Locomotives no Longer Have the Stamina of Their Predecessors

Bob

Unfortunately technology is moving at a much faster pace and product of all nature become obsolete much faster. When you think of it those older RR engines of the steam era and the GG1 really did have staying power

The GG1-s were running on borrowed time at the end.  They would not still be running today.

Rusty

I am sure there are still many EMD units running today on their 3rd rebuild.

The AEM7s before and especially after modifications were real work horses. They were more efficient that the old G's and were better suited for the shorter trains of the modern era. With a little sand, they were fast accelerators, good in commuter service. I hope their replacements will be as good over the long haul.

I loved the GG1s and miss these iconic machines but their time had come on many fronts. ...PCBs anyone?   

The AEM7 is not respective of the real EMD picture.  The SD40-2, and some others models don't have to apologize for anything...especially life span !

Our newly-acquired AEM7 No.915, built in 1981

Well, it did make it 34 years, that's not all that bad.  How many of you have 34 year old cars?

Look at the bright side. One more flying toaster off the rails.... In general, saving one for future generations is a good thing.

Someone, somewhere is saying "that is one beautiful little locomotive".

Hot Water stated it well. The iconic GG-1 was displaced by changing technology. GG-1 transformers contained PCBs; and that was not a good thing.

The little EMD F40PH's are 40 years old and still a kicking!

Heck the Big Boys only lasted 20 years.

For what I paid, I hope my VL-BB lasts as long.

Those transformers are stationary, not subject to the stresses of motion, rapid demand changes and potential collision damage.

Plus, a GG1 for all its impressive mass, is not very roomy on the inside.  A good part of it is supporting structure.  It's like being in a submarine, except with less room.  Pulling maintenance on them must've been a real joy.

Rusty

quote:

Isn't it ironic that the GG1 ran for 49 years and would have run longer if the eco-nuts didn't stick their noses in.

I could have sworn that I read that they were starting to suffer from metal fatigue as well. Here is a thread from Railway Preservation News.

I think 34 years is a good run for a fleet of locomotives that saw very heavy use. The ASEA Swedish RC4's for which the AEM7's are based on are still going strong in Sweden many are now pushing 50+ years old. That's as good as run as the GG1. Are SEPTA and MARC are still running theirs?

No gg1's are running anymore. They can't even be rebuilt to run because of the Pcb's. The  repair facility in paoli, pa. Became a super fund site because of leakage of Pcb's from the 40's till the end of the gg1's time. The ground was soaked with Pcb's from years of repairs. 

In the 1970s.to keep these locomotives running,  Penn Central and Amtrak would have faced the decision to either replace the transformers with dry type transformers or reprocess the existing transformers with a flush/retrofill and disposal of PCB containing insulating fluid. The latter alternative would not have provided the fire retardent properties of the Askarel/PCB insulating fluids  of the original design, beneficial to applications in confined and enclosed spaces as within the body of a locomotive. Dimensionally, the dry type transformer would have been larger than its fluid filled counterpart since dielectric strength of the fluid is greater than air and solids which would have made up the dry type design . If space constraints were a consideration and it appears that is true, than it might not have been possible to match the electric power rating of the original design with a dry type transformer design. Since the locomotives were about an average of 40 years of age when PCB regulations came about, the railroad had to consider the economics of investing in the retrofit recognizing the locomotives estimated remaining service life.  

The other choice would be to replace the fleet with new and imprived deigns, seemingly a good idea. With respect to the E-60 it didn't quite work out that way.

Ot is probably reasonable to assume that had the PCB issue not have surfaced in the 1970s, the G's probably would have continued to run for a while perhaps another 10-15 years depending on their physical and operational condition. 

With respect to utility provider transformers containing PCB insulating fluids continuing in service to the present, the regulations developed in the 1970s provided a ban on PCB production after 1979 and a requirement for users to implement a replacement and/or flush/retrofill  program for transformers and other electrical equipment then in service  that might contain PCB type insulating fluids at that time.

During the 1970's manufacturers developed and employed non PCB  dielectric fluids and materials  in new power equipment installed during that time period. Going forward. Utilities followed through on the required  replacement and/or flush/retrofill programs for in service units , certifying and documenting existing in service equipment so processed as being "PCB free" as defined by the regulations.  

