RDC passenger consists

[jrbarney]

AntonioFP45,
Could you check that URL, please ? On my computer it opens to the Web site of an Australian model. I'm sure all women from Oz are nice, but I'm not sure that's where you wanted to lead us.
Bob
NMRA Life 0543

[AntonioFP45]

Drephpe.

[:D]Thanks so much, guy! [tup]TOP NOTCH INFO! Looks like that It's also "poetic justice" that the metroliners were in service on the already "plagued" Penn Central. I've wondered for years why those blisters were on the roofs of the metroliners. I had guessed that it was air conditioning equipment.
Thanks again!

[:)][8D]BTW: For any interested, go to: www.asmodel.com
This company makes resin kits of the SPV 2000 as well as other commuter equipment.

[Anonymous]

I thought I had seen pictures of RDC's with trailers but then the post about Doodlebugs made me recheck. I couldn't find the photos but I have a couple of notes which indicate it was Doodlebugs and trailers. The note didn't include road but indicated NE so it could have been B&M.

[Anonymous]

RE: SPV's and ML trolley cars. Both are off the line, to my knowledge, and not a moment too soon, as they were both dogs. Ask any ATK maintenance person who had to mess with them. Those ML's may have looked sleek, but they only blew by at 110 because ATK had to assign an on-board electrician to each train to keep them running, and don't ask them to run in the snow, because the cooling air intakes and resistor grids were under the cars and would clog, leaving them dead and (poetic justice!) they'd have to be hauled in by a G! That's why they got reshopped and the grids put on top. Another interesting tidbit--the pans were aerodynamic, of course, but where a conventional train would have one or maybe 2 up, the MLs, being EMUs, had to have one up for each paired carset. If the train got any longer than about 3, the slipstream turbulence from the forward pans would cause the pans on the rear cars to gallop on and off the wire, playing havoc with the traction motors and creating a psychedelic ride for the passengers. Hence AEM7's hauling Amcans on the NEC spine ASAP and the trolleys relegated to the Harrisburg line where they could lope along and not see as many picky passengers. The SPVs were owned by ConnDOT and to my knowledge have been replaced by a locomotive hauled trainset. I seem to recall at least one fire, the exhaust leaked into the cabin, the ride was horrendous, etc. Can someone confirm, I think they may have been de-engined like MBTA did to some of their RDCs and turned into trailers. The RDCs were also genuine maintenance headaches until the Canadians rebuilt them, which helped a lot but did not completely solve the problem, although my old friend Jack Humbert (nee of the Reading, B&O and IC) swore by them when he had them in commute service in Philly and Baltimore.

Dallas/Ft Worth (Trinity Railway Express, jointly owned by DART and The T) runs re-engined, re-transmissioned RDCs bought from Canada, MU-ed routinely in trains, but with no trailer cars. They were gutted and are quite nice inside. Here's one of several available links: http://www.trinityrailwayexpress.org/images.html They are also running bilevels between Dallas and Fort Worth, accessible by free shuttle from DFW Airport.

And if it's still running this week (you Canadians help me out here) the E&N on Vancouver Island (VIA) ran a pair of RDC-1's between Victoria and Courtenay ( I think now just Nanaimo)--there has been quite a controversy over this line, with Rail America on again-off again; the last I saw, back on with the intervention of a shipper. It's a beautiful trip, although the lack of accommodations made it decidedly third-world, but I never could understand why they locked the doors between the two cars, even though both were occupied. I'll always be grateful to the conductor and brakeman who held the train for my then-young son and me at Courtenay so we could run to a store several blocks away and get some food and drinks (there wasn't even water on the train).

B&O ran an all-RDC consist called the "Daylight Speedliner" in the late 50's and early 60's as a mainline train replacement. This train even had an RDC adapted as a food service car. They wound up in commute service (I rode one in 1966 between Pittsburgh and McKeesport) with the train name plates still on the equipment. Definitely one-of-a-kind.

Hope this info is useful. Happy hunting.

[Anonymous]

They still use tham in Dallas Texas. I think Nigel may not be mistaken. I am sure that there was one railroad that used non-powered cars with RDCs. My guess is that it was B&M

[AntonioFP45]

Gentlemen,
Great feedback!

[;)][:)] If I can add one more to the RDC topic. In the early 1980s, Budd's replacement for the RDC was known as the "SPV 2000". A group of enthusiastic Amtrak fleet maintenance employees wanted them officially nicknamed "Spiffy" or "Spiffies" because of their neat and clean looks but Amtrak president Alan S. Boyd was more "matter of factly" (o.k, unimaginative) and didn't officially adopt the nickname.
(some executives are just too "hard boiled", even with good intentions)

The SPV 2000 was basically an Metroliner/Amfleet coach with a metroliner cab end and Detroit Diesel engines for power. The car was 85ft in length but lighter in weight and more fuel efficient than RDCs. Don't know about the horsepower, but I did read that they were not as roomy or comfortable as the RDCs and locomotive engineers [|(] did not like the vibration that these cars exhibited. Do any of you know if Amtrak is still running SPV 2000s?

