I notice in photos that they Railroads only ran 2 to 4 car trains or lash up on the Budd RDC's. Was there a limit on the amount of cars used?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I have seen three car sets, as they should all be MU able: Look at this video on YouTube:
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDQeVUnZ0JI
Marty
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDQeVUnZ0JI
Marty
quote:Railroads ran them in 2-4 unit sets because that's what the partonage required.
Exactly right! Depended on what the ridership called for, and in most cases these were relatively short commuter runs.
I rode those babies from Savage, MD, to downtown DC several times a week for a couple of years. I'm still a fan of those Budd cars (boy, could they put out the smoke on occasion!).
Basically RDC's coud be in a train longer than four units. The PRSL did this for a while by running an 8 to 10 car or so train out from Camden NJ, then splitting it into two trains farther out on the line: one for Alantic City and the other to Cape May.
Single unit RDC's running as a train sometimes caused problems by not properly activating grade crossing or road signals. With only four wheels in contact with the rail, the use of sand or rails wet from rain could isolate a car enough that it did not activate signals or be detected. A two car train did much better in that respect.
The Budd warrantee and making it void if an RDC was used as a 'locomotive' for an unpowered car or cars stemmed from the Allison torque converters used with each 6 cylinder diesel engine powering the car. In RDC use, the Allison hydraulic transmission (used in US Army tanks) was pushed very close to its maximum limit.
In order to persuade railroads that the RDC was a reliable piece of equipment, Budd put itself out on a limb and offered free replacement of the transmission if it had a road failure. Railroads were very suspect of hydraulic drives.
In tests, Budd learned that if every unit was powered these transmissions worked well. However, if a single, unpowered car was put between two RDC's it could eventually overheat the transmissions and they would fail. Railroads could choose to ignore that warrantee warning but they would have to pay the full bill for replacing burnt-out transmissions. Of course, such an unpoweerd car would have to be wired for remote control of the RDC on the opposite end.
Budd eventually developed the RDC-9. This was an RDC coach-trailer unit with a single diesel engine and torque converter tansmission to move it. It could be used in tandem with two other fully powered RDC's and that set up gave no overheating problems in typical, start-run-and-stop commuter service.
Ed Bommer
Single unit RDC's running as a train sometimes caused problems by not properly activating grade crossing or road signals. With only four wheels in contact with the rail, the use of sand or rails wet from rain could isolate a car enough that it did not activate signals or be detected. A two car train did much better in that respect.
The Budd warrantee and making it void if an RDC was used as a 'locomotive' for an unpowered car or cars stemmed from the Allison torque converters used with each 6 cylinder diesel engine powering the car. In RDC use, the Allison hydraulic transmission (used in US Army tanks) was pushed very close to its maximum limit.
In order to persuade railroads that the RDC was a reliable piece of equipment, Budd put itself out on a limb and offered free replacement of the transmission if it had a road failure. Railroads were very suspect of hydraulic drives.
In tests, Budd learned that if every unit was powered these transmissions worked well. However, if a single, unpowered car was put between two RDC's it could eventually overheat the transmissions and they would fail. Railroads could choose to ignore that warrantee warning but they would have to pay the full bill for replacing burnt-out transmissions. Of course, such an unpoweerd car would have to be wired for remote control of the RDC on the opposite end.
Budd eventually developed the RDC-9. This was an RDC coach-trailer unit with a single diesel engine and torque converter tansmission to move it. It could be used in tandem with two other fully powered RDC's and that set up gave no overheating problems in typical, start-run-and-stop commuter service.
Ed Bommer
I spent the first 11 years of my life in Massachusetts and my Dad rode these to work every day in Boston. I went with him a few times and the B&M easily ran more than four RDCs in a train.
quote:The New Haven also ran MU conduits on a Pullman-Bradley coach to splice between two RDC's. When Budd got wind of it, they threatened to cancel the RDC's warranties and the New Haven relented.
Jersey Central also pulled the same stunt, using a standard commuter coach. They also had problems with the RDC's because they used low grade diesel fuel.
