# GG-1 apparently a name of a loco.. ( Pennsylvania?)



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

I lucked on a chat session tonight and with reference to a GG-1 Loco or line name mentioned... 

Chat lines run fast. Would anyone out there know more about this GG-1 train?

Thanks and Regards, 

GG


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, but why not google and see a lot of pictures. 

The GG-1 is made by several companies in several scales. LGB makes one that is semi-scale, MTH makes a nice one in 1:32, and USAT makes a beautiful one. They are not cheap. 

Very art deco.. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

The GG-1 is probably the most beautiful loco ever built. It was an electric loco built by Pennsy and primarily ran the Northeast corridor (DC to NY) mostly passenger service but some freight too. They were in operation for over 50 years. 

Look up GG-1 under locomotives - electric at http://railpictures.net
some good ones - 


http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/9/9/0/5990.1208497037.jpg 

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/0/7/9/4079.1196258400.jpg 

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/4/9/7/1497.1192647600.jpg 


-Brian


----------



## ralphbrades (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, even a poor boy from the wild high veldt of Rhodesia has heard of the GG-1. It is however interesting to note that all the models that I have seen that have been made -have carved wooden body work. I plan to be different and use model aeroplane technique and produce a frame and the plate it with ABS sheet.

This is a locomotive which annoys rivet counters -with of course *one *exception....


regards


ralph

Post Scriptumn: Can something be done about the spell checker as some of us do speak american(!)


----------



## Ltotis (Jan 3, 2008)

The GG=1 chassosis was based a New HAven RR desogn. 
LAO


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Thanks for the feedback and yes VERY art deco.... 

Shame, it's missing a boiler...












Regards, 


Gavin


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By ralphbrades on 01/25/2009 2:14 AM
Yes, even a poor boy from the wild high veldt of Rhodesia has heard of the GG-1. It is however interesting to note that all the models that I have seen that have been made -have carved wooden body work. I plan to be different and use model aeroplane technique and produce a frame and the plate it with ABS sheet.

This is a locomotive which annoys rivet counters -with of course *one *exception....


regards


ralph

Post Scriptumn: Can something be done about the spell checker as some of us do speak american(!)




Ya lost me! Whuts wronger 'bouts der speel cheeker? Us'n merrycans doan seam tuz gots da probs wid it.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

LOL


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

"Whuts wronger 'bouts der speel cheeker? Us'n merrycans doan seam tuz gots da probs wid it." 

That's because, judging from some of the messages, most of us can't find it.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By GG on 01/25/2009 10:51 AM
Thanks for the feedback and yes VERY art deco.... 

Shame, it's missing a boiler...












Regards, 


Gavin 




Ergh, they did have boilers.

The last steam pre full switch to HEP Amtrak train run in 1982 was pulled by a GG1 if I am not mistaken.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

It wasn't that they lacked boilers for HEP... there are only 2 things wrong with the GG-1 

1) they are not powered by a boiler. 
2) they are not powered by a boiler. 

I realize that those points are the same, but it is such an important point, that it bears repeating.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 01/25/2009 12:48 PM
It wasn't that they lacked boilers for HEP... there are only 2 things wrong with the GG-1 

1) they are not powered by a boiler. 
2) they are not powered by a boiler. 

I realize that those points are the same, but it is such an important point, that it bears repeating. 








Har... Har.... 

If it doesn't have a boiler..... was it a loco?


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Some have called it such, but those of us that love trains know that it was the designer that was loco.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

That is my point, they had boilers, not HEP. One of a few reasons they were retired. 

And if you stop and really think about it, they were in fact powered by boilers.... 










My late grandfather did some work for the plans to electrify the PRR from Philly to Pittsburgh. This was in the late 1920s, and a turn in the economy spelled the end for that.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

I tried to look up how this design worked however did not get very far. So correct or wrong: 

Electricity drives electric motors which in turn drives the power train 

OR 

Electricity heats the boiler. Steam produced drives the power train ( effectively electricity replaces the use of coal or diesel ) 

If this unit uses steam as the prime driver for the power train then indeed it is not loco... 

gg


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

The former... electricity drives the electric motors.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 01/25/2009 1:59 PM
The former... electricity drives the electric motors.













Glorified electric truck... 

Not a loco...


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

I share your sentimate, but the GG1 does have some artistic curves you just don't find in railway equipment, so it has more character than anything else that doesn't have a boiler. 










http://www.spikesys.com/GG1/


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

See:

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/GG1

Wheel arrangement is 2-C+C-2
Meaning leading truck of 2 unpowered wheels
Power truck of 3 driven axles
Power truck of 3 driven axles
Trailing truck of 2 unpowered wheels

EACH power axle had two 385 HP electric motors mounted above and to the side connecting (total HP is then 385 * 2 (per axle) *3 axles * 2 trucks = 4620 HP total for the locomotive) to a gear box that then attached to the driven axle via what is called a "Quill Drive". This Quill Drive allows the axle to move in relation to the body of the truck and still be driven by the motor. The motor is thus shielded somewhat from the shocks and vibration of rolling on the track. It also allowed the motors to be larger in diameter than would be allowed if the motor was mounted directly on the axle.