Ironically I've seen pictures of "non-Amtrak" RDCs "still running" in Canada. In the U.S some survive in tourist service. LIke an old Chevy these old girls were truly built to last!

[:)]

[Anonymous]

Hadn't thought about the commercial considerations, you're probably right there. Not sure about trailers slowing them down though - power-trailer combos over here can hit 65MPH without much trouble. Guess as US cars are heavier the effect of the trailer would be more marked.

[ndbprr]

But it was the transmission that was the weak link. I suspect that Budd wanted to maximize RDC sales to some degree and trailers don't do that. Don't forget they were also big in city mass transit like subways and elevated cars where all are powered. Could they have beefed up the transmission? Sure but at what cost. Acceleration from a standing stop was one of the selling features minimizing times between stations. The RDC was never designed to replace backwoods doodlebugs on leisurely schedules. It was designed to be a mainline or commuter line replacement with performance guarantees and cost savings. Dragging trailers severly limits that performance

[Anonymous]

I'm a little puzzled why the RDCs couldn't haul trailer cars - their British equivelents could. It's not a problem with the type of transmission - we have both diesel-mechanical and diesel-hydraulic railcars over here that can handle trailers. I guess they just weren't powerful enough. Interestingly, the newer "second generation" diesel railcars over here are all powered units - presumably to help with acceleration from stops.

[BR60103]

I think Nigel is mistaken about non-powered RDCs. The B&M had some RDC9, which CN bought, which were powered but without driving cabs. They were used to fill out the middle of trains.
The last time I saw this discussed, the end conclusion was that pulling cars might void the warranty, but somebody probably did it.

[Dayliner]

QUOTE: Thanks for the encouragement Dayliner.

Thanks AntonioFP45 for your positive feedback--it's nice to have that kind of response to my first post!

I've always been surprised that modelers haven't taken to the RDC more than they have. It's ideally suited to the kind of operating conditions most of us face on our layouts, with limited room for long trains. They enable even the smallest layout to run a decent passenger service. I don't know what it was like in the States, but up here in Canada the Budds could show up just about anywhere--corridor service, inter-city runs, branchline service, commute trips--anything except the transcontinental glam trains.

Perhaps part of the problem was a lack of decent models, but that's changed now in both HO and N.

Have fun!

[AntonioFP45]

Ndbprr

You're correct! I just remembered that on my home computer's picture slide show I have a picture of Metroliner #800 (I think) wearing the red Pennsylvania Keystone on the front end early in 1968, just before the merger! The red stripes stayed in the Penn Central scheme according to the pictures that I have.

Thank you for mentioning this! I'll modify one of the cars as number 800.

JBarney and Railroading Brit, thank you too. Guys like you make this hobby enjoyable![:)][8)][;)][8D][:D][:)]

[jrbarney]

AntonioFP45,
Judging by the photo at the site that Railroading Brit provided, the unit in the line drawings in the Precision Scale catalog appears to be identical, although not identified as Tenshodo. Did a "Google" search for Tenshodo, and found a site that advertises the Tenshodo SPUDs. The "Budb" author of the site is the proprietor of the Aero-Train Hobby House. The URL is:
http://www.geocities.com/budb3/arts/xmpl/spud.html
Hope this helps, since I don't know what the customs duties and S&H would be from the UK.
Bob
NMRA Life 0543

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ndbprr

I don't know if you could still find one but PFM had a device called a SPUD for self propelled under car device that I used to power my Metroliners. It is a truck with a motor built in and is self contained. It worked great

SPUDs are still available - they're made by a Japanese company called "Tenshodo". I've found a supplier here: www.dckits.co.uk/motors.html

Obviously it would be easier to find a US stockist, but in the unlikely event that there isn't one DC Kits seem prepared to ship worldwide.

[ndbprr]

You missed one variation. Mine are in PRR dress as originally intended. Stainless steel sides with a red stripe above and below the windows connected at the cab end and a PRR keystone on that end and the front. Since the merger occurred prior to them being accepted pictures were a bear to find.

[jrbarney]

AntonioFP45,
Not sure if this is helpful, but the response from Ndbprr reminded me that in their HO and HOn3 Steam Locomotive Super-Detailing Part and Kits Catalog No. 3, Precision Scale Co. Inc. lists a 4-wheel drive under-the-floor power truck with a wheelbase adjustable from 7' c-t-c to 9' 3." It's their item HO31930. I have not seen it, much less used it, but their catalog has line drawings of it.
Bob
NMRA Life 0543

[AntonioFP45]

Hey Ndbprr

Thanks. [:)] I check into right away. BTW: When did you get your Metroliner cars? Do you have them in the Amtrak Phase 1 colors or did you repaint them into Penn Central? I think that the stainless steel look really made them stand out. [^] While Penn Central was a financial disaster, the Metroliner trains were the company's "bright spot" before Amtrak took over the service.

