doing anything
> else electrically to them price restoration out of reach.


Japp and [null] said it best so far.

The comment about GG1s not being ergonomically acceptable to engineers anymore shows that Jaap has been in a GG1 cab. For their size, the cab was incredibly cramped. To get from any of the four side access doors into either cab required the crew to flip the seats forward! Anyone of "industrial size" wouldn't make it. Going from engineer's side to fireman's side (fireman in an electric locomotive?) was an adventure on account of the structural members. The two couldn't even see each other when seated! Going through the nose door wasn't any better.

Amtrak had to use generator cars when GG1s operated with Amfleet or upgraded Heritage Fleet cars. I don't know how many they had. These were built from the same ex-US Army kitchen cars which Amtrak rostered at least 30 of the 1300 series "shorty" single door baggage variety.

Age and hazmat concerns finally sidelined them after almost 50 years of service (first built in 1934 for PRR and last retired in 1983 by NJT). There are at least a dozen GG1s preserved out there but none in operational condition. Some, like the 4859 in Harrisburg, PA, have residual contamination that still has to be removed.

Any electric running the entire length of the modern NEC has to contend with three voltage and frequency combinations; Washington to New York (the phase break is either at Sunnyside or New Rochelle): 11KV @ 25 Hz, New York to New Haven (Metro North): 12KV @ 60Hz and New Haven to Boston: 25KV @ 60Hz.

-PRR 5711

scannergeek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You CAN do this today with modern power
> electronics. Basically, you take the 60 Hz input,
> convert it to DC, then have an inverter to change
> from DC to AC, at whatever frequency you want. So
> you set the inverter to deliver AC 25 Hz
> electricity. Throw in a transformer to step down
> the voltage (you could also do this when the
> electricity is DC using another converter) and
> you're good to go.
>
> The only issue is available space inside the
> locomotive for this gear.

2 issues: You forgot the cost as some of the conversion gear would need to be custom fabricated.

This is off topic, but I wanted to respond to the previous poster's handle: 5711.
West Lafayette, Ohio; July 31, 2004

http://www.transitspot.com/gallery/Buckeye-Limited-and-Dennison-TrainFest-1/04_07_31_003

---

To return to topic, here's a southbound Amtrak train photographed from the South Street Bridge, Philadelphia, on November 6, 1974

http://community.webshots.com/photo/28536790/28543576tpkhkkbeLX

---

"Today's Northeast Corridor catenary supplies 25,000 volt 60-cycle AC power"

Like they said: that's just east of New Haven.

Only one still has a transformer and that might be the one that was air blast cooled. I don't know if that is Old Rivets, #4800, or not but that would make sense. Besides the power change that never happened they were retired because the frames were cracking.

If one of the extant G's could be found with a frame that is not cracked then it might be possible to restore one for purposes of excursion service. All sorts of things are possible electrically. If one could get the guts of a scrapped E60CH it's possible the 6 motor thyrister wiring could be adapted to the G's 12 motors (or just use half of them). The GG1 motors should digest clean DC ok although I can't say for certain about the light-dimmer like output of the E60 thyrister system.

However it's also possible to have a new transformer made to the pattern of the original. It may be a stretch but this could even be something done by amateurs given a few people who know what they're doing and could obtain winding equipment. It is just laminations and wire after all. With experts directing them it could be done. The rest is just tap changer contactors on the outside. As for the motors I don't think there's anything out of the ordinary about them and they can be overhauled and/or rewound as needed. It just takes money. Yes, probably a lot but I don't see why it should be worse than restoring a steam locomotive. That's if you can find one with a decent frame and the present owners consent of course. If the frames are all bad then some serious big time welding and annealing are called for.

Now here is a question I will throw out. Assume there was never any plan to change the power. And assume the GG-1 frames were as solid as the day they were built. Could they still cut the mustard today? Seems like they could outperform the E60's (maybe not in raw TE at low speeds but overall in their intended services) But how does a G stack up against an AEM7 or ALP44 etc? They seem to have shown themselves to be pretty decent machines.

filmteknik Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But how does a G stack
> up against an AEM7 or ALP44 etc? They seem to
> have shown themselves to be pretty decent
> machines.

One G could outperform two AEM7's.

I rode a charter in 1976 on which Old Rivets pulled an E60 (HEP only, no contribution to moving the train) and 22 cars. Acceleration out of 30th Street Station was surprisingly robust.