There is the argument that it is not a true "locomotive" because it does not carry the power producing apparatus on-board, but runs from power generated at a stationary plant that is carried to the engines via wire (catenary or 3rd rail) and the rails (electrical ground). But most people do not understand that finer point of the semantics of the language and thus call it a locomotive because it is the part of a train that makes the rest of it move.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Yes, nice photo and as Greg said very Art Deco in design. Pulling power if I'm correct comparable to Big Boy. 

A lot of power. 

Thanks for the links. Lots of reading to do.. 

gg


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Ltotis on 01/25/2009 4:24 AM
The GG-1 chassis was based a New Haven RR design. 
LAO




Are you sure that wasn't a Russian design, Chekov?






















-Brian


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

For the electric to steam, there was the Suisse..... 

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/swisselec/swisselc.htm


----------



## Charles M (Jan 2, 2008)

I once heard that the designers of the GG-1 were given the specifications for a " locomotive " capable of taking a train weighing 1,000 tons from a standing start to 100 miles an hour in 100 seconds ! Anyone know for sure if the information is correct ? 

Charles M SA#74


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Spule 4 on 01/25/2009 5:32 PM
For the electric to steam, there was the Suisse..... 

http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/swisselec/swisselc.htm 









Now that link says all!!! This is a loco... The issue is the source of energy to drive the prime mover yes? 


Efficiency questions yes however the "taste" of Swiss chocolate in a locomotive. 

And is Swiss chocolate a necessity or an extravegance?







Based on the link, a practical use of available energy. Electricity and Water. (retrofits?)


That loco would be a real collectors item on a model railroad... live steam based. 


gg


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Heres A video of a MTH gg-1 and a USA version...


----------



## rpc7271 (Jan 2, 2008)

What's so special about the GG1? Longevity. The first GG1 went into service in 1935 and the last was taken out of service in 1983. The GG1 outlasted the railroad that built it and its successor road. This may be in part due to the fact that the GG1 was not handed a spot in the PRR inventory, it earned it. It was inspired by the nearby New Haven boxcab electric EP-3a that served that road so well. PRR was in the market for a new electric but the R-1 was offered in addition to the GG1. The R1 and GG1 inherited their general styling from the smaller modified P5a. The GG1 recieved the special attention of industrial designer Raymond Loewy, who, with minor changes in the sheet metal and major changes with the livery, made the GG1 the visual classic it is. Despite the other omnipresent items designed by Loewy, he stated he was always especially fond of the job he did on the G. The R-1 had a smaller single frame 2-D-2 wheel arrangement, compared to the GG1's multiframed 2-C+C-2. The PRR put both locos through their paces and the GG1 came out on top with slightly better tracking characteristics. 

4800 (originally 4899) was the prototype for the line and was the only one to have a rivited body. At the behest of Loewy, all later ones were welded. Another asset of the GG1 was strength. A GG1 frame looks more like a bridge than a locomotive. The 4876 lost its brakes and pulled the _Federal Express_ right into Washington Terminal, crashed into the concourse and fell into the basement. It was cut up into small sections so it could be removed from the basement, shipped back to Altoona for reassembly. It was returned to service and still survives today! 

With their steam boilers the Gs were intended primarily as passenger locomotives, but adeptly handled freight as well. One of the original orders of the locomotive were built with passenger gearing in the traction motors. As they aged and newer power took over passenger service and many Gs were regeared for freight service. Starting sometime after 1955, many units were equipped with large ungainly air intakes. 

The Gs served the Penn Central after the merger and routinely ventured onto New Haven track. After PC's brief life, most Gs went to Conrail where they served until 1979. 40 units were transferred to Amtrak, and 13 to New Jersey Transit where they served until 1981 and 1983 respectively. Despite their sturdy construction, the millions of miles racked up by these units eventually caused frame cracks too extensive to justify repair, given that parts were getting hard to find. The last nail in the coffin was to be the expected catenary frequency change from 25 to 60 Hz. The later rectifier locomotives could use either, but not the all-AC GG1. Of the 16 units still in existance, 3 are under cover and 8 have been restored to Pensy paint. at least 4 of the units are rapidly deteriorating for lack of upkeep. Most, if not all, G tranformers were drained of the PCB laden coolant oil when they left service. Some may have been refilled with sand or concrete, others removed.

