Budd RDCs Purchased for Potential Vermont Commuter Rail Service

I believe this is a good investment, as far as the value of the cars.  They were quite well-maintained by Trinity Rail Express, and had capital rebuilding before coming to Texas to start up TRE.  The original, leaky, Detroit Diesel power plants were replaced by horizontal "large cam" Cummins diesel engines and engine parts are going to be available for some time. 

If the Vermont outfit cares for the cars, they should serve well.   If they set them out to rot while they argue over establishing service, then, they will have wasted a valuable asset.

I have several O gauge NH RDCs.

I am amazed that the real ones keep rolling along.  It appears that these were very well built and have been well maintained by several owners over the years.

NH Joe

Bio?  My RDC run on electric,  18 volts or so. Why do you want to make them smell like a McDonalds? 

I am surprised there were not diner and sleeper RDC's for overnight routes.

Number 90 posted:

The original, leaky, Detroit Diesel power plants were replaced by horizontal "large cam" Cummins diesel engines and engine parts are going to be available for some time.

I hope the Cummins diesels are quieter than the original. I rode on one of these about 1962 and my thought at the time; this is noisy.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

I am surprised there were not diner and sleeper RDC's for overnight routes.

RDC's were essentially designed for economical operation of low density runs and commuter service.

Most photographs I've seen show them operating anywhere from one to three RDC's per train.  I think the B&M operated up to eight RDC's in a single commuter train.

Rusty

Oman posted:

Number 90 posted:

The original, leaky, Detroit Diesel power plants were replaced by horizontal "large cam" Cummins diesel engines and engine parts are going to be available for some time.

I hope the Cummins diesels are quieter than the original. I rode on one of these about 1962 and my thought at the time; this is noisy.

The RDC cars were passenger cars that had engines in them. As self propelled rail cars they had two diesel engines below the car that directly powered the wheels through a driveshaft coupling and gearbox. They were direct drive and not diesel electric locomotives. I rode in one when the Cape May Seashore lines was in business and enjoyed the ride. Since you are sitting above two large Detroit diesel engines the noise is more pronounced than in a std passenger car.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

I am surprised there were not diner and sleeper RDC's for overnight routes.

If I remember correctly, two Budd RDC-2's were built with full kitchens and 6 tables accommodating  dining seating for 24 in a tavern style seating arrangement along with a small baggage area and coach seating for 24 more passengers. They were specifically ordered in 1955 for the B&O's Speedliner Service, an experiment in intercity passenger service, replacing a conventional passenger train set with three Budd cars. A pair of three car sets were purchased and placed in service between Washington, DC and Pittsburgh. One of these unique baggage/diner/coach units has been preserved (unrestored and on static display outdoors the last time I visited there a few years ago) at the B&O museum in Baltimore.

Other RDC's were modified in later years by their respective owners for "snack bar" type service. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the two B&O cars were the only ones built and delivered by Budd with dining accommodations. 

C.J.

Blue Mountain & Reading has adapted them for railfan use with openable windows.  I don't know if the AC is still operable. 

It should be noted that RDC's were designed to be just powerful enough to run themselves.  Jersey Central tried adding a "trailer" car to some consists and succeeded in voiding the warrantees as well as causing serious damage.

Kent Loudon posted:

Blue Mountain & Reading has adapted them for railfan use with openable windows.  I don't know if the AC is still operable. 

It should be noted that RDC's were designed to be just powerful enough to run themselves.  Jersey Central tried adding a "trailer" car to some consists and succeeded in voiding the warrantees as well as causing serious damage.

The New haven ran an "American Flyer" coach between two RDC's until Budd said "Warranty Violation."

Rusty

Oman posted:

Number 90 posted:

The original, leaky, Detroit Diesel power plants were replaced by horizontal "large cam" Cummins diesel engines and engine parts are going to be available for some time.

I hope the Cummins diesels are quieter than the original. I rode on one of these about 1962 and my thought at the time; this is noisy.

You can hear the diesel engines under the floor.  As to the Cummins 855 or the Detroit 6-92 being louder, I couldn't say.  However, I did not find the TRE RDC's to have enough engine noise inside to inhibit conversation in a normal tone of voice.  I do remember the Santa Fe RDC's sounding like I was riding in a General Motors bus from the 1950's.