The G operated better than it looked.

http://community.webshots.com/photo/28536790/28679539lFcxHAFBIM

---

and here's a visual example: southbound Champion photographed from under the South Street Bridge, Philadelphia, on April 24, 1976

http://community.webshots.com/photo/28536790/28678536HFhcbDKKNg

---

5711 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jaap Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The GG-1 would not be ergonomicly acceptable
> to
> > engineers anymore.
> > The GG-1's were sidelined due to extreeme
> frame
> > cracks.
> > The GG-1's Lack HEP to power todays coaches.
> > The GG-1's were not designed to handle todays
>
> > voltage other than 11.5 Kv at 25 Hz
>
>
> Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Googling on GG-1 voltage says they were
> desgned for
> > 11kV at 25Hz, which is what is still in use
> Washington-
> > NYC. The two main problems for the GG-1, as I
> understand
> > it, right now are the fact that the
> transformers are
> > bathed in PCB oil -- which means serious
> hazmat problems
> > if you need to do anything with the
> transformers, and the
> > fact that those costs plus the costs of doing
> anything
> > else electrically to them price restoration
> out of reach.
>
>
> Japp and said it best so far.
>
> The comment about GG1s not being ergonomically
> acceptable to engineers anymore shows that Jaap
> has been in a GG1 cab. For their size, the cab
> was incredibly cramped. To get from any of the
> four side access doors into either cab required
> the crew to flip the seats forward! Anyone of
> "industrial size" wouldn't make it. Going from
> engineer's side to fireman's side (fireman in an
> electric locomotive?) was an adventure on account
> of the structural members. The two couldn't even
> see each other when seated! Going through the nose
> door wasn't any better.
>
> Amtrak had to use generator cars when GG1s
> operated with Amfleet or upgraded Heritage Fleet
> cars. I don't know how many they had. These were
> built from the same ex-US Army kitchen cars which
> Amtrak rostered at least 30 of the 1300 series
> "shorty" single door baggage variety.
>
> Age and hazmat concerns finally sidelined them
> after almost 50 years of service (first built in
> 1934 for PRR and last retired in 1983 by NJT).
> There are at least a dozen GG1s preserved out
> there but none in operational condition. Some,
> like the 4859 in Harrisburg, PA, have residual
> contamination that still has to be removed.
>
> Any electric running the entire length of the
> modern NEC has to contend with three voltage and
> frequency combinations; Washington to New York
> (the phase break is either at Sunnyside or New
> Rochelle): 11KV @ 25 Hz, New York to New Haven
> (Metro North): 12KV @ 60Hz and New Haven to
> Boston: 25KV @ 60Hz.
>
> -PRR 5711
>


Good post. Of course the G's had firemen (that 4740 steam generator didn't work by remote control, and the mere fact that visibility was completely blind on each side further justified another man in the cab). Running in to NYC from New Haven was an adventure in the tubes and east side of Penn. Station. I cursed those engines when I worked them, but if I had just one railroad-wish I'd love to run one again. They were like submarines as far as cramped quarters was concerned. But they were rockets. I took a jumpered lite pair east out of New Rochelle interlocking late one night and couldn't believe how fast those babies maxed out. 100MPH+ in no time. Sweet memories....................

It sounds as if one could run again maybe by using parts from an E60 and retrofiting the engine. Would it be too out of the question for any railroad group to try and revive one for fantrips and celebrations? That would certainly be one of the most exciting re-creations that I could think of! And alot easier than resurecting a steam locomotive.If anyone agrees with me, please chime in! Thank you all for your great answers.

All remaining GG-1's have stress cracks in frame and will never ever run again. not with new parts or with recycled parts.

Jaap and others have made it plain that the GG-1's will
NOT operate again anywhere. The transformers were removed
from all of the ones that were donated or saved. Just
about everything on them is obselete and it has been over
20 years since any of them had a pan up on live wire.
They were hotter than hell in the summer and like an ice
box in the winter, drinking water sometimes would freeze
up in the cab on a really cold night and the engine crew
had to really dress warm on them.
On the other hand, they were generally dependable, rode
quite well and ran well. There were some problems with
them between New York and New Haven due to voltage
problems, pantograph problems and other stuff but they
got over the road most of the time without any major
problems. It helped to know what caused the problems
that were unique to the former NHRR and how to correct
them.
They were generally un-comfortable to work on, quite
dirty and the visibility was about that of a steam
engine or a diesel with the long hood in front. The
steam generators would heat a monster train and generally
did not give too much trouble but on gaps and breaks in
the overhead voltage they had to be reset until the
wiring was modified to generally correct that condition.
The generator used a lot of water in heating some of the
big trains and that could also be a problem if the fireman
did not know enough to take care of it and plan ahead.
As for today, they can't go east of Sunnyside due to the
voltage change and I doubt if they could be modified
without a huge amount of work and money.
They were good engines and I am glad that I had a chance
to work on them but I did not mourn their passing, they
were simply worn out and obselete.
As for one of them outrunning or outperforming an AEM-7,
pure nonesense.
NW