It's funny that up until Amtrak retired them, many of the prototype Metroliner cars were still in their Penn Central livery. I have fond memories of these 110 mph "wind slicers"
zipping along the Northeast Corrider.

Along with a "decent" truck motor, I also plan on upgrading the 4 car set with clear window glazing, weights in the car floor underneath the passenger section, lighting kit, and DCC/Sound (horn only). I plan on using the new "Gold White" LED lights for the overhead headlights on the lead car.

The paint job: strip to primer. spray jet black followed by Alclad Chrome which will give the cars that "stainless steel" look that so many of us would like to see on model passenger cars. (See June 2003 model railroader)

[:D][:)][8D]I plan on submitting photos to Model Railroader once I finish
(may take a year as my modeling fun time is limited!)[;)]
Thanks again! God Bless!

[ndbprr]

I don't know if you could still find one but PFM had a device called a SPUD for self propelled under car device that I used to power my Metroliners. It is a truck with a motor built in and is self contained. It worked great

[AntonioFP45]

[;)]Thanks for the encouragement Dayliner. And yes, I've decided not to cannabilize the motor as I think it would be a "crime" on such an attractive unit. When I was looking at motoring options for my HO Metroliner, an LHS rep pointed out that "pricewise" it was cheaper to buy the RDC and gut it rather than get an NWSL set up. Glad, I changed my mind!

It's funny that even though I saw a few as a kid, [:o)] I never was a big RDC fan until I purchased this proto unit. It's amazing what an effect a high quality model can have on a modeler! [:D] Your input has given me another use for the RDCs now, as I plan on having New Haven passenger trains on my future layout. I can get away occasionaly with putting an RDC or two on a locomotive hauled local passenger or commuter train, to keep things interesting. [C):-)]

Thanks again! Peace![:D][8D][8)][:)]

[Dayliner]

I remember hearing somewhere that Budd actually had a clause in its sales contracts for the RDCs stipulating that the warranty was void if the cars were used to haul trailers.

Conversely, though, it was not unknown for RDCs to be included in the consist of a locomotive-hauled train. I remember seeing a photo in Trains some years ago of Canadian Pacific RDC in a train pulled by a CP 4-4-4! I grew up on Vancouver Island, and from time to time the Budd cars would make their daily round trip behind one or two of the line's freight units, on account of either bad weather or, more often, mechanical failure. So, you could run your RDC as part of a larger train--just remember to put something on the head end!

Glad you're not going to cannibalize your RDC--as you can tell from my handle, I love 'em!

[ndbprr]

If I am not mistaken the original RDC's used a GM Buick Dynaflow transmission and were never intended to pull trailers. I recall some stories of railroads burning them up very quickly. The PRSL did run 10-12 car all RDC trains but trailers were never intended to be pulled by them.

[AntonioFP45]

[:D]Thank you Dehusman and Nfmisso & Ndbprr.

[:)][:D]Very helpful, Amigos! I've never seen pictures of RDCs pulling the regular Budd or Pullman standard 85ft. long passenger cars, but I was curious.

I will purchase another New Haven RDC (non-powered) and make a 2 car set as the New Haven ran short RDC trains in Northern Connecticut. Got to admit, again that the Proto RDCs are good looking units that run smoothly. The only modifications I wi***o make to my current RDC is to add lighting to the interior and intall a TCS DCC decoder. It will be in conjunction with a DSX sound decoder from Soundtraxx(horn only).

[nfmisso]

Budd made some un-powered RDC for use as trailers, I think that B&M had some. I do not believe that they pulled conventional passenger cars.

[dehusman]

There probably are examples of RDC's pulling trailers or other cars, but RDC's used a drive which wasn't designed for the stresses of moving tonnage, so it would be pretty rare.

Dave H.

[AntonioFP45]

I recently puchased a brand new Proto New Haven RDC (HO scale) at a model train show for only $45. My expectations were at best "mediocre". I was very surprised at how heavy it is, beautifully detailed, and how smoothly it runs. Originally I purchased this unit to "cannibalize the truck motor" in order to repower one of my Bachmann Metroliner cars (no longer made) which I'm repainting into Penn Central along with 3 other Metroliner cars. I've decided to keep the RDC intact and just purchase a NWSL truck motor instead for the Metroliner.

Often times when we see pictures of RDC trains they're run either as single units or in multiple units.

Question: Do any of you know if any railroads that ran or still run RDCs had them pull non-dieselized passenger cars? While horsepower was not very high, it would seem reasonable that one or two RDCs could pull a couple of cars if passenger demand put the railroad in a pinch.

Thanks.