I read in Trains Magazine several years ago that there were some RDC cars used in local freight service.  I saw photos of a RDC pulling some boxcars and doing some switching work.  An unusual use for this type of equipment but when a railroad is short on power they use what they have available.  I can't remember which railroad did this but I do remember that it was actually done. 

The Burlington occasionally used Gas-Electrics in local freight service, but that's a whole different animal:

Rusty

Visible from from a train leaving North Station......I was traveling to meet up with Chris Lonero in the spring of 2015. Old Boston & Maine's.

BTW, Chris' layout is fantastic.....Later that week I visited Marty & Dottie.

Peter

645 posted:

GP 40 posted:

If I remember correctly, two Budd RDC-2's were built with full kitchens and 6 tables accommodating  dining seating for 24 in a tavern style seating arrangement along with a small baggage area and coach seating for 24 more passengers. They were specifically ordered in 1955 for the B&O's Speedliner Service, an experiment in intercity passenger service, replacing a conventional passenger train set with three Budd cars. A pair of three car sets were purchased and placed in service between Washington, DC and Pittsburgh. One of these unique baggage/diner/coach units has been preserved (unrestored and on static display outdoors the last time I visited there a few years ago) at the B&O museum in Baltimore.

C.J. 

B&O 6551 is no longer at the B&O Museum - it was trucked to the Gaithersburg (MD) Community Museum in January 2012 and placed on display there. It was even covered in detail on this very forum back then:

 

With all due respect, I believe we are discussing two different Budd cars.  The car currently at Gaithersburg, B&O 1951, nee 6551 was built by Budd in 1953. Although it too is an RDC-2, (baggage/coach) according to the 1960 B&O Summary of Equipment, it was classed by B&O as DC-3, and had a seating capacity of 70.  It was never equipped with the kitchen and dining area that the two I was referring to were. The two cars I referenced were ordered in 1955 and built/delivered in 1956 as B&O numbers 1960 and 1961. As I stated above, these cars were built specifically for the experimental Speedliner service hence the kitchens and dining table seating. They were classed by B&O as DC-4 and had a seating capacity of 48 (24 in the dining section and 24 coach seats).

A quick check of the B&O Museum web site still lists the 1961in it's collection. 

C.J.

645 posted:

GP 40 posted:

645 posted:

GP 40 posted:

If I remember correctly, two Budd RDC-2's were built with full kitchens and 6 tables accommodating  dining seating for 24 in a tavern style seating arrangement along with a small baggage area and coach seating for 24 more passengers. They were specifically ordered in 1955 for the B&O's Speedliner Service, an experiment in intercity passenger service, replacing a conventional passenger train set with three Budd cars. A pair of three car sets were purchased and placed in service between Washington, DC and Pittsburgh. One of these unique baggage/diner/coach units has been preserved (unrestored and on static display outdoors the last time I visited there a few years ago) at the B&O museum in Baltimore.

C.J. 

B&O 6551 is no longer at the B&O Museum - it was trucked to the Gaithersburg (MD) Community Museum in January 2012 and placed on display there. It was even covered in detail on this very forum back then:

 

With all due respect,  I believe we are discussing two different Budd cars.   The car currently at Gaithersburg, B&O 1951, nee 6551 was built by Budd in 1953. Although it too is an RDC-2, (baggage/coach) according to the 1960 B&O Summary of Equipment, it was classed by B&O as DC-3, and had a seating capacity of 70.  It was never equipped with the kitchen and dining area that the two I was referring to were. The two cars I referenced were ordered in 1955 and built/delivered in 1956 as B&O numbers 1960 and 1961. As I stated above, these cars were built specifically for the experimental Speedliner service hence the kitchens and dining table seating. They were classed by B&O as DC-4 and had a seating capacity of 48 (24 in the dining section and 24 coach seats).

A quick check of the B&O Museum web site still lists the 1961in it's collection. 

C.J.

 

I beg to differ. I'm not a B&O authority (never said I was) and was only repeating what was reported in the following discussion which is where the 6551 identification came from. Specifically the post by 'RuleG' made on 01/18/12 19:54 which states 6651 was  built with that number in 1953 and renumbered to 1951  three years later. You can read it for yourself here:

http://www.trainorders.com/dis...n/read.php?4,2664595

So we are discussing the  SAME  RDC apparently per the above linked discussion. Or it's possible someone made a typo where 1961 should have been 1951 in the above mentioned thread.