B&O used RDC's on some intercity trains, I believe Pittsburgh-Washington. I believe they had one car reconfigured as a sit-down diner! Does anybody have the complete details?
Years ago I had a personal experience with RDC's on Pacific Great Eastern (now BC Ry). Some slow running along a lake produced very noticable diesel fumes inside the car.
In 1980, while President of a local Railroad Historical Society, I helped arrange a fantrip on former Lackawanna commuter lines (operated then by NJ Transit/NJ DOT) using 4 ex-CNJ RDC cars.
Ran Hoboken-Netcong-Gladstone-Hoboken...shown here in siding at Murray Hill, NJ for a meet with regular MU cars.
This was only time the ex-CNJ BUDDs ran on this Lackawanna trackage since they were used only between Hoboken and Waldwick, NJ in weekday commuter service.
Each car was re-lettered with 'contact paper' decals to read LACKAWANNA RR including herald and car names. Train orders issued for Gladstone Branch portion identified train as "LACKAWANNA #559 run Passenger Extra". I still have a set of these unique train orders.
The Lackawanna RR NEVER owned RDC cars, at least not until that day, July 20th, 1980. By the way, that date recorded temperatures over 100 degrees...sure wished the a/c worked in all the cars.
The return trip from Gladstone to Hoboken, NJ Terminal set a non-stop speed record that remains unbroken to this day!
The trip was covered by WABC TV and made the national news segment that evening.
Thanks.
Walter M. Matuch
Ran Hoboken-Netcong-Gladstone-Hoboken...shown here in siding at Murray Hill, NJ for a meet with regular MU cars.
This was only time the ex-CNJ BUDDs ran on this Lackawanna trackage since they were used only between Hoboken and Waldwick, NJ in weekday commuter service.
Each car was re-lettered with 'contact paper' decals to read LACKAWANNA RR including herald and car names. Train orders issued for Gladstone Branch portion identified train as "LACKAWANNA #559 run Passenger Extra". I still have a set of these unique train orders.
The Lackawanna RR NEVER owned RDC cars, at least not until that day, July 20th, 1980. By the way, that date recorded temperatures over 100 degrees...sure wished the a/c worked in all the cars.
The return trip from Gladstone to Hoboken, NJ Terminal set a non-stop speed record that remains unbroken to this day!
The trip was covered by WABC TV and made the national news segment that evening.
Thanks.
Walter M. Matuch
In the late 50s/early 60s CP ran a commuter train consisting of TEN (10) RDCs from Windsor Station (Montreal) to the Lakeshore late at night, about 11:15 or so.
I believe it was broken up for the return trips the next morning, but I could be wrong on this.
Glenn
.
I believe it was broken up for the return trips the next morning, but I could be wrong on this.
Glenn
.
I remember when the Reading Railroad had the RDC cars back in the 1970's and seeing them run through Glenside and Jenkintown on their way to Bethlehem and up to Newark,New Jersey when the Reading ran trains there up until August of 1981. I wonder if septa is regretting their decision to get rid of passenger train service to Pottsville and Newtown and the other two lines I mentioned. Those RDC cars would still come in handy today on those lines.
I only did it once but circa 1981 I think, I rode an RDC from Middletown NY to Suffern.
The conductor allowed me to ride the rear vestibule.
Zipping down the curves along the Ramapo River was great ride.
The conductor allowed me to ride the rear vestibule.
Zipping down the curves along the Ramapo River was great ride.
Pacific Great Eastern, later BC Rail, had some awesome Budd runs from
North Vancouver to Price George...an all day journey, and then some.
Food served at your seat in first class....but then all Budd product
was first class!!!
North Vancouver to Price George...an all day journey, and then some.
Food served at your seat in first class....but then all Budd product
was first class!!!
quote:Originally posted by Ed Bommer:
Basically RDC's coud be in a train longer than four units. The PRSL did this for a while by running an 8 to 10 car or so train out from Camden NJ, then splitting it into two trains farther out on the line: one for Alantic City and the other to Cape May.