Railroads: Pennsylvania, Pen Central, Conrail, Amtrak, New Jersey Department of Transportation, later New Jersey Transit
Builder: GE/PRR, with Baldwin and Westinghouse colaboration
Price: $250,000 each for first production order
Numbers: PRR and sucessors: 4800-4938, Amtrak: 901-939 (later 4901-4939), NJT: 4872-4884
Production Run: 1934-1943 139 units
Locomotives Displaced: P5a (to freight service)
Locomotives Displaced by: E44, E60
Service Lifetime: 48 years
Weights Weight: 447,000 lb total
Adhesive Weight: 303,000 lb, 50,500 per axle
Maximum Axle Load: 5,500 lb
Boiler: 17.1 tons
Transformer: 15.3 tons
Lengths Length: 79' 6"
Wheelbase: 69' 0"
Driver Wheelbase: 37' 4"
Rigid Wheelbase: 13' 8" (2) 
Rataings Tractive Effort (maximum): 70,700 lb (65,500, 72,800 or 75,000 lb by other sources)
HP (continuous): 4,620 (385 per motor) at 100 mph HP (maximum): 8,000 at 100 MPH, 9,500 at 49 mph Mechanicals Gearing: 24:77 passenger; 24:79 frieght
Maximum Speed: 100 mph in service, 110 mph in testing (90 mph in service for freight gearing)
Drivers: 12, 57 in.
Trailers: 8, 32 in.
Wheel arrangement: 2-C+C-2 (2-Co+Co-2 or 4-6-0+0-6-4)
Traction transmission: quill drive, 2 motors per quill
Electricals Line in: 11,000 V AC, 25 Hz
Traction line in: ? 400 V AC, 25 Hz ?
Transformer: 4,600 kVA
Transformer Control: electro-pnumatic
Motors: 12 in 6 pair, 6 pole
Control Notches: 22 for passenger service, 17 for freight
Batteries: 32V, 300 amps per hour
Auxiliaries Steam Boiler: oil fired, 200 psi, 4,500 lbs per hour
Air: recipricating compressor


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Gents, 

When the video is viewed and combined with rbc7271 comments I am in awe: 

A very serious and good looking "art-deco loco".... ok I will retract my comments earlier re this not being a loco... 


MTH protosound 2 I suspect here.... makes everything sound real or would this be DCC at work? (at its best)


gg


----------



## Savannah Railway Co. (Jan 19, 2009)

apparently a GG1 crashed through the floor of the station in DC. It was cut in half with torches, extracted, repaired, and put back into service


----------



## Savannah Railway Co. (Jan 19, 2009)

oops! didn't read the post above


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes. There was a big crash with one. 

An old guy tells me they were quite amazing. No engine noise, no racket, they just whooshed by.


----------



## sang_route (Sep 24, 2008)

Diesel-mechanical 
A diesel-mechanical locomotive uses a mechanical transmission in a fashion similar to that employed in highway vehicles.The mechanical transmissions used for railroad propulsion are generally more complex and much more robust than road versions. There is usually a fluid coupling interposed between the engine and gearbox, and the gearbox is often of the epicyclic (planetary) type to permit shifting while under load. Various systems have been devised to minimise the break in transmission during gear changing. 

Diesel-electric 
In a Diesel-electric locomotive the Diesel engine prime mover drives an electric generator whose output provides power to the traction motors. There is no mechanical connection between the prime mover and the driving wheels (drivers). 

Diesel-hydraulic 
a locomotive driven by a hydraulic transmission system, a device employing a liquid to transmit and modify linear or rotary motion and linear or turning force (torque). There are two main types of hydraulic power transmission systems: hydrokinetic, such as the hydraulic coupling and the hydraulic torque converter, which use the kinetic energy of the liquid; and hydrostatic, which use the pressure energy of the liquid, powered by a diesel engine. 

Gas turbine-electric locomotive 
In a GTEL a turbine engine, similar to a turboshaft engine, drives an output shaft that is in turn attached to an electrical generator via a system of gears. The electrical power is distributed to power the traction motors that drive the locomotive. In overall terms the system is very similar to a conventional diesel-electric, with the large diesel engine replaced with a smaller gas turbine of similar power. 

Electric 
An electric locomotive is a locomotive powered by electricity from an external source. Sources include overhead lines, third rail, or an on-board electricity storage device such as a battery or flywheel system. 

Steam 
The generated steam is stored in the steam space above the water in the partially-filled boiler. Its working pressure is limited by spring-loaded safety valves. It is then collected either in a perforated tube fitted above the water level or from a dome that often houses the regulator valve, or throttle, the purpose of which is to control the amount of steam leaving the boiler. The steam then either travels directly along and down a steam pipe to the engine unit or may first have to pass into the wet header of a superheater, the role of the latter being to improve thermal efficiency and eliminate water droplets suspended in the "saturated steam", the state in which it leaves the boiler. On leaving the superheater, the steam exits the dry header of the superheater and passing down a steam pipe enters the steam chests adjacent to the cylinders of a reciprocating engine. Inside each steam chest is a sliding valve that distributes the steam via ports that connect the steam chest to the ends of the cylinder space. The role of the valves is twofold: admission of each fresh dose of steam and exhaust of the used steam once it has done its work. 

The cylinders are double acting, with steam admitted to each side of the piston in turn. In a two-cylinder locomotive, one cylinder is located on each side of the locomotive. The cranks are set 90° out of phase. During a full rotation of the driving wheel, steam provides four power strokes; each cylinder receives two injections of steam per revolution. The first stroke is to the front of the piston and the second stroke to the rear of the piston; hence two working strokes. Consequently two deliveries of steam onto each piston face in two cylinders generates a full revolution of the driving wheel. Each piston is connected to the driving axle on each side by a connecting rod, the driving wheels are connected together by coupling rods to transmit power from the main driver to the other wheels. At the two "dead centres", when the connecting rod is on the same axis as the crankpin on the driving wheel, it will be noted that no turning force can be applied. Since the two sides are 90° out of phase, only one side can be at dead centre at a time. 

