Eastern Railroad Discussion > Erie EL E-8 question.

Most if not all, of the E units I have seen do not have side windows.   Why?

I was always told that the high-maintenance portholes were replaced with fiberglass panels (in the mid-60's generally).

TJY

817 was the only EL E-8 to keep its portholes thru to Conrail.

Thanks.

Why are the portholes so high-maintenance?

Posted from iPhone



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/20 23:40 by Sp1110.

Target practice.

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Target practice.

Yep, you can't have a piece of glass on the railroad....it'll get broke sooner or later. 

I thought portholes were for ships. They keep water out.

Posted from iPhone

I remember walking the EL (Erie) main to Black Rock Curve (east of Port Jervis, NY) and hearing gunfire and something wizz by me. I got down low away from the track and yelled out that "bullets were wizzing by a hiker."  After a few minutes when no other projectiles were in the area I made my way back toward town. E units were running in those days! 

Well, for one thing, most of these units got new side panels at some point in their lives to replaces damaged or rotted ones, and not having to cut a new hole and put the window back in was much easier, especially when they served no real useful purpose.   I also imagine over time the window frames would rust out, requiring the purchase of new parts, which was another unneccesary expense. Where the portholes required to be FRA complaint glass?  If so, that would be another big expense, especially in an era when all E and F units were on borrowed time, and half the railroads were literally or functionally bankrupt.

I seem to recall something about SAL experimenting with aluminum sheet side panels. 

Union Pacific maintains the portholes on their E9As and E9B. Those locomotives look sharp.

Porthole window sashes are aluminum. They do not rust out. As said the panels rot out as they were made out of a Plymetal material.
RWJ


junctiontower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, for one thing, most of these units got new
> side panels at some point in their lives to
> replaces damaged or rotted ones, and not having to
> cut a new hole and put the window back in was much
> easier, especially when they served no real useful
> purpose.   I also imagine over time the window
> frames would rust out, requiring the purchase of
> new parts, which was another unneccesary expense.
> Where the portholes required to be FRA complaint
> glass?  If so, that would be another big expense,
> especially in an era when all E and F units were
> on borrowed time, and half the railroads were
> literally or functionally bankrupt.