Single unit RDC's running as a train sometimes caused problems by not properly activating grade crossing or road signals. With only four wheels in contact with the rail, the use of sand or rails wet from rain could isolate a car enough that it did not activate signals or be detected. A two car train did much better in that respect.
The Budd warrantee and making it void if an RDC was used as a 'locomotive' for an unpowered car or cars stemmed from the Allison torque converters used with each 6 cylinder diesel engine powering the car. In RDC use, the Allison hydraulic transmission (used in US Army tanks) was pushed very close to its maximum limit.
In order to persuade railroads that the RDC was a reliable piece of equipment, Budd put itself out on a limb and offered free replacement of the transmission if it had a road failure. Railroads were very suspect of hydraulic drives.
In tests, Budd learned that if every unit was powered these transmissions worked well. However, if a single, unpowered car was put between two RDC's it could eventually overheat the transmissions and they would fail. Railroads could choose to ignore that warrantee warning but they would have to pay the full bill for replacing burnt-out transmissions. Of course, such an unpoweerd car would have to be wired for remote control of the RDC on the opposite end.
Budd eventually developed the RDC-9. This was an RDC coach-trailer unit with a single diesel engine and torque converter tansmission to move it. It could be used in tandem with two other fully powered RDC's and that set up gave no overheating problems in typical, start-run-and-stop commuter service.
Ed Bommer
Ed one correction. The PRSL did run the long RDC consists as you said but if I am not mistaken it was broken into three separate trains. One to Ocean City, one to Wildwood and the other to Cape May City. The CMSL still runs the original restored cars in the summer months.
Just an update on two former B&O BUDDs.
The B&O Museum is now back in possession of their operational RDC. It was leased out to a Pennsylvania tourist line for a number of years. The museum has yet to confirm what their future plans are for it. As of yesterday, it was tucked away in a publicly inaccessible portion of the museum yard with other diesels behind it. This unit was used on their short excursions up until the late 1990s (?). Excursions today and for the past number of years are run using former MARC commuter cars painted in B&O Passenger scheme with power being a 1950 built former NYC switcher. Occasionally, a Chessie GP38 is used. According to the museum, the other operational diesel engines are not "blue carded" and are not able to be used on public trips. Regardless, hopefully soon the museum will get back to me as to their future plans for their recently returned RDC and hopefully run it for the public (as with the other stuff usually hidden away).
Currently in the museum paint both, the Museum is finishing up an extensive restoration (non-operational I would assume) of another B&O/MDOT combine RDC. This unit will be going on display in Gaithersburg, MD with a B&O/Chessie bay window caboose and BC&G #14, a 2-8-0 that recently underwent an very extensive and BEAUTIFUL cosmetic restoration.
The museum does have at least one more RDC in MDOT paint out stored on the "North Main" with the Union Station GG1. It is in rough shape, complete with many bullet holes. These former MDOT units were stored in Brunswick up until fairly recently.
The B&O Museum is now back in possession of their operational RDC. It was leased out to a Pennsylvania tourist line for a number of years. The museum has yet to confirm what their future plans are for it. As of yesterday, it was tucked away in a publicly inaccessible portion of the museum yard with other diesels behind it. This unit was used on their short excursions up until the late 1990s (?). Excursions today and for the past number of years are run using former MARC commuter cars painted in B&O Passenger scheme with power being a 1950 built former NYC switcher. Occasionally, a Chessie GP38 is used. According to the museum, the other operational diesel engines are not "blue carded" and are not able to be used on public trips. Regardless, hopefully soon the museum will get back to me as to their future plans for their recently returned RDC and hopefully run it for the public (as with the other stuff usually hidden away).
Currently in the museum paint both, the Museum is finishing up an extensive restoration (non-operational I would assume) of another B&O/MDOT combine RDC. This unit will be going on display in Gaithersburg, MD with a B&O/Chessie bay window caboose and BC&G #14, a 2-8-0 that recently underwent an very extensive and BEAUTIFUL cosmetic restoration.