I beleave the Russians even developed a nuclear locomotive, but is melted the permafrost and sunk.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By sang_route on 01/26/2009 11:47 AM
Diesel-mechanical 
A diesel-mechanical locomotive uses a mechanical transmission in a fashion similar to that employed in highway vehicles.The mechanical transmissions used for railroad propulsion are generally more complex and much more robust than road versions. There is usually a fluid coupling interposed between the engine and gearbox, and the gearbox is often of the epicyclic (planetary) type to permit shifting while under load. Various systems have been devised to minimise the break in transmission during gear changing. 

Diesel-electric 
In a Diesel-electric locomotive the Diesel engine prime mover drives an electric generator whose output provides power to the traction motors. There is no mechanical connection between the prime mover and the driving wheels (drivers). 

Diesel-hydraulic 
a locomotive driven by a hydraulic transmission system, a device employing a liquid to transmit and modify linear or rotary motion and linear or turning force (torque). There are two main types of hydraulic power transmission systems: hydrokinetic, such as the hydraulic coupling and the hydraulic torque converter, which use the kinetic energy of the liquid; and hydrostatic, which use the pressure energy of the liquid, powered by a diesel engine. 

Gas turbine-electric locomotive 
In a GTEL a turbine engine, similar to a turboshaft engine, drives an output shaft that is in turn attached to an electrical generator via a system of gears. The electrical power is distributed to power the traction motors that drive the locomotive. In overall terms the system is very similar to a conventional diesel-electric, with the large diesel engine replaced with a smaller gas turbine of similar power. 

Electric 
An electric locomotive is a locomotive powered by electricity from an external source. Sources include overhead lines, third rail, or an on-board electricity storage device such as a battery or flywheel system. 

Steam 
The generated steam is stored in the steam space above the water in the partially-filled boiler. Its working pressure is limited by spring-loaded safety valves. It is then collected either in a perforated tube fitted above the water level or from a dome that often houses the regulator valve, or throttle, the purpose of which is to control the amount of steam leaving the boiler. The steam then either travels directly along and down a steam pipe to the engine unit or may first have to pass into the wet header of a superheater, the role of the latter being to improve thermal efficiency and eliminate water droplets suspended in the "saturated steam", the state in which it leaves the boiler. On leaving the superheater, the steam exits the dry header of the superheater and passing down a steam pipe enters the steam chests adjacent to the cylinders of a reciprocating engine. Inside each steam chest is a sliding valve that distributes the steam via ports that connect the steam chest to the ends of the cylinder space. The role of the valves is twofold: admission of each fresh dose of steam and exhaust of the used steam once it has done its work. 

The cylinders are double acting, with steam admitted to each side of the piston in turn. In a two-cylinder locomotive, one cylinder is located on each side of the locomotive. The cranks are set 90° out of phase. During a full rotation of the driving wheel, steam provides four power strokes; each cylinder receives two injections of steam per revolution. The first stroke is to the front of the piston and the second stroke to the rear of the piston; hence two working strokes. Consequently two deliveries of steam onto each piston face in two cylinders generates a full revolution of the driving wheel. Each piston is connected to the driving axle on each side by a connecting rod, the driving wheels are connected together by coupling rods to transmit power from the main driver to the other wheels. At the two "dead centres", when the connecting rod is on the same axis as the crankpin on the driving wheel, it will be noted that no turning force can be applied. Since the two sides are 90° out of phase, only one side can be at dead centre at a time. 

I beleave the Russians even developed a nuclear locomotive, but is melted the permafrost and sunk.





That was good and really sorted out the technology here. Thanks


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

From your User Name (GG) I had assumed that you were a Pensy GG-1 fan. 

But from your question, apparently you were not... 

so that brings up the question... 

now that you know what they are... are you now a fan???


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 01/26/2009 12:15 PM
From your User Name (GG) I had assumed that you were a Pensy GG-1 fan. 

But from your question, apparently you were not... 

so that brings up the question... 

now that you know what they are... are you now a fan??? 








The more I read, the more interesting all of this gets. Education eliminates bias and ignorance. 

Your input cut straight to the chase. 

As for being a fan, yes I see a relationship forming between "GG" and "GG-1". However I must admit my love of steam as I work with it in my profession. I really did relate to your steam portion of your technology explanation. Steam, in its own right is the most efficient way to transport heat energy (Btu's) from point A to Point B and realize that energy at the point of use. In a locomotive however, we are not using the latent heat energy of steam per sae however simply one of its properties... that steam is a gas that can be efficiently generated in a mobile unit. 


Maybe I should take a GG-1 and bash it back into a steamer. That would make for quite a phot op..










GG


----------



## Savannah Railway Co. (Jan 19, 2009)

[No message]


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

Since the nit-pickers [in the friendliest manner] are out in force, it should be pointed out that a vehicle that collects its power from an external source is not a locomotive.

In order to qualify it must carry the means of generating its power entirely within its own structure.

