Pennsy Question

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

  1. to me, it seems strange that electric catenary on the former pennsy-line ends at Harrisburg. thus, on the mountain-section to Pittsburgh, electric traction would have had greater advantages over steam or diesel traction than in the flat country. does anyone know. Has the mountain-section to Pittsburgh (and the Horse Shoe Curve) never been electrified, or did the Pennsy or Conrail decide to de-electrify the line?

  2. does anyone know: have the GG1 been equipped with mu.?

2

  1. There is lots of books about this subject. The mountain section to Pittsburgh was never electrified, it was planned to but never materialized. True the electrics would have performed better than steam and for the passenger trains better than diesel.

  2. If you mean m.u. as in multiply with other engines then yes GG1’s could m u but only with other GG1’s, not with any of the other types of units. 3 or 4 GG1’s could be seen on freight trains, up to two on heavy mail trains.
    GG1’s could haul a heavy train pretty good but if it got stopped at a signal on a grade with a very heavy freight train they couldn’t get started so the Pennsy had pusher engines for starting electric freights, here the diesel electrics could start up a heavy freight better then the GG1, but for hi speed heavy passenger trains or lighter fast freights the big G’s could out do diesels easily.

3

@440cuin.

thank you for your quick reply.

martin

4

Money was the reason.

Adrianspeeder

5

they stopped in harrisburg i believe because harrisburg is pennsylvania’s capital and a large city. They ran more trains to harrisburg than what they did past Harrisburg to Pitsburgh and chicago. They electrified the most traveled areas.

6

…I suspect the bigest reason the electrification was stopped at Harrisburg was the fact it was constructed during the depression years and there was only so much money available to do such projects. I’m amazed they did that much during those times.
Riding behind a GG-1 was a pleasant experience…When it started the train it felt like it meant business and then it would bring it up to speed…90 or so and really move it out…Smoothly.

7

At the risk of sliding off topic, [:I] modelcar, how loud were those GG1s? I guess the coaches were reasonably insulated for noise? [;)]

Dave

8

…Dave: Riding in the car as I remember it there was no noise detectable from the GG-1…The main input from it to me…was how it pushed you back in the seat as it started to move the train…Riding east to get to Harrisburg the train would have been pulled by K4’s and there was a difference from it compared to when the GG-1 was connected at Harrisburg to continue the trip to NYC…

9

Thanks modelcar, [:)][;)] electrics seem to really have good acceleration…our EMU’s also seem to give us a little push…[:0]

Dave

10

Pennsy had the intention to electrify to Pittsburgh. But the country had the small black Friday in 1929 which dried up the funds. The great depression did in the plans to electrify to Pittsburgh.

11

The electrification to Harrisburg was completed in 1938, and as some have suggested the lack of funds stopped any further extensions. There was talk of extending the electrification to Pittsburgh to replace steam uo to and after WW-II, but with the advent of diesels electrification was thought not to be necessary.

Having ridden the Pennsy many times between Washington and New York I can attest to the ability of one GG 1 to handle a heavy train. I rarely saw more than one GG 1 on a passenger train unless it had more than 18 cars. The Congressional Limited in the 1950’s had 18 cars, and one GG 1 could handle the train, and still make the 3 hr 35 minute schedule.