The museum does have at least one more RDC in MDOT paint out stored on the "North Main" with the Union Station GG1. It is in rough shape, complete with many bullet holes. These former MDOT units were stored in Brunswick up until fairly recently.
Hey Ed
The Rdc's were made by the Budd Co. at the factory in Phila Pa. on Red lion Road.
thats a street in N. E. Phila,
Lived real close to there.
The Rdc's were made by the Budd Co. at the factory in Phila Pa. on Red lion Road.
thats a street in N. E. Phila,
Lived real close to there.
The B&O rebuilt their RDC's for diner service. Did Budd ever offer it as diner and/or sleeper service out of the red Lion plant?
quote:Originally posted by DominicMazoch:
The B&O rebuilt their RDC's for diner service. Did Budd ever offer it as diner and/or sleeper service out of the Red Lion plant?
The B&O did not rebuild those RDC-2s with dinette sections and kitchens. Budd built them that way for the B&O right on the assembly line. Still one could see where some windows in the car sides had been plated over or altered (for the kitchen area). Budd simply modified their standard RDC-2 body (built on jigs with prefabricated parts welded together) to suit. Such custom work was avaibable for a price, of course!
I don't know of any other US RDCs with similar dining set ups from the Red Lion Philadelphia PA plant. I did see an RDC 2 built under license by Commonwealth Steel of Australia that had a dinette/kitchen arrangement similar to what B&O had. However, that conversion work was done by the owning railroad.
Budd built a few RDCs as sleepers and maybe a diner or two. All were for export. Several such units went to Saudi Arabia with other RDCs. They were used between the seaport of Ad-Dammam on the Persian Gulf to Ridyadh, about 400 miles inland. Saudi heat and desert sand was not kind to them. Their RDCs soon ended up being hauled by locomotives.
Ed Bommer
quote:Originally posted by Allan Miller:quote:Railroads ran them in 2-4 unit sets because that's what the partonage required.
Exactly right! Depended on what the ridership called for, and in most cases these were relatively short commuter runs.
I rode those babies from Savage, MD, to downtown DC several times a week for a couple of years. I'm still a fan of those Budd cars (boy, could they put out the smoke on occasion!).
For about 4 months, back around 1992, I rode MARC's RDCs from Union Station to Baltimore and back to Union Station. I guess this was at the very end of their normal use.
The small Gaithersburg, MD, station is supposed to get a RDC for display in the next couple of weeks.
Jim
quote:Originally posted by jd-train:quote:Originally posted by Allan Miller:quote:Railroads ran them in 2-4 unit sets because that's what the partonage required.
Exactly right! Depended on what the ridership called for, and in most cases these were relatively short commuter runs.
I rode those babies from Savage, MD, to downtown DC several times a week for a couple of years. I'm still a fan of those Budd cars (boy, could they put out the smoke on occasion!).
For about 4 months, back around 1992, I rode MARC's RDCs from Union Station to Baltimore and back to Union Station. I guess this was at the very end of their normal use.
The small Gaithersburg, MD, station is supposed to get a RDC for display in the next couple of weeks.
Jim
Jim,
See my post above. Restoration is on the home stretch at the B&O Museum shop.
SP's unit is at the Galveston RR Museum. Ike did a number on it.
quote:Originally posted by Kent Loudon:
Just one more piece of RDC trivia: IIRC, Jersey Central was the only railroad that ordered RDC's equipped with a fireman's seat!
I will have to differ, Kent. Santa Fe DC-91 and DC-92 had fireman's seats. A Fireman was required by union agreement when both cars were operated in multiple, but not when used singly.
At least some B&O and PRSL RDCs had fireman's seats too. Don't know if they came from Budd with them or were added later.
The firemen's seat in RDCs was required by various 'Full Crew' laws of states and likely, ICC regulations as well for trains passing through state lines. Budd included them in the operating cabs. This was before the ICC died, with the FRA taking its place and growing bigger teeth during the Reagan Adminstration.