Never uttered from my lips. Yech.  And as for the hideous Siemens replacements, double yech. They look like a minivans with pantographs. I bet it has cup holders and baby seats in it.

In responce to "where" the F40s are....

CSX has at least 2 or 3 of them for Executive train use. 

Grand Canyon uses them pretty much exclusively. 

PLENTY of commuter operations - Caltrain, MBTA, NJ Transit, come to mind. 

MARC still runs their AEM7s, although they always go in pairs "just in case" (want to take a guess at their "reliability"?") 

MARC also runs the HHP8s but not for long. Again, want to guess their "reliability"....

MARC is talking about or has placed an order for 10 more MP36 diesels to replace all electric locos. They still have a few GP39s (almost all I believe are ex-B&O). One GP40 red nose with Gyralight is the Northeast Corridor protect/rescue engine based out of Odenton. 

Plenty of F40 action in Canada!  Try riding the Canadian, a chooch not trusted to a bunch of GE clunkers !

Me, I have a 45 year old car. Runs great. I would drive it anywhere.

quote:

A friend of mine was an engineer on the NE corridor during the last years of GG1 operation.  He told me once that the shop in Wilmington, DE kept a bucket of transformer oil handy for the mechanics to wash their hands in since they liked it as the best cleaner available.

People didn't know.
The governor of NY once stated that PCB's were harmless, and that he could drink a glass of PCB without ill effect.

Me, I have a 45 year old car. Runs great. I would drive it anywhere.

And you're in a pretty small peer group.  My point remains valid.

I worked in the environmental Field when the PCB laws came out.  Most of the shops had a bucket of PCB oil for cleaning the grease off their hands and cleaning their tools.  They claimed it worked better then Go Jo and it would remove rust from their wrenches.

Originally Posted by Hudson J1e:

Me, I have a 45 year old car. Runs great. I would drive it anywhere.

And you're in a pretty small peer group.  My point remains valid.

John, of course your point remains valid. I agree with you. I was just kidding around. That's why I put the smiley face.

Interesting. I wonder if any of them came down with any problems from working with that stuff?

I'm still waiting for the problems coming from the asbestos on all our pipes in the basement of the house I grew up in!   So far... so good...

Newer isn't always better. I have had some cars that I would take in a heart beat over  most of the stuff being made now.

Let's see Metra is still running the F40PH 

Several Big Boys were stored serviceable until 1961 which makes a 20 year service record...You should be able to count that high IF you use both your fingers & toes 

From 1985 to present, CalTrain uses F40PH-2's.  Matt

Some technology's come out new and gets in cars before they are ready. In general I think new cars are MUCH easier to maintain. I grew up in the muscle car era and had a 71 Mach I until just a couple of years ago. Yes it was easy to work on it but the thing is it needed constant attention. Newer cars last 200+ thousand miles easy. Used to be if you 71 Torino had 100k on it you were fixing it constantly and you were looking for the next car. Now the check engine light comes on you plug in a scan tool and it tells you whats wrong..

I don't miss performing tune ups every 10,000 miles, valve jobs at 60,000 or rebuilding carbs on a regular basis. Cars are "easier" to maintain, but Oh so expensive...Like $160 headlamp bulbs and expensive "modules" that run just about everything on the cars today. $$$$$$$$ I'm thankful that I'm on the receiving end of repairing these wonders of modern science.

Earl Trygar

ASE Master Tech    

They are both 84 years old and running strong. Thousands of these Model A Fords have survived and a sizable replacement parts industry has grownup for these cars. In fact, the hobby is so strong that you can buy a brand new Model A Ford with parts that are interchangeable with the originals.

Antique cars, antique firearms and toy trains go together.

I ran the GG-1 in 1979-81.  Supposedly, the ELECTRICS were refitted with mineral oil.  As a side note, the traction motors on top of the trucks were susceptible to shorting-out on the Corridor during floods and storms on the Corridor.  Not to mention the seat stuffing popping up between your legs on 4800 "Rivets", the green toilets under the headlights, and the mold around the inside of the windows. I think some of you have a romantic picture of railroading...it's a dirty environment.  It's a wonder I do not glow in the dark!!!

Love the old model A but a car today is a incredible machine. Older cars were maintenance nightmares, with tires lasting just 12-14000 miles, tune ups every 8-10,000 miles, brakes, etc. 

I lease a car now every three years and the only maintenance done is a oil change, never anything else.