So the GG-1 and my beloved Y-1 of the GN are not locomotives, just rather posh trolley cars.

tac
www.ovgrs.org


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Yeah, I said that earlier, but nobody pays any attention. Of course, I have heard people call it a "Choo Choo" and that is also a misnomer.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Take the GG-1 and bash it back to where it should be.... steam driven 

Now we'll have a REAL Choo-Choo

gg


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Turning a GG-1 into a steam powered locomotive would just produce a streamlined Fairlie Locmotive!









http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairlie


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

YES !!! self contained GG-1 

Question is where does one stick the coal.... long run for a tender. 

gg


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Fuel was carried either in a bunker in the middle of the cab or in one of the side tanks on one or both boiler barrels... obviously they did not carry much fuel and thus had to make lots of stops to pick up fuel. They were used in both switching duties where they stayed in a yard, or on short line, usually point to point lines, such as commuter lines where they stopped frequently anyway. The often carried just enough fuel to get from one station to the next, refueling duing the passenger unload/load time.


----------



## rpc7271 (Jan 2, 2008)

The 4876 lost its brakes and pulled the _Federal Express_ right into Washington Terminal, crashed into the concourse and fell into the basement. This was one week before JKF was inaugurated. They built a temporary floor over the loco and when everyone arrived for the inauguration no one was the wiser. After the inauguration the floor was removed and the loco was cut into pieces, removed, and put back together.


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

Hehe. I'd seen photos, but I guess I didn't read enough to pick up the JFK connection.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Torby on 01/26/2009 5:31 PM
Hehe. I'd seen photos, but I guess I didn't read enough to pick up the JFK connection.


Twernt Kennedy.... it was Eisenhower

http://www.dcnrhs.org/union_station/union_wreck.htm

http://www.thejoekorner.com/rrfolklore/fedexp.shtm


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 01/26/2009 2:40 PM
Yeah, I said that earlier, but nobody pays any attention. Of course, I have heard people call it a "Choo Choo" and that is also a misnomer.






Locomotive translates to place movement out of latin or of movement in French, has nothing to do with being self powered?


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Spule 4 on 01/26/2009 7:26 PM
Posted By Semper Vaporo on 01/26/2009 2:40 PM
Yeah, I said that earlier, but nobody pays any attention. Of course, I have heard people call it a "Choo Choo" and that is also a misnomer.






Locomotive translates to place movement out of latin or of movement in French, has nothing to do with being self powered?



According to "Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary":

1 b: having the ability to move independently from place to place.

3: of, relating to, or being a machine that moves about by operation of its own mechanism.

A second definition of the word says it is "a self-propelled vehicle that runs on rails, utilizes any of several forms of energy for producing motion, and is used for moving railroad cars."


Admittedly the dictionary I have quoted is an OLD one (1965), but the definition is the same today. The additional meanings that I left out here do not provide for the inclusion of an externally powered machine as being a Locomotive.

The argument being that an electrically powered train engine that can only move if power is supplied externally does not meet the definition of "independently". If it had on-board batteries or a generator that is powered by some on-board mechanism (that is not itself powered by some external source of power) then it can be classified as a "locomotive".

I remember an argument back in the 1950's whereby a "trolley car" was deemed not to be a Locomotive because it derived its power from electricity supplied by a stationary generating station. The argument was made due to a tax that was levied on a city transport that was heavier if the trolleys were "Locomotives". Included in the argument was whether the trolley towed another vehicle (tandem trolleys) and whether that other vehicle would then also be taxed at the higher rate.

Unfortunately, the decision relegated the GG-1 and most all the other electrically powered railroad engines as not being "Locomotives" anymore.







The vernacular notwithstanding.

It also means that your toy track powered choo choos are not locomotives!

Oh dear I can just hear the cheers from the battery mafia!


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

God.... the battery nuts... 

forgot... and God forgive the wrath that is about to descend. 

What have you started here Semper???


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

I run Live Steam... so what do I care about batteries or track power?


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

LOL









Some day the world will run out of water and you will be faced with a Nuclear Loco.


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

Isn't the GG-1 pretty GG? ^^ So now you should change your name to GG-1 =)


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Engineercub on 01/26/2009 8:33 PM
Isn't the GG-1 pretty GG? ^^ So now you should change your name to GG-1 =)





Sorry man... I need STEAM here. 

As mentioned... I like the GG-1 design however am in love with STEAM... I like hot engines.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By GG on 01/26/2009 8:44 PM
Posted By Engineercub on 01/26/2009 8:33 PM
Isn't the GG-1 pretty GG? ^^ So now you should change your name to GG-1 =)





Sorry man... I need STEAM here. 

As mentioned... I like the GG-1 design however am in love with STEAM... I like hot engines. 














So... what Steam do you intend to run on your new pike?


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Yeah, I said that earlier, but nobody pays any attention. Of course, I have heard people call it a "Choo Choo" and that is also a misnomer 




That's OK. I've had folks point to my F3 and turn to their companion and say, "Look! A GG1". I just let it go. 

I was one of the fools that wanted a GG1 so I could bash it in to an EP-3!!! 


On the New Haven, the electrics were referred to as "Motors".