Even a single RDC running as a 'train' could be required to at have a crew of four: Conductor, Engineer, Fireman and Brakeman. Brotherhood agreements may have also been a factor in crew assignments. However, when I rode the NWP's RDC from Eureka to Willets in California in 1969, it had a crew of three.
Longer trains (freight and passenger) usually had a crew of five, including a second Brakeman (head end or rear) or a "Trainman," as identified by cap badges on B&O passenger trains.
Ed Bommer
Even a single RDC running as a 'train' could be required to at have a crew of four: Conductor, Engineer, Fireman and Brakeman. Brotherhood agreements may have also been a factor in crew assignments. However, when I rode the NWP's RDC from Eureka to Willets in California in 1969, it had a crew of three.
Longer trains (freight and passenger) usually had a crew of five, including a second Brakeman (head end or rear) or a "Trainman," as identified by cap badges on B&O passenger trains.
Ed Bommer
The NWP Budd is still with us. SP sent it up to the NWP....and ended up on the Island. (Galveston)
A Budd RDC sleeper?? Now there's a thought. Unless your track was just
about perfect, you'd be rocking all over the place. If your a sailor, it
might just enhance your snooze!
about perfect, you'd be rocking all over the place. If your a sailor, it
might just enhance your snooze!
More than just a thought.
Budd did build some RDC's as sleepers. Likely having sections, with restrooms at each end. No roomettes, compartments, bedrooms or drawing rooms. All were for export. Here is what I posted about that on January 1:
Ed Bommer
Budd did build some RDC's as sleepers. Likely having sections, with restrooms at each end. No roomettes, compartments, bedrooms or drawing rooms. All were for export. Here is what I posted about that on January 1:
quote:Budd built a few RDCs as sleepers and maybe a diner or two. All were for export. Several such units went to Saudi Arabia with other RDCs. They were used between the seaport of Ad-Dammam on the Persian Gulf to Ridyadh, about 400 miles inland. Saudi heat and desert sand was not kind to them. Their RDCs soon ended up being hauled by locomotives.
Ed Bommer
I have always like the BUDD 3 car set in the B&O. I have read this thread and learned a great deal. Thank you everyone.
Now my question was several.
Was a Budd subject to rocking or hunting at a certain speed range?
They don't seem to haul very much fuel and wonder where they put it.
And finally the fans up top. What are they for?
Now my question was several.
Was a Budd subject to rocking or hunting at a certain speed range?
They don't seem to haul very much fuel and wonder where they put it.
And finally the fans up top. What are they for?
http://www.gazette.net/article...urg&template=gazette
Will have to stop by this weekend and see it. The latest graduate of the B&O Museum's restoration shop.
Will have to stop by this weekend and see it. The latest graduate of the B&O Museum's restoration shop.
quote:Originally posted by Lee 145:
I have always like the BUDD 3 car set in the B&O. I have read this thread and learned a great deal. Thank you everyone.
Now my question was several.
Was a Budd subject to rocking or hunting at a certain speed range?
They don't seem to haul very much fuel and wonder where they put it.
And finally the fans up top. What are they for?
1. Budd's RDCs were prone to rocking at low speed, especially on jointed rail.
Likely due to the coil springs and soft snubbers (shock absorbers). The trucks may have been set up that way for smoother travel over generally rougher branch line trackage. From my rides in some RDC's, the rocking tended start at about 10 mph and leveled out above 20 MPH.
RDC's had Budd disc brakes, two rotors and air operated calipers on each axle. No brake shoes on the wheels.
RDC's had sanders too. Sand boxes were built into the car side walls over the trucks on each side. Total capacity was 600 lbs. The filler for each was a small, sqaure hatch just below the belt line, under the window area.
2. There was a 250 gallon fuel tank that served both diesel engine/transmission
sets. It was located near the center of the car and could be filled from either side. RDCs were not intended for long distance work, although some were indeed used for that, such as Western Pacific's "Zephyrette." Sometimes larger fuel tanks were fitted, at other times additional fuel as put aboard during station stops.
The engines were two 275 HP 6 cylinder diesels, mounted on an angle and almost on their sides in a roll-out cradle. This made the power unit fairly easy to replace.