Misidentification of preserved equipment has occurred before including an ex-C&O/C&NW RDC - see this thread about that one:

http://www2.irm.org/blogs/categories/39-RDC-9933

http://www.irm.org/gallery/CNW9933

B&O RDC 1951 (nee 6551) located Gaithersburg and B&O RDC 1961 located B&O Museum are two different cars, built in two different years and currently preserved in two different locations. A little research will verify this. I have no further comments on the matter.

Respectfully,

C.J.

This is going to be an unpopular opinion but I almost wish they bought newer equipment.  The improvements in safety of passenger rail equipment has been dramatic since the 1950's.  Especially with all the grade crossing collision that happen I would rather be in something more recent.  

Why does Vermont need commuter service? This was tried years  ago and in rush hours the trains were empty. Tiny city to tiny towns.

645 posted:

FECguy posted:

This is going to be an unpopular opinion but I almost wish they bought newer equipment.  The improvements in safety of passenger rail equipment has been dramatic since the 1950's.  Especially with all the grade crossing collision that happen I would rather be in something more recent.  

Having something more recent isn't necessarily going to be better especially if there are design flaws and/or quality issues. You should read up on LA's Metrolink cab cars bought from Rotem as one example - here's a few links to get you started:

http://trn.trains.com/news/new...inst-cab-car-builder

http://www.latimes.com/local/l...-20150903-story.html

http://www.latimes.com/local/c...-20151216-story.html

They did lease a bunch of diesels from BNSF to use in place of these cab cars temporarily but in December 2016 the diesels were returned. I believe the cab cars are now leading in one direction on Metrolink trains again.

No cab car or RDC will compare against a locomotive for protection if something is struck.

I liked the way LIRR did it with the old push-pull diesel fleet (circa 1971-1999) where a converted cab unit (Alco FA or EMD F-unit) served a both a control cab and HEP source. "Convertible" MP15AC's were also used as a control cab/HEP source. On the long runs (mainly to Montauk) the crews would often run the GP38-2 around the wye after arrival on a eastbound and place it on the west end so it could lead even if a power pack (FA, F-unit or MP15AC) was on the west end. This practice was done more for engineer comfort as the GP38-2 rode better than any of the power packs. Also had benefit of adding one more unit ahead of the passenger consist which increased the protection potential at grade crossings a bit.

And yes, even a converted cab unit could be taken out - one of the LIRR FA's so converted was scrapped after striking a loaded gravel truck at a grade crossing. It went on it's side but engineer was not severely injured. Other than an abrupt stop believe the rest of crew and passengers were unhurt. Today LIRR uses cab cars at the west end of most diesel trains. Some diesel jobs run with a third rail equipped dual mode diesel at both ends but those are usually peak period schedules in/out of NY Penn Station.

Today's reality is cab cars help the economics of short haul commuter trains. In Chicago the CB&Q and C&NW converted to this concept in the 1950's with Milwaukee Road and Rock Island following suit later. For the most part the concept has worked out well otherwise cab cars would not have continued in service to the present day. The real issue is usually a vehicle blocking the way at a grade crossing due to being stuck or attempting to beat the train - this is a situation that usually should have not occurred. In such cases won't matter if you have a cab car, RDC or locomotive leading - but yes, I'd rather be in a locomotive for the added protection in case of hitting something on the right of way.

The issue the Metrolink Cab Cars have is more of an acceptation because for the most part newer passenger equipment is much safer then older equipment.   It would be nice if this service had a F40PH cabbage or something similar on one end of train so the crew and passengers have slightly more safety if a road crossing collision  happens.  What is the top speed of this operation going to be?

They're paying about $300,000 per unit. TRE spent $1,200,000 each rebuilding the RDCs when they got them. Pretty good deal. Of course, TRE takes a bath, or taxpayers do with the writeoffs. Will miss seeing those around Dallas/Ft. Worth, but they've been parked now for several years.

The article says "According to DART, however, the agency decided to dispose of the cars because of the expense of finding parts for, and otherwise maintaining, the vintage equipment, which was built in the 1950s by the now-defunct Budd Company of Philadelphia." I wonder why the new owners think they can make economic sense of it, when DART apparently couldn't.