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

I have my LGB. Evaluating the Hudson and the C16 by Aristo. These two locos would cover off 2 ERA's and would be the backbone to the layout.


----------



## Snoq Pass (Jan 2, 2008)

Semper Vaporo, "Unfortunately, the decision relegated the GG-1 and most all the other electrically powered railroad engines as not being "Locomotives" anymore." 

That might be true, however, the Amtrak Acela has a system on them that when the engineer applies the brakes, the heat generated by this is converted to electricity and put back into the overhead wires for the locomotive to draw back from when it starts moving again. So in affect it is kinda a self contained locomotive.


----------



## Tom Parkins (Jan 2, 2008)

Just to add a little more prototype information regarding the GG1. In PRR terms, class G = 4-6-0 so when you put two 4-6-0 wheel arrangements together it would be GG and the 1 is for model 1. If the PRR had later purchased any Challengers they would have been GG2. 

It is a misconception that a GG1 would not operate today due to the voltage/frequency change. The Northeast Corridor still operates on 11,000v 25Hz on NY to Washington. There were plans to modify it to 60 Hz but it did not happen. (It's different electricity north of NY) AEM7s and Acellas handle the electric change internally at phase change points, I believe NY and New Haven. Cracked frames would prohibit a GG1 from operating today. They just wore out after millions of miles. 

I had the opportunity to operate a GG1. The cab is very, very cramped and visibility is much like a big boilered steam engine. I suspect there are some railroaders today who would have trouble getting in to the cab and getting from the engineer side to fireman side would be interesting. The PRR also called their electric engines Motors. 

Tom


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

No locomotives run independently. They all have their sources. Steam locomotives required coal, water, and a fusee to light the firebox. Electric Locomotives required electric catenary and a power plant to keep it "lit". Modern Diesels require diesel. They are all in need of lubrication and maintenance and only go where the rails take them. Independent does not really work in describing locomotives as they "depend" on alot of factors. As far as people looking at catenary as being a leash and therefore GG-1 not being a locomotive, it is only an obvious one. BigBoy had a leash as it couldn't run on just any territory because of it's rigid running gears. Even with the articulation, it could only handle certain radii curvature. Narrow Gauge couldn't run on Standard Gauge, Standard Gauge couldn't run on Narrow Gauge. But if we are going to adhere to the definition of the word "Locomotive" then I'll go along with it. My point of all this is that BigBoy was one massive Trolley! ;-P

-Will


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Sorry, the definition of the word "Locomotive" means that it is "self-mobile" and any engine that derives its source of power from the track or catenary is not, by definition, a "locomotive". 

That is not a disparaging comment about the GG-1 or any other of the electric engines that pull (or push) a train of cars, whether on rails or not, it is just the definition of the word, "Locomotive". 

Digging deep into the semantics of it, there are many other types of engines used to pull trains that the general public may refer to as a locomotive, that are not really a locomotive by definition. 

Mag-lev or "fireless cooker"... they ain't locomotives if they derive their power from another source that does not travel with it. They can be refered to as "Engines" or "Motors", but NOT "Locomotives" if one is to maintain an exact usage of the language.


----------



## Snoq Pass (Jan 2, 2008)

Okay, so a locomotive has to get its power from itself..... But don't you have to fill up a diesel locomotive's fuel tank full of diesel inorder for it to move? Without the fuel, which has to come from an external source (the locomotive is unable to "grow" its own supply), the locomotive is unable to go anywhere...... 

And I refer back to my other post which seems to have been overlooked. The Amtrack Acela locomotives (which are electric) do put electricity back into the over head wires when the engineer is applying the brakes. That electricity is then later used to make the locomotive go. So it is making its own power, so wouldn't it then fall under your definition of a locomotive?


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Snoq Pass on 01/28/2009 3:30 PM
Okay, so a locomotive has to get its power from itself..... But don't you have to fill up a diesel locomotive's fuel tank full of diesel inorder for it to move? Without the fuel, which has to come from an external source (the locomotive is unable to "grow" its own supply), the locomotive is unable to go anywhere...... 

And I refer back to my other post which seems to have been overlooked. The Amtrack Acela locomotives (which are electric) do put electricity back into the over head wires when the engineer is applying the brakes. That electricity is then later used to make the locomotive go. So it is making its own power, so wouldn't it then fall under your definition of a locomotive?




Electricity can not be stored unless batteries are used. On braking you are effectively putting electricity back into the grid and not storing it in the engine or motor. Compared to steam or diesel which has its "onboard" supply of energy, the Amtack Acela "engines or motors" do not have this capability.


----------



## Madman (Jan 5, 2008)

Yea. And steam "locomotives" need _coal_[/b] and _water_[/b]


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Madman on 01/28/2009 3:56 PM
Yea. And steam "locomotives" need _coal_[/b] and _water_[/b] 




Yes, ingredients for onboard supply of energy.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Sure, we can carry the "where does the power really come from" to extremes. It all comes from the sun, right? In the present situation, no, that argument is discounted.