I watched a crew change a motor-transmission set in an RDC at Reading Terminal in Philadelhia in the late 1960s. It took about 45 minutes.
RDC enignes were similar to what GM built for buses.
An Allison torque converter transmisson mounted on each engine provided hydraulic drive up to 55 MPH or so, then locked into direct drive.
Sort of like Chevy's old two-speed "Power Glide" on steriods.
A 16.5 Kw generator was attached to each motor/transmission set for the car's electrical system. Two battery boxes were also mounted under the car.
3. The roof blister contained radiators for cooling the diesel engine and transmission sets. Water capacity of the systems was 225 gallons. There were two, one for each power unit. Coolant in pipes (as well as engine exhaust through mufflers under the car and exhaust piping to the roof top) was carried up through dividing walls in the middle of and on each side the car's passenger compartment. Inside the blister, electrically operated, thermostat controlled fans provided the air flow. An under-body mounted, electrically operated Frigidaire air conditioner was also on RDCs.
Ed Bommer
quote:Originally posted by Ed Bommer:
1. Budd's RDCs were prone to rocking at low speed, especially on jointed rail.
Likely due to the coil springs and soft snubbers (shock absorbers). The trucks may have been set up that way for smoother travel over generally rougher branch line trackage. From my rides in some RDC's, the rocking tended start at about 10 mph and leveled out above 20 MPH.
Ed Bommer
Very interesting, Ed. Santa Fe bought their RDC pair for a fast San Diegan service that only made two intermediate stops in the 129 miles instead of 7. The cars ran at 80 MPH for significant distances without speed reductions, and over numerous crossings protected only by wig wag crossing signals. As a result (and so typical of Santa Fe's Mechanical Department) they got replacement trucks - more like regular passenger equipment and having extra ride control features - for better ride quality, as well as heavy plating on the front of the cabs for added strength in case of grade crossing collisions.
I was only 9 when the big wreck occurred and they were reassigned to Newton, Kansas, so I never did ride them in coast passenger service. As they were about to close out their ATSF service, I rode them from Albuquerque to El Paso in 1967. From Albuquerque to Belen, they ran smoothly at 80 MPH. From Belen to El Paso, it was "dark", so they were only allowed 59 MPH maximum, and much of the line was 40 MPH or a little less, following a river, on jointed rail. I noticed a slight tendency to rock very gently when running at 40 or less, but nothing dramatic.
Later, I rode the cab of an RDC on CNR at 80 MPH riding smoothly without any pitching or rocking at any speed. And, when Trinity Railway Express started up its RDC operation out of Dallas over our track, I was sent to audit their Engineers' performance. Those are ex-Canadian RDC's and they also ride fine. However, during a cab ride on a Penn-Central RDC on the Needham line out of Boston, the rocking was quite evident.
The Canadians must have done something to address the rocking on their RDC's.
Ed Bommer wrote that the Allison trannies in the Budd cars had the torgue convertors which locked out at road speed, giving a direct mechanical drive, such as in a car with a "straight stick" trannie." The 1st such auto tranny was the Ultramatic, installed in the "Golden Anniversary" Packards, introduced in May, 1949. The other-wise similar Buick Dynaflow did not have the lock-out feature, so the turbine blades were spinning away at all speeds.
Looking back on my Desiel experience, if those Budds were so many dozens of tons and to maintain them at 80 mph I have to ask myself
"How did those transmissions managed to get such a heavy and long object that fast when it could not really drive a tank much beyond a certain speed?"
After a certain horsepower/Torque power chart is reached "On the other side of the hill" the engines don't have anymore to "Give" in the way of more speed/power.
"How did those transmissions managed to get such a heavy and long object that fast when it could not really drive a tank much beyond a certain speed?"
After a certain horsepower/Torque power chart is reached "On the other side of the hill" the engines don't have anymore to "Give" in the way of more speed/power.
The Budd RDC 1 weighed about 118,700 lbs, with 60,500 lbs on the drivers (the inner wheelset of each truck). The drive axles used a Spicer drive with a 2.08:1 ratio on 33" diameter wheels.
I think tanks had a much higher ratio in their final drive. They also had multi-speed hydraulic transmissions, I think, judging from those I saw being rebuilt at the Letterkenny Army Depot in the late 1960s. That would make them more powerful but also slower. For their size though, it sure looked like they could move pretty fast out on the test grounds - maybe 40-45 MPH or so?
I don't have any charts, only tabulated information on RDC motors and their drive. RDC's had 33" diameter wheels. So maybe someone can figure out how they could reach 80 MPH within the motor's continuous service RPM rating from the rest of the information below:
The two 6 cylinder, 2 cycle GM diesel engines were Model 61801-RA-(6110). The maxmum rating for each was 275 hp at 1,800 RPM. Bore 5", stroke 5.6"
The continuous rating was 213 hp, yielding a useable 426 hp per Budd car (or about 279 lbs per horse). They sounded very much like GM's buses with their torque converter drives as they started out.
The engines would rev up fairly high on a start. The RDC unit would then 'catch up' with the motors, moving faster as the motors still ran at about the same RPMs.
Once the transmission locked into direct drive at 50-55 MPH or so, the rest of acceleration would be up to the motors' remaining capacity, with the advantage of having the mass of the RDC already moving. Also, there is much less resistance with steel wheels rolling on steel rails than there is with tires or treads on pavements or the ground. So it would not take quite so much power to keep it moving and accelerate it.
In 2006, I rode some new Australian RDC's on Adelaide's commuter rail system. The diesel engines in these units ran at a continuous speed (about 1,200 PRM), with no variation whether running, stopped or accelerating.
Start out was smooth and sure. They did not have the 'laggy' start like older US RDCs had, with their 'catch up' to the motor output. Perhaps the Aussie RDCs are using a form of hybrid electric drive instead of a hydraulic torque converter drive?
Ed Bommer
I think tanks had a much higher ratio in their final drive. They also had multi-speed hydraulic transmissions, I think, judging from those I saw being rebuilt at the Letterkenny Army Depot in the late 1960s. That would make them more powerful but also slower. For their size though, it sure looked like they could move pretty fast out on the test grounds - maybe 40-45 MPH or so?
I don't have any charts, only tabulated information on RDC motors and their drive. RDC's had 33" diameter wheels. So maybe someone can figure out how they could reach 80 MPH within the motor's continuous service RPM rating from the rest of the information below:
The two 6 cylinder, 2 cycle GM diesel engines were Model 61801-RA-(6110). The maxmum rating for each was 275 hp at 1,800 RPM. Bore 5", stroke 5.6"
The continuous rating was 213 hp, yielding a useable 426 hp per Budd car (or about 279 lbs per horse). They sounded very much like GM's buses with their torque converter drives as they started out.
The engines would rev up fairly high on a start. The RDC unit would then 'catch up' with the motors, moving faster as the motors still ran at about the same RPMs.
Once the transmission locked into direct drive at 50-55 MPH or so, the rest of acceleration would be up to the motors' remaining capacity, with the advantage of having the mass of the RDC already moving. Also, there is much less resistance with steel wheels rolling on steel rails than there is with tires or treads on pavements or the ground. So it would not take quite so much power to keep it moving and accelerate it.
In 2006, I rode some new Australian RDC's on Adelaide's commuter rail system. The diesel engines in these units ran at a continuous speed (about 1,200 PRM), with no variation whether running, stopped or accelerating.
Start out was smooth and sure. They did not have the 'laggy' start like older US RDCs had, with their 'catch up' to the motor output. Perhaps the Aussie RDCs are using a form of hybrid electric drive instead of a hydraulic torque converter drive?
Ed Bommer
I put down the paper and pencil. I come up with 153 pound per horse against a 520 hp diesel/40 ton semi. A small percentage of horse is always lost through "Hotel" power and final drive.
1200 RPM is pretty close to just above torque and going into the ascending horse power peak. So your 2006 Train should "Walk away" rather smartly without excessive revving or struggle with the weight. There was probably another 500 or so RPM room to run if so choose.
