pennsy wrote:Interesting points, Walt.
However, all you needed at the end of line for a GG-1 to reverse itself was a run around track for the engine to escape from one end of the train, run around the train, and then couple up to the opposite end.
With respect to the GG-1's ability to handle commuter trains as a subway, with many stations and the need for rapid acceleration to speed and then rapid deceleration so as not to over run the station. Remember the GG-1 had 100 % short term overload capability for rapid acceleration, and effectively dynamic brakes for rapid deceleration, dumping the generated power back into the catenary. So, effectively, the GG-1 could put up to 10,000 hp on the rails to rapidly get the train up to speed, in a very short period of time. Therefore, theoretically at least, the GG-1 could have handled that service.
Alan---IIRC, there wasn't even enough track room at Media or West Chester for even the run by that you mention. In the last days of service to West Chester, there was only a single track at the terminal ( in fact the entire line was single track west of Media). And I agree- it would have been theoretically possible for a GG1 headed train to handle the constant acceleration & deceleration which characterised operation on that line, it would not have been the most efficient use of that locomotive. The MP-54's, with their top speed of only 50 MPH, were perfectly adequate, though in later years not the most well received units, for that line. I don't know what the top speed of the present Silverliner equipment is, but I doubt that they're running at more than 60 MPH over most of what is left of that line.
Finally, in PRR days, with the exception of the long rush hour trains, the average length of trains- Philly - Media was four cars, and the length was two- cars west of Media--- and that was true only because the PRR didn't operate MP 54's as single unit trains because of weak brake capacity. Not nearly enough train to support using a GG1 as motive power.