EL - PC power incompatable MU ?

[Cactus Jack]

Back in 1974 when EL and PC began operating via Utica after the Poughkeepsie Bridge burned both PC and EL consists were used. At times when power was mixed for power balancing, it was never MU'ed as "the MU between the two railroads locos was not compatable". I always believed this to be a 27 pin MU jumper issue.

However, there are photos of EL and PC Big Uboats on the EL near Port Jervis that seem to indicate that the two railroads power did MU as early as 1971 - 72. After Conrail began in 1976 ... and in the very early months of Conrail there are photos and I recall ex-EL units MU'ed in dogs breakfast consists with PC power.

So, what is the real story ? Did EL just not want PC units to be MU'ed out of Utica with PC power and the story given that practice could not be done? Was Conrail ultra-efficient in quickly rewiring MU wiring and tracking units that were compatible for mating up in consist ?

Anyone know the EL and PC 27 pin jumper arrangement designations ?

The other thing was that the EL 900's would not MU with the 1200's, true ? When the 900's started running into Utica in the early 1970's they were "orphans" not ever mixed with anything else.

[Tommy Meehan]

At times when power was mixed for power balancing, it was never MU'ed as "the MU between the two railroads locos was not compatable". I always believed this to be a 27 pin MU jumper issue....

I guess it depends on who you're quoting. But it sounds like a pin issue.

I knew and spoke fairly often with the late Charlie Smith, New York Central's last Mechanical Engineer-Locomotives, used to pick his brain. I remember he told me, right after the PC merger, it was discovered when a PRR E unit was MU'd with an NYC E unit, the Pennsy unit would dump its sand as soon as the cables were connected. Point being, diesel units from two different railroads -- especially first generation diesel units -- could be incompatible in odd ways.

In fact early first generation units from the same railroad could be incompatible. Charlie told me Central could not MU FMs with EMDs because of things like the backup light and the bell. The two builders apparently used different pins to control those functions. Under the old ICC regulations, the engineer in the lead unit had to have full control of ALL functions or it was a violation.

Might've been a similiar issue with the 900s and the 1200s. Charlie said Central didn't MU first generation Alcos with first generation EMDs either. Until many years later, that is, when the pins had been modified.

[cdw]

Erie lackawanna at the time of the Conrail takeover had all 27 pin MU changed to AAR standard.EL RS2 RS3 Gp7 units had 6SL&6BL, that was not compatable with 24RL &26L,alough the 1270 to 1284 DL&W GP7's had 24RL air equipment. I would say that the air brake compatability was the problem,not the 27 pin MU. These units with No 6 equipment were always kept with each other. When the Century 424's were ordered they had the two extra hoses and extra air portion to make them compatable with No6 equipment.

Dick Welles

[Cactus Jack]

Thanks Dick !

Good info.

Was EL non-standard then sometime just before the date they went into CR ?
And how about DL&W and ERIE - were the pins different ? - and did they even use 27 pin then ?

One last one .... did the PC power from NE97 ever make it to Hornell or did they turn at Gang Mills or layover in Binghamton.

Hope "retirement" is working well for you

Doug Ellison

[Tommy Meehan]

The other thing was that the EL 900's would not MU with the 1200's, true? When the 900's started running into Utica in the early 1970's they were "orphans" not ever mixed with anything else.

EL RS2 RS3 Gp7 units had 6SL&6BL, that was not compatable with 24RL &26L,alough the 1270 to 1284 DL&W GP7's had 24RL air equipment.

That sounds like the 900s should've been able to MU with the 1200s. Except maybe not with the 15 ex-Lackawanna units with 24RL air.