In real life, can a electric diesel, like a E-44, be MU-ED to a couple of road diesels without the need of overhead wires? If not, is there another way to power it for service in real life without overhead wires?
Minor detail The E-44 is not a diesel.
Rich
Well, then I geuss consider it traction? I dont know, but the E44 is the correct engine for the catigory I'm asking about
Dear Jet,
Without electricity (i,e. catenary [in the case of the E-44] or third rail) the electric locomotive would basically be along for the ride. There were locos, like the FL-9. that were dual powered, but they were the exception, not the norm.
Have fun!
the Bah-mam
I fond the below in a forum after a one hour seach.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One E-44, # 4453, was returned to GE by Conrail for rebuilding just before they ended electrified freight service, evidently as a pilot for a rebuilding of the fleet. In 1984, it was used, nicely repainted in fresh Conrail blue, on several round trips between the northern New Jersey terminals and Potomac yard on TV-23/24. I understand that the tests were of a system which allowed it to operate slug style by taking power from diesels in non-electrified territory (though the catenary on the freight bypasses and in the yards was still largely intact at that time.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read the below link on this issue.
http://www.worldrailfans.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4619&view=next
Rich
Those things might be considered monsters. 4,400 hp and some where upgraded to 5,000 hp. They were MU'd together from all I have found out so far.
One road had two upgraded to 5,000 hp at 25,000 volt, 60 cycle.
Rich
Electric diesel?
http://www.davesrailpix.com/pe/htm/pe020.htm
Rich
The Milwaukee Road regularlyn MU-ed the GE "Little Joe"s with regular diesel electric units."Two Joes and a Geep" was common in the fifties, later a single Joe and two SD-40's was the norm. I am not sure whether the Joe's had modified control stands to control the diesels--but all the photos I have seen the Joes were in the leagj
I went through a few dozen E44 photos and they all showed either a single or two or three running together. Sometimes with a GG1. I think there were at least sixty E44's built.
There might have been times a road diesel was a pusher in the rear. No idea so far.
Rich
We often use technically incorrect names for things, for example we often speak of "diesel engines" when we mean "diesel-electric locomotives." Even worse is hearing any kind of locomotive referred to as a "train." But if we can accept these, I suppose we should be able to deal with "electric diesel," at least in a time and place where people are used to thinking of steam outline locomotives versus diesel outline locomotives.
Having said that, I was intrigued by rich finding mention of an E-44 being run as a slug, drawing its power from a couple of diesel-electric locomotives to run its traction motors. I think this is what jettrainfan had in mind in his original post.
Jim
Quote from: Jim Banner on September 21, 2011, 11:51:51 PM
Having said that, I was intrigued by rich finding mention of an E-44 being run as a slug, drawing its power from a couple of diesel-electric locomotives to run its traction motors. I think this is what jettrainfan had in mind in his original post.
Jim
From what I found is that the end of the electric power for some roads was approaching and someone had the thought of somehow reusing the E44 running gear.
With many searches a nd readingI have done, many roads did all kinds of experimenting with road power whether, steam, diesel, electric, etc.
The E44's had a relatively short life. Only one is preserved. They were designed for freight but in only a few years they were used for passenger service by Amtrak and New Jersey Transit.
The GG1's were flat worn out when Conrail inherited them from so much passenger use which is what they were designed for.
Rich
Quote from: Jim Banner on September 21, 2011, 11:51:51 PM
Even worse is hearing any kind of locomotive referred to as a "train."
Jim
Jim-
This irritates me, too, but a locomotive running light
is a train when it's out on the rails.
-- D
Quote from: Doneldon on September 22, 2011, 01:13:22 AM
Quote from: Jim Banner on September 21, 2011, 11:51:51 PM
Even worse is hearing any kind of locomotive referred to as a "train."
Jim
Jim-
This irritates me, too, but a locomotive running light is a train when it's out on the rails.
-- D
Only if it is displaying markers.
Read the rulebook definition of a train: -
Train—An engine or more than on engine coupled, with or without cars, displaying markers.
roger-
It must carry markers if it'sut on the line.
-- D
E44s were built for the PRR in 1959. They were freight locomotives. They had no provision for generating steam. Conrail inherited the fleet from Penn Central. Since they required catenary, their use was restricted to the ex-PRR electrified lines. Conrail rid itself of those electrified lines and sold the E44s to NJT and Amtrak. NJT never used theirs and sold them to Amtrak in 1986. NJT's locomotive hauled passenger fleet of 1986 used steam heated passenger cars, which were replaced by HEP, and the E44 could provide neither. Amtrak might have used them to haul MOW trains. Today both railroads use a totally different electrical voltage and no PRR loco could run on it.
Any time any equipment occupies track outside yard limits it must have orders to do so from the dispatcher and it is a train.
Ok, I found a real electric diesel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_FL9
Rich