Greetings;
In some topic here someone flatly said that EMD didn’t make electric locomotives. I knew that wasn’t true, but couldn’t find any info to refute that statement. Today another post pointed me to the GF6C of the former BCRail. I know I have seen pictures of other EMD electrics of recent vintage.
Can anyone give me some info, or pointers to info, about electric locomotives built by EMD?
Thanks,
Dennis
Perhaps the most famous ‘regular’ EMD electrics (leaving out the Rc-4-derivative AEM-7s) were the pair of demonstrators built in the mid-'70s: GM6C #1975 and GM10B #1976. As noted, these used ASEA traction gear (at that time European components were very exotic!). There wasn’t much call for modern freight electrics at the time, and PC/Conrail weren’t particularly in the market – essentially the only market in the United States – for new freight-only locomotives (if anything, they already had a glut of GG1s, E-44s and E33s, etc., and they were already running extensive diesel consists on the wired trackage because it was more flexible to do so)
I dimly remember that the GM10B had some kind of running-gear difficulties, and the 6C was not particularly kind to the track… certainly wasn’t as good as the decades-older G in that respect. We didn’t particularly like the appearance of the locomotives at the time (call us spoiled by Loewy streamlining!)
Add FL-9’s to that list
The GM10B and GM6C were gawdawfull heavy rascals…At low speed they “crabbed” pretty good…saw both go through La Junta, CO en-route to AAR/TTC’s Pueblo Test Track (then found out my camera had shutter problems, underexposed!)…
The Iron Ore Company of Canada also had a small fleet of SW1200MG’s that were derived from the SW1200 with a bank of rectifiers and related equipment replacing the 567 engine.
I thought the SW1200MG had an AC electric motor turning a DC generator hence the MG ???[%-)]
The Mohawk & Hudson chapter confirms the SW1200MGs are motor-generator locomotives (2300V@60Hz source). First manufactured in 1963; while solid-state rectification became more cost-effective before the last ones were produced (1971) the MG was retained to keep the parts and maintenance common.
The GM10B rode on three, two axle trucks of blolsterless design similar to those on the AEM7s. EMD built them for two reasons I can recall. First, is the GG1s were getting old and in need of replacement. Second, part of the legislation creating Conrail called for a study of electifying all the way to Pittsburgh (I have a copy of that study squirrelled away, somewhere…). So, EMD had a potential market to sell into, if the electrification came to pass. What actually happened was that Conrail decided that better overall utilization could be had if they canned the electrics and ran diesels instead. And, the study didn’t show much of a rate of return for electrification, so the EMD electrics became orphans.
On unintended consequence of running diesels under the wire was that they did not have the speed control equipment that existed on the electric fleet which “enforced” speeds governed by cab signal aspects. That fact played a role in the Cha
The reason Conrail did away with the electrics is that Amtrak raised the car mile rate for using the NEC to several times the normal rate. That made it too expensive for Conrail to move the freight on the NEC, so all of the traffic that could be moved over to the Reading/LV tracks through Pennsylvania and New Jersey was moved off of Amtrak’s rails. Then of course it was far too expensive to electrify the new route, and it made no sense to keep 5000 HP E44a’s for local service. Not to mention the problems with the PCBs in the transformers of the GG1s, E44s, E33s, and E40s.
EMD builded the AEM 7s
It wasn’t only Penn Central that prompted EMD’s two demonstrators (which I remember seeing at McCook–the track parallel to the IHB was strung with wire for a long time thereafter).
Other railroads (or maybe it was just the AAR) were studying the feasibility of electrifying some of the high-density main lines of the time (UP was often mentioned), but it was deemed impractical since electric locomotives wouldn’t be able to go just anywhere. Keep in mind that the mid-1970s was when oil prices first took off (gasoline roughly tripled in price at the pumps relatively quickly, and diesel probably went up just as suddenly). I wonder how the study would have gone given the density of traffic on these lines today.
UP seriously considered electrifying the Ogden - Green River stretch during the early 1970s. They actual installed about a mile of catenary near Kaysville UT which they electrified (voltage olnly - no current) so that they could test the impacts of electrification on their communication equipment and signalling.
dd
Hello all,
I’m a young fellow and I’ve found myself infatuated with the GM6C and GM10B. If anyone knowledgeable is still active here, I would love to learn more about these precious locomotives.
The GM10B could be considered as 1.5 AEM-7’s with different gearing and cab.
I’m glad at least something successful came from the two demonstrators, being the AEM7 tech. I’ve read up on some pretty contradictory experiences with these locos describing how they ran, some sources state the GM10B in particular rode remarkably smooth on poor trackage with its 3 bogies while others mention it rode quite roughly. B-B-B is very rare in North America anyways. It’s all fascinating stuff!
I don’t know if I fit this description but…
Hope this helps:
Preston CookEMD Locos016 by John W. Barriger III National Railroad Library, on Flickr
Neat Stuff!
Regards, Ed
Thank you Ed, this is incredible!! Appreciate it, and you do fit my description!!
Found this:
And this from our own Trains:
Apparently only two GM6Cs were built?
Source:reddit
That’s only one GM6C. That was the el cheapo alternative, sharing the DC traction motors and other components of the SD40-2 to reduce overall expense. One sees this strategy much more rigorously described in the Garrett ‘dual-mode-lite’ research that followed a few years later.
The GM10B, the other ‘white wonder’, was far more technologically sophisticated. This involved much more technology transfer from ASEA; unlike the AEM-7s these were AC motors and drive, and while the outer truck pivoting arrangement on long secondary springs was similar to that on the passenger motors, the actual truck design was very different (perhaps Dave Goding has specific distinctive competence on the details).
Note that when the actual opportunity to build road locomotives for a new electrification emerged a decade later, the el cheapo model was what served: the GF6C.
