Catenary wire maintenance

I recently came across a picture of a vehicle for the greasing of overhead wires related to a trolley/interurban system. Was the lubricating of the lines a practice of the New Haven, and if so how often was it done and what kind of lubricant was used? I’ve never come a across a picture of a New Haven wire maintenance car except in the excellent book Forgotten Railroads Through Westchester County.

I have heard that one of the reasons running steam under wires was frowned upon was because of the soot settling on the wires. If the wires were greased then I suppose the mixture could have gotten pretty messy on the pantographs.

grease used on catenary is graphite grease or carbon grease, so soot should be perfect for replenishing

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/graphite

Kilgore Trout wrote:I have heard that one of the reasons running steam under wires was frowned upon was because of the soot settling on the wires. If the wires were greased then I suppose the mixture could have gotten pretty messy on the pantographs.

There was plenty of steam under the wires especially between New Haven and Bridgeport where you had both freight and passenger trains enroute to the Naugy at Devon behind steam until the first diesels came on the scene in the mid to late 40's. I don't think it was ever much of an issue.
Noel Weaver

Well, I learned something today. So much for assumptions.

I knew an engineer on the New Haven - George Ayrers who ran the steam-powered wire train before diesels took over.

He got pretty high on the roster before he retired in the mid-1970s. Had a morning run out of GCT (he lived in Queens) & return from NH in the afternoon.

chnhrr wrote:I recently came across a picture of a vehicle for the greasing of overhead wires related to a trolley/interurban system. Was the lubricating of the lines a practice of the New Haven, and if so how often was it done and what kind of lubricant was used? I’ve never come a across a picture of a New Haven wire maintenance car except in the excellent book Forgotten Railroads Through Westchester County.

Funny, but if you hadn't specifically said that photo was taken on an interurban line somewhere, I'd have sworn it was the Danbury Branch. The cat poles are identical, from top to base (and don't they look pretty heavy-duty for an interurban?), and the woods in the background look like what you would find in upper Fairfield County.

Is that a hose that extends up to the men on the platform? It doesn't look like it's attached to anything on the car.

The steam engine for the wire train was oil-fired, not coal fired. The last steam regularly used in the electrified zone was circa 1927, so servicing coal-fired engines became problematic. The oil-fired engine was easier to refuel.

The problem with using coal-fired steam engines in the electrified zone was partly due to the exhaust (which really didn't help anything), but also the piled-up coal in the locomtive's tender. A freshly-serviced road engine coming out of Cedar Hill bound for Maybrook had a decent-sized coal pile in its tender. Coal will conduct electricity, and low-hanging catenary is filled with 11,000 volts of the stuff. Potential problem? You betcha! I saw a pantograph vaporized once simply due to bouncing on the catenary.

Statkowski wrote:The steam engine for the wire train was oil-fired, not coal fired. The last steam regularly used in the electrified zone was circa 1927, so servicing coal-fired engines became problematic. The oil-fired engine was easier to refuel.

The problem with using coal-fired steam engines in the electrified zone was partly due to the exhaust (which really didn't help anything), but also the piled-up coal in the locomtive's tender. A freshly-serviced road engine coming out of Cedar Hill bound for Maybrook had a decent-sized coal pile in its tender. Coal will conduct electricity, and low-hanging catenary is filled with 11,000 volts of the stuff. Potential problem? You betcha! I saw a pantograph vaporized once simply due to bouncing on the catenary.

Come on, Henry, how do you suppose the Maybrook freight jobs got from Cedar Hill to Devon or back? They did not change power at Devon, that's for sure. How did the Naugy jobs get from either Cedar Hill or Bridgeport to or from Devon? Again, they did not change power at Devon although the through jobs to or from the Naugy and New York did change from steam (later diesel) power to electric power at Bridgeport Station. There were hundreds of steam miles under the wire on a daily basis on the New Haven Railroad especially before the Maybrook Line went diesel. The New Haven was not the only railroad to run steam under the wire, the Pennsylvania ran both freight and passenger steam under the wire in several locations for various reasons. Who can forget the days of K-4's running all the way in and out of the old Jersey City Terminal to and from North Jersey Coast points? This operation was one of the last steam operations anywhere in the New York City area until late 1957, I rode it a few times over the years and remember it well. Both the Lackawanna and the Reading also ran considerable steam under the wires. All of these operations took place with coal burning locomotives as well.
I remember in the coal strike in 1948 or so the New Haven tried one of the wire train 2-6-0's on trains 158 and 465 between Bridgeport and Winsted and it did not work out very well. They had problems keeping up the steam and I think maybe the fire went out once or twice too. I remember waiting for 158 in Torrington one night when they did this and the train was very late. It was not long after that that the first RS-1's came to the Naugy and they breathed a high sigh of relief. The strikes in the coal mines hastened the railroads move to diesels but in the case of the New Haven it was going to happen anyway strike or no strike and they dieselized before most of the others did.
Noel Weaver

as for OP photo, I doubt the wire train was greasing, it seems they are installing original catenary, as can be seen by wire near man at ground level.
and as someone mentioned by shape of poles it may be on Danbury Branch.

Noel, never did I say that they couldn't run coal-fired engines under the wire, just that a highly-stacked coal pile could be problematic. Anywhere else on the system one could fill a tender seventeen feet high, if possible. Under the wire, however, it was advisable not to use a coal rake on a high pile.

DutchRailnut wrote:as for OP photo, I doubt the wire train was greasing, it seems they are installing original catenary, as can be seen by wire near man at ground level.
and as someone mentioned by shape of poles it may be on Danbury Branch.

Definately the Danbury Branch. I lived near this line when I was a small child. Over the years it has been very, very hard for me to find good pictures of the Branch under wire. Finding action shots under wire showing the unique catenary supports has been even more difficult.

That might partly be because this was in a sort of rural out-of-the-way area back in the days before the wires came down. Lots of online pictures can be found - from the Metro-North era, not from the New Haven era.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain