Since I’m wore out after shoveling about 1-2’ of snow. I decided to sit down, relax and surf youtube. Came across this cool presentation of vintage electrics ranging from the PRR to NdeM. A few FL9’s make the cut as do some other dual and tri mode units. A few electric switchers which I always found intriguing are showcased as well. I bet those would be fun to kick cars with due to the instant loading. Enjoy!
You made me look with those double-stack cars in the background at what I think was LEMO. Of course with closer inspection…
I suspect no few electric switchers were actually slow accelerating. The PRR B1s were likely in that category – they put on a far bigger buzzing and humming show than their 15mph top speed would indicate, and their imposing front profile was impressive only while maintaining a substantially end-on view. Imagine being required to run one from Sunnyside to Wilmington on its own wheels for maintenance, and then perhaps have to run it back…
This little guy right here?
Not a world’s first of course but for India yes…
At the rate Indian Railways is moving they’ll end up beating us with our own doubles stack innovation.
Look at the extreme reach of that pantograph.
Are those containers in well cars? It looks like they are stacked two high on top of more conventional flat cars, although maybe with small wheels?
Is the advantage of double stack that great to go to the enormous expenditure to raise the wires that high?
Unless there were a lot of overcrossings that had to be raised, I wouldn’t think that adding a few feet to wire height would cost all that much. The vertical clearance needed for double stack can come in handy in hauling an oversized load such as a very large transformer.
Do Indian locomotives/crews in double stack service sound the horn continuously from origin to destination? Video sounds like it.
It is the entire cost of rebuilding the overhead support and guying system, which is likely a considerable percentage of overall electrification cost. This appears to be new construction (I don’t see evidence of the uprights having been ‘lengthened’) but I also don’t see footings for a ‘replaced’ older system (as you will on sections of the NEC in Westchester and western Connecticut where constant-tension is being constructed ‘between’ the existing bridges to preserve continuity of service).
I thought this might be 3000VDC which has among the lowest corona concerns. But Indian Railways was looking with Japanese technical ‘input’ into 25kV at 7.45 meter clearance, nearly 24 ½ feet. This is the broad gauge, so I don’t know if those are skeleton flats or truck frames visible, but the cars are said to be ‘regular flats’ – since no accommodation for shared weight in articulation is needed as with well sets, 33" wheels should be suitable.
They’re probably blowing the horns to celebrate, not warn people in stations. There are enough air compressors in those multiple units to keep the main reservoir pressure from falling… very much.
Stack doubles line capacity with no increase in crew capacity. If that is important to the government that is paying for the upgrading… there you’ll go.
Did anyone else catch the distributed power? I don’t know if the ‘caboose’ vehicle is for radio control or if there is block capability a la Don
That’s the Rats.
Originally designed to be coupled in pairs, which was (probably) a little less unstable. But useful in maximizing the length of cut in a given track at Sunnyside, or a whop-ton of units in the yard-engine pocket at Enola, in an era when that might be important…
You can really tell that electric locomotive designers of that era were thinking very much in steam terms.
The ‘little guy’ is the electric version of a 0-6-0T (not that an electric would ever need a tender), just as the GG1 can be thought of as an electric Challenger.
No this was a ceremony of the first revenue DS train on India’s new Western Dedicated Freight Corridor.
Indias Western Dedicated Freight Corridor with an OHL height of 23.25’ does look extreme as their locomotives are much smaller in height compared to ours. Yes those stacks are riding on flats with what appears to be 30" wheels. India prefers this setup as it utilizes more containers per train length, but there’s trade offs. They can’t run two high cubes on some of the electrfied lines. Some of the lines that aren’t electrified can handle double stacked HC’s. Net weight penalties per container due to, smaller wheel diameter and using heavier flatca
You have the analogy very correct for that era, but managed to laser-pick the only wrong example out of the batch.
Yes, the Rat was analogous to an 0-6-0 (irritating to modern eyes PRR used B for 0-6-0 and A for 0-4-0 as (Sam Berliner aside) a single-axle tank engine would need gyroscopes). DD1s were a married pair of 4-4-0s, the P5 was a bidirectional Pacific and the Os bidirectional Atlantics (K4 and E6 comparisons), the L1 a freight Mikado, and the R1 a stretched P5 with a little more sense than the P5b.
The New Haven had motors before the ‘GG1’ inspiration that were explicitly Pacifics back to back (some other railroads did the same), but the 2-C-C-2s not only predated Challengers (by two years in the case of the GG1) but were fully bidirectional with the minimum weight on ‘noncarrying wheels’ for a given chassis length.
Note I avoid any analogy with those L5 ‘passenger Mikados’. It is difficult to imagine getting so many things wrong in one design.
I’ll remember to call 3985 a “steam G” if I ever make it to Wyoming, just to see what happens…
Wouldn’t those ‘American Crocodiles’ be more accurately described as an “electric Duplex”? They seem to be a 2-4-4-2 instead of a 2-8-2.
Their centre cab section looks just like the B1’s entire body, I wonder if it has the same measurements?
You might get to call it a steam “GG” but the Challenger isn’t bidirectional…
In any case UP had steam 2-C-C-2s that were far better ‘steam Gs’ (albeit at only about half the horsepower per unit)…
Yes, and if there had been any need for a duplex Mike there would be your prototype – note though that in that era PRR assigned the Mikado class letter to them. It’s the rigid wheelbase that is the biggest issue. Had the chassis been hinged a la DD1, the ghastly tendencies would have been greatly reduced even with 80" drivers and almost no high-speed restoring stability to match.
I never thought to look. Sure looks like it, though…
The locomotives that Westinghouse built for the Milwaukee in 1919-20 were Pacifics back to back with a 2-C-1+1-C-2 wheel arrangement. These locos didn’t like sharp curves, so the Milwaukee actually split one as an experiment.
The GE locomotives built for CUT in 1929 were 2-C+C-2s.
I woul
Found this rare film of a GM6C testing on the NEC for Conrail… Oh what could’ve been…
Some more classic electro-motive action from the NEC.