The definition of "Locomotive" is simple. If the power source is carried with it, it is a Locomotive, otherwise it is not, it is just an engine or motor. In a Diesel-electric the "Prime Mover" is the Diesel engine that is producing the power to drive the electric motors that move the vehicle, so, since the Prime Mover goes with the vehicle it is called a Locomotive. If the "Prime Mover" is at a stationary plant and does not travel WITH the vehicle, then the vehicle is a Motor or Engine and nothing more.

Even if the Acela puts electricity back into the power lines, it is not STORED anywhere at that time, it is being supplied to other MOTORS at that time, else it would be just LOST completely, or more correctly, it would not even be generated. The electricity has to be used or it does not flow. The dynamic braking electricity that is being generated has to be "used" someplace or the dynamic braking doesn't work. If there were no other "users" on the line then the electricity generated would have to be dissapated in the resistor grid in the locomotive or NO braking would occur. It could be stored in batteries and that would present a "load" to the motors that are generating the electricity and thus electricity would be flowing and braking would occur, but as I understand it, there are no batteries involved, the electricity is just placed back on the line and is used by other motors.

Again, saying that the GG-1 is not a Locomotive is not a disparaging remark regardless of whether one thinks it is a beautiful device or downright ugly, it just the definition of Locomotive. Even the Pennsylvania RR knew it was not a Locomotive and called it a Motor. It is a simple thing to just accept the meaning of the word and use it correctly. It is no different than the error of calling a Diesel Locomotive a "Steam Engine" or the Observation car on the end of a passenger train a "Caboose", or the wheels on a freight car as being "Tires".


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Think this way... 

LOCO -MOTIVE

"local"-"motive power"


----------



## Snoq Pass (Jan 2, 2008)

LOCO -MOTIVE 
"From a place" -"Causing motion" 

Loco (Latin locus) 
Motive (Latin motivus)


----------



## Engineercub (Oct 18, 2008)

LOL In any case GG-1 is still a locomotive to me, and a darned nice one ^^. It's like Jerry Barnes says, "Life is too short to take seriously". The exact meaning and classification of a locomotive matters very little in the grand scheme of things. If you want to call it a Trolley, fine. If you want to call it a Locomotive, fine. It's just another topic for people to fight about, Noone is really wrong in their reality so let's just say everyone is right and WALA! Everyone goes home happy =D 

-Will


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

B-B-B-B-But, MmmmOOOOOoooooMMMMmmmm!


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Well 4 pages later and I am fully educated on the original topic question. 

Thanks for the feedback.. 

gg


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

Sounds to me like you need one


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Torby on 01/29/2009 9:46 AM
Sounds to me like you need one " align="absmiddle" border="0" />




I already have an engine or motor sitting in the driveway! Think STEAM and mobility !


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4SuiSURDyQ


----------



## Madman (Jan 5, 2008)

I just want to carry this to the point that we all throw in the towel. 

Steam locomotives may have the coal and water onboard, however they had to be placed onboard. The coal and water didn't just appear to the fireman and engineer when they wanted to make the locomotive and train move.







Lets take this one step further. The coal and water are technically not onboard the locomotive, they are in a trailing car called a tender. Yes I know most European steam locos have the coal and water right on the locomotive, as do small industrial types. But in either case, the fuel came from an outside source.







In the case of electric locomotives, the fuel comes from an outside source, better known as a catenary wire.







In this case the fuel is a never ending supply that stays with the locomotive no matter how far it travels under that wire. Whereas a steam loco must stop occassionally, or it will run out of fuel.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Madman on 01/29/2009 5:40 PM
I just want to carry this to the point that we all throw in the towel. 

Steam locomotives may have the coal and water onboard, however they had to be placed onboard. The coal and water didn't just appear to the fireman and engineer when they wanted to make the locomotive and train move.







Lets take this one step further. The coal and water are technically not onboard the locomotive, they are in a trailing car called a tender. Yes I know most European steam locos have the coal and water right on the locomotive, as do small industrial types. But in either case, the fuel came from an outside source.







In the case of electric locomotives, the fuel comes from an outside source, better known as a catenary wire.







In this case the fuel is a never ending supply that stays with the locomotive no matter how far it travels under that wire. Whereas a steam loco must stop occassionally, or it will run out of fuel.















I know there are those out there that are gonna complain about the "arguing" here, but I would argue with you about that. Nobody is Heated here. I enjoy the discussion and if you don't like it, stop readin'... 

Locomotive is derived from the Latin for words that have grown and changed over the years since Latin was the language in vogue and some of our english words can be traced back to them. Loco is usually associated with "location" or "self", (Loci being the center of an area or of self). Motive has come across with little deviation, and means movement or impetus. Thus Locomotive is Self Mobile.

Several have pointed out the fact that even a steam locomotive needs to have the fuel... the ultimate source of energy to move the vehicle... placed onboard or the steamer don't go nowhere. They are then drawing the anology that the method of "loading" the "fuel" onboard an electric engine, the GG-1 in this discussion, but by extension any of the similar vehicles, is merely the wires that carry the "fuel" to the engine to make the electric motors propel the vehicle. It is an interesting anology and does hold some credance to the discussion.

