Anyone have any details about this interesting news piece from the November 1954 issue of Trains?
“A western road is reportedly interested in a business-car edition of the Budd RDC.”
Makes sense. The official can go when and where he pleases, subject to slots opening up on heavily ussed routes, without coupling to a a regular train, freight or passenger. I am sure Railway Equipment Co. in Moncton, Canada, will be glad to supply one in excellent operating condiiton, for a good price.
But you will have to be sure it will go 88 miles per hour (no optimistic RDC speedometer readings count) in order to get it back to November 1954.
;-}
You made a time machine out of an RDC?[wow] It sure beats a Delorean.
They’re both stainless steel… C&NW DID convert an RDC into a track inspection car.
On my carrier a single RDC car or locomotive is restricted to 30 MPH - and will never make it back to 1954.
You could always put a jet engine on the roof like the NYC did.
Then it is an RJC (Rail Jet Car). Balt, does your road have any regulations concerning an RJC?[:)]
Same speed restrictions would apply - single engine or Budd car - 30 MPH account of the signal system and crossing protection having trouble with a single piece of equipment operating at higher speeds. Two engines, Budd cars or RJC could operate at maximum track speed.
Back about 46 years ago, I had the impression that braking power entered into the rule. In the spring, I rode a single car RDC train from Baltimore to Washington, and, in June, I rode the two car train that connected from the Capitol Limited, and the two car train had a much faster schedule. I am away from home, so I am unable to look the schedules up.
Incidentally, before Amtrak tariffs went into effect, a ticket Chicago-Washington and Chicago-Baltimore cost the same, no matter which road you rode, because of the competition between the B&O and the PRR. When I bought my ticket in Chicago, the clerk had a little trouble understanding that even though I wanted a slumber room to Washington, I wanted my rail ticket to re
The business-car report is in “Arrivals and Departures” (p.12 of that issue). Surely there was something in the contemporary railroad press about this that has more detail.
It does seem like a very logical use of the Budd technology, and might have been substantially enhanced in usefulness if ‘official’ Budd policy did not forbid operation with a conventional business car as a trailer…
My understanding is that the 30 MPH restriction on single engine operations had to do with the signals and crossing protection of the day being relay controlled - if the circuits were tripped too rapidly the relays didn’t have time to perform their functions and activate the appropriate protection
Any idea which Western Class 1’s had a large percentage of its mainline devoid of passenger traffic at that time? That’s about the only thing I could think of as a possible clue since just tacking on a business car to the rear of a streamliner would be the more expedient thing to do when possible.
Whatever party it was, I wonder if they instead invested in something like a used DC-3. This was right about that time where large Class 1’s, like many other powerful corporations, started to think about aviation and railroad business car fleets started to be slashed as executives stopped using them for normal business travel in favor of the corporate aircraft.
Yes, that was my observation, no matter on which road I was riding–IC, ACL
Or, perhaps, a Western Class I that already had a percentage of its passenger service being provided by Budd RDCs … and wanted a business car that could be attached to such a train when desired (the Budd company being averse to the use of trailers, particularly heavy ones). My vote is for Western Pacific.
I doubt it. That company went bankrupt a couple years ago and is being liquidated.
8 n’ Sand
There were issues with Budd RDC braking power. In February 1965, for the one month, Dad was the Station Agent at Crossfield, AB on the Calgary-Edmonton line. This was right after we left Irricana and before he was set up as a Dispatcher in Calgary.
For certain passenger trains, Crossfield was a Flag Stop. A combination green/white flag would be inserted into a hole on the the Train Order Semaphore pole. But from one direction, I forget which, if the Engineer was not right on the ball he would overshoot the station by several car lengths. There was an unofficial workaround for this, by setting a red board with the semaphore to give the Engineer that bit of extra warning due to the extra height of the signal. The rules experts can debate the official meaning of a red over green/white signal, but back in the sixties it seemed to work OK.
EDIT: This had not been a problem with earlier conventional passenger train service.
Bruce
If I had the funds I would have a DMU converted rather then an RDC.
The M&StL had some RDCs which they used with heavyweight trailers. It was not successful and they traded the units to the C&O.
But isn’t the Budd RDC a DMU?
I understood that the main difference is one of age, as well as the fact that RDCs appear to be able to be operated on US rails without FRA exemptions, while most new DMUs available today are non-US, and do not generally meet FRA requirements.
On the other hand, I believe US Railcar, which acquired the Colorado Railcar (ex-Rader Railcar) patents and designs, does still offer to design US-built FRA-compliant DMUs.