1200 RPM is pretty close to just above torque and going into the ascending horse power peak. So your 2006 Train should "Walk away" rather smartly without excessive revving or struggle with the weight. There was probably another 500 or so RPM room to run if so choose.
quote:Originally posted by Ed Bommer:
...
The engines would rev up fairly high on a start. The RDC unit would then 'catch up' with the motors, moving faster as the motors still ran at about the same RPMs.
...
Ed Bommer
It was always impressive to watch 3-4 of the RDC's (once saw five) start off at the MARC station in Laurel, MD. From the front, the smoke plumes would shoot up and cross one another and make a very impressive cloud.
Bob Bunge
Very interesting reading about RDC's, the last attempt at the
rail car concept that came from all the gas electric cars from
the dawn of the automobile age. A lot of truncated tinplate
versions have been made, but 3rd Rail did a scale length one,
but not the RPO/Baggage/Combine (RDC-2?) I wanted for a "one car train" concept, so I had to pass...(I'm a big fan of those types of gas electrics, combine cabooses, etc. and other rolling stock as would have run on short and branch lines) they said not enough roads ran those to make it worthwhile to produce. What roads DID run those? I figured I would kitbash two of the best modeled shorties from somebody into a scale length one, but it is way down my list of to-do's.
rail car concept that came from all the gas electric cars from
the dawn of the automobile age. A lot of truncated tinplate
versions have been made, but 3rd Rail did a scale length one,
but not the RPO/Baggage/Combine (RDC-2?) I wanted for a "one car train" concept, so I had to pass...(I'm a big fan of those types of gas electrics, combine cabooses, etc. and other rolling stock as would have run on short and branch lines) they said not enough roads ran those to make it worthwhile to produce. What roads DID run those? I figured I would kitbash two of the best modeled shorties from somebody into a scale length one, but it is way down my list of to-do's.
Ed: there are some bulbs on ebay (3504924409550)is one, be sure and list T-10 projector bulbs or you get hundreds of listing for T10 auto bulbs. Original bulbs are available, but expensive $38 or so.
Someone mentioned the prob of diesel fumes at low speeds. I had the same prob last week in what passes for an "ambulance" these days, a diesel-powered hard riding truck. BTW, almost 30 yrs after Packard's Ultramatic, Chrysler came along with the same idea, claiming it was "new."
The Budd RDC was not the last attempt at at that type of car. ABB
made a three car set that rode on four trucks. Israel Railways
uses them between Haifa and Tel Aviv. They are super smooth.
Israel Railways loaned four such sets to Amtrak and They were used
on the East Coast as well as the West Coast during their trials.
Beautiful train sets.
Wish MTH made them in O Gauge
Al W
made a three car set that rode on four trucks. Israel Railways
uses them between Haifa and Tel Aviv. They are super smooth.
Israel Railways loaned four such sets to Amtrak and They were used
on the East Coast as well as the West Coast during their trials.
Beautiful train sets.
Wish MTH made them in O Gauge
Al W
quote:The drive axles used a Spicer drive with a 2.08:1 ratio on 33" diameter wheels.
quote:So maybe someone can figure out how they could reach 80 MPH within the motor's continuous service RPM rating.
Ed
At 80 mph with 33 inch wheels, a 2.08 gear reduction and the torque converter in lockup the engine would be turning 1695 RPM. That is 105 RPM below the 6-110s continuous rating.
It is too bad Detroit Diesel did not develop the 6-110 further. Having driven a few rigs with a 6-71 the world really did need a bigger, badder 6-71 with more torque to get a load moving or pull a hill. With the expansion of the 71 series in the 60s the 8V-71 could beat the 6-110 in horsepower, rev higher and the more cube like shape would fit under a conventional truck hood and many other places. So the 6-110 became the first jimmy diesel to go out of production. With the advent of the 6V-92 the 6-110 was deader than dead. Like all Jimmys the 6-110 shared the same basic concept as the EMD two cycle supercharged diesels.
