Virginian Railway Electrification/Riding the N&W Steam Clips

[NW Mailing List]

Pretty simple answer. N&W did a line relocation in the very early 1950s to lessen the grades. All the N&W electrification power plants, and locomotives were old, and maintenance costs were rising every year. The cost of the infastructure upgrades were probably deemed higher than the return on investment.

With the VGN, once the merger was accomplished meant less operating efficiency, motors had to move west via VGN with empty trains. The N&W had planned on running most coal eastbound via the VGN, including the traffic on the former Radford Division side. It also meant stocking materials and supplies for electric maintenance. I do not have particular evidence of this, but it appeared that the VGN had a lot more deferred maintenance on the electrics in its last years of operation, perhaps to increase the bottom line of the operating books. 

The jackshafts were already 35 years old, and most had been virtually stored in the time leading up to the merger, only the 1956 EL-Cs would be considered relatively new, the EL-2Bs were 12 years old at the merger. Again, higher maintenance costs. I have seen a file with costs on maintenance, but no longer have it. Of course, the N&W really wanted to get rid of the electrics, as it was now out of character with their operating plan as well, so they could easily adjust the numbers to show exactly what upper management wanted to see.

Ken Miller

On Apr 6, 2016, at 7:13 AM, NW Mailing List wrote:

> Please remind me:  why did N&W eliminate electrification on the mainline in WV in the 1950s and the former Virginian west of Roanoke in the early 1960s?   Thanks.
> 
>     Ray Smoot
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NW-Mailing-List [mailto:nw-mailing-list-bounces at nwhs.org] On Behalf Of NW Mailing List
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 5:42 PM
> To: N&W Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Virginian Railway Electrification/Riding the N&W Steam Clips
> 
> Mr. Whalen asks: 
> 
>>> One day it occurred to me that while many, if not most, railroads 
>>> used
> electrification when they had mountains to climb (N&W, VGN, GN, CMSt&P, BA&P), the PRR relegated its electrification to its flatlands and continued to use steam to climb its mountains. << 
> 
> Answer: The PRR was in the planning stages of electrifying from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh (two divisions, Harrisburg-Altoona, and Altoona-Pittsburgh.) 
> 
> The late years of the Depression and then the war years sapped that project. There was supposedly an attempt to revive the project in the early 1950s, but recessions and general business conditions in the Northeast (tonnage erosion) caused the shelving of the project. 
> 
> The electrification was installed first on the "flatlands" (NY-Harrisburg-Baltimore-Washington) to break the logjams at stub-end terminals (principally at Broad Street Station, Philadelphia.) 
> 
> For details check the truly voluminous Chronology of the PRR by Dr. Christopher T. Baer of the Hagley Museum. You can get the Chronology on-line. It is downloadable on a per-year basis, and each year runs 40 to 60 pages. 
> 
> -- abram burnett 
> 
> ===========================
> Sent to You from my Telegraph Key
> ... better than AT&T 4G LTE
> ===========================
> ________________________________________
> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
> To change your subscription go to
> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
> http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/
> ________________________________________
> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org
> To change your subscription go to
> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list
> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at
> http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/