BUT... as has been said by others here, even the Pennsylvania Railroad refered to the GG-1 as a Motor instead of Locomotive, thus there is this precident to the argument that the method of delivering the energy to the engine has no bearing on the definition and that they did not consider electric wires to be a part of the device, nor that delivering coal via a coal shute or water via a tower has any bearing on it either.

Like I said before, all the energy comes from the Sun (wll, okay some now maybe from a nuclear reactor on Earth) but that was not a part of the understanding of power or energy when the term was coined for use in defining what a Locmotive is.

It is a fine point of language and, yes, languages change and evolve and words change their meaning...(even to becoming the exact opposite, e.g.: Cleave means to both Join-Together and to Split-Apart) and again, yes, in the vernacular the GG-1 is often denoted as being a Locomotive, but I contend that is an error by those that do not know any better.

I did a search on Google to see what I could find and what I found is that the language is litteraly falling apart (cleaving instead of cleaving!) I did find many (too many) references that called it a "Locomotive". I also found references to the GG-1 as a "Steam Engine", and a "Choo-Choo", both of which are to the point of being ludicrous terms for the GG-1 so I hold little credance in the web references to the proper definition of Locomotive nor defining what the GG-1 is.


Of course, there is always Humpty Dumpty in "Alice, Through the Lookingglass" (Lewis Carroll's sequal to "Alice in Wonderland"). After a discourse wherein he totally confuse poor Alice by extremely odd and erroneous usage of words and language and she complained to him, he replied...

`When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful
tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor
less.'


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By GG on 01/29/2009 7:27 AM
Well 4 pages later and I am fully educated on the original topic question. 

Thanks for the feedback.. 

gg




I love the ongoing banter here as to what this all means. Everyone wins... 

Now do I qualify for a PhD here based on the intellectual discussion going on? YES. 


PhD of GG-1 philosphy... 


Bring it on as I see that no one is objecting to the discussion. 

GG


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Madman on 01/29/2009 5:40 PM
I just want to carry this to the point that we all throw in the towel. 

Steam locomotives may have the coal and water onboard, however they had to be placed onboard. The coal and water didn't just appear to the fireman and engineer when they wanted to make the locomotive and train move.







Lets take this one step further. The coal and water are technically not onboard the locomotive, they are in a trailing car called a tender. Yes I know most European steam locos have the coal and water right on the locomotive, as do small industrial types. But in either case, the fuel came from an outside source.







In the case of electric locomotives, the fuel comes from an outside source, better known as a catenary wire.







In this case the fuel is a never ending supply that stays with the locomotive no matter how far it travels under that wire. Whereas a steam loco must stop occassionally, or it will run out of fuel.











Bottom line.... all energy comes from the SUN. (refer to earlier input on this thread) 


Taking the conversation further, this comment now says that the definition of " Locomotive" do not exist in our world. We are all working with "Engines or Motors". 


Cheers...


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Then how does one class the DRG V19.1001? Steam powered, with four V2 motors.


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By Spule 4 on 01/29/2009 8:05 PM
Then how does one class the DRG V19.1001? Steam powered, with four V2 motors. 


Indirect "Sun-Powered"?


----------



## Madman (Jan 5, 2008)

The towel still has some life left in it. Keep it going.


----------



## Snoq Pass (Jan 2, 2008)

Semper, "I did a search on Google to see what I could find and what I found is that the language is litteraly falling apart (cleaving instead of cleaving!) I did find many (too many) references that called it a "Locomotive". I also found references to the GG-1 as a "Steam Engine", and a "Choo-Choo", both of which are to the point of being ludicrous terms for the GG-1 so I hold little credance in the web references to the proper definition of Locomotive nor defining what the GG-1 is." 

What was the phrase you used to search google? Here are just a couple of what I have found: 

Oxford Dictionary (Locomotive) 
A powered railway vehicle used for pulling trains. (An electric locomotive is a powered railway vehicle) 

American Heritage Dictionary (Locomotive) 
A self-propelled engine, now usually *electric* or diesel-power, that pulls or pushes freight or passenger cars on railroad tracks. 



Semper, "It is a fine point of language and, yes, languages change and evolve and words change their meaning..." 
Well, maybe the definition of locomotive has changed...... 



Semper, "Several have pointed out the fact that even a steam locomotive needs to have the fuel... the ultimate source of energy to move the vehicle... placed onboard or the steamer don't go nowhere. They are then drawing the anology that the method of "loading" the "fuel" onboard an electric engine, the GG-1 in this discussion, but by extension any of the similar vehicles, is merely the wires that carry the "fuel" to the engine to make the electric motors propel the vehicle. It is an interesting anology and does hold some credance to the discussion." 

For the majority of steam locomotives, where is the fuel and water stored? In the tender. Is the TENDER the LOCOMOTIVE? NO. The tender is a car that is being pulled along, but it is not the locomotive. So, a steam engine is not a self-powered locomotive since it requires a external source for its fuel. If you take the exact definition that you have found somewhere, then only diesels and tank steamers are locomotives.....


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

I give up and will start a new thread on the J3a Hudson and "electro-conversion" to a motor... 

gg


----------



## Madman (Jan 5, 2008)

You are a glutten for punishment


----------

