News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.3K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.3K     0 

^^Also, no doubt, towing lot of extra weight unless removed, then you get into the ride issue as previously mentioned.
Indeed, this is what Morrison-Knudson found out when they rebuilt a dozen RDCs to coaches for MBTA back in the 1980s. They had to completely redo the springing to account for the several thousand pounds of weight that were removed.

But that step only needs to be done if you remove all of those devices as M-K did. Removing just the right-angle gearboxes and driveshafts is only a couple of hundred pounds, and wouldn't drastically change the overall weight of the cars.

Dan
 
Indeed, this is what Morrison-Knudson found out when they rebuilt a dozen RDCs to coaches for MBTA back in the 1980s. They had to completely redo the springing to account for the several thousand pounds of weight that were removed.

But that step only needs to be done if you remove all of those devices as M-K did. Removing just the right-angle gearboxes and driveshafts is only a couple of hundred pounds, and wouldn't drastically change the overall weight of the cars.

Dan

I suppose that's possibly just a matter of dropping one axle at each end and substituting a non-geared wheelset....but if one were going to the trouble of lifting the cars off the trucks, one might as well just change out the springs (and maybe do any other needed refurbishment) at the same time.

If I were the Chief Mechanic, and the imperative was to not mess with weighting, I would still strip the underbodies of all the redundant motor gear and substitute a slab of concrete... as a matter of simplifying maintenance.

Which gets to this discussion being a bit of a rabbit hole - there are a million things than can be done to RDC carbodies (and have been done by someone, somewhere) to convert them to unpowered coaches. All of these cost money. In the end, we are speculating. If the subject of this discussion is the (only rumoured, so far) intent to remove RDC's from the White River train, presumably VIA is looking for the lowest cost alternative. We don't know what (if any) RDC components are creating cost for VIA, but a modification to create a cab car that would run with surplus HEP II coaches and a locomotive sure seems simplest. Maybe the one RDC-4 just gets a compatible MU and brake setup, and the others go away.

- Paul
 
I suppose that's possibly just a matter of dropping one axle at each end and substituting a non-geared wheelset....but if one were going to the trouble of lifting the cars off the trucks, one might as well just change out the springs (and maybe do any other needed refurbishment) at the same time.

If I were the Chief Mechanic, and the imperative was to not mess with weighting, I would still strip the underbodies of all the redundant motor gear and substitute a slab of concrete... as a matter of simplifying maintenance.

Which gets to this discussion being a bit of a rabbit hole - there are a million things than can be done to RDC carbodies (and have been done by someone, somewhere) to convert them to unpowered coaches. All of these cost money. In the end, we are speculating. If the subject of this discussion is the (only rumoured, so far) intent to remove RDC's from the White River train, presumably VIA is looking for the lowest cost alternative. We don't know what (if any) RDC components are creating cost for VIA, but a modification to create a cab car that would run with surplus HEP II coaches and a locomotive sure seems simplest. Maybe the one RDC-4 just gets a compatible MU and brake setup, and the others go away.

- Paul
Are there any more Amtrak NCPU's for sale? But apparently that didn't work out too well for ONR.
 
I suppose that's possibly just a matter of dropping one axle at each end and substituting a non-geared wheelset....but if one were going to the trouble of lifting the cars off the trucks, one might as well just change out the springs (and maybe do any other needed refurbishment) at the same time.

If I were the Chief Mechanic, and the imperative was to not mess with weighting, I would still strip the underbodies of all the redundant motor gear and substitute a slab of concrete... as a matter of simplifying maintenance.

Which gets to this discussion being a bit of a rabbit hole - there are a million things than can be done to RDC carbodies (and have been done by someone, somewhere) to convert them to unpowered coaches. All of these cost money. In the end, we are speculating. If the subject of this discussion is the (only rumoured, so far) intent to remove RDC's from the White River train, presumably VIA is looking for the lowest cost alternative. We don't know what (if any) RDC components are creating cost for VIA, but a modification to create a cab car that would run with surplus HEP II coaches and a locomotive sure seems simplest. Maybe the one RDC-4 just gets a compatible MU and brake setup, and the others go away.

- Paul

It comes back to the question, what is the problem we are trying to solve? For the 3 trains a week, it would likely be cheaper to just turn the locomotive at each end (or run with two locomotives), than it would to retrofit the RDCs and continue to maintain equipment that isn't used anywhere else on the network.
 
Is therev
It comes back to the question, what is the problem we are trying to solve? For the 3 trains a week, it would likely be cheaper to just turn the locomotive at each end (or run with two locomotives), than it would to retrofit the RDCs and continue to maintain equipment that isn't used anywhere else on the network.
Is there a wye in Sudbury as well? Two locomotives for such a small train is a huge waste of fuel and reasources. Unless one is dead in tow but dragging it for hundreds of kms is not a good use of reasources either. If it doesn't matter which order the cars are in, it would be easier to disconnect the locomotive and wye it separately and then reconnect the train. I guess they will have extra HEP coaches on hand to meet demand? Some trains are 2 and others are 3 cars.
 
The one thing I was wondering about re two locomotives is whether it would make a difference for refuelling. IIRC from the TVO documentary, the RDCs make a refuelling stop en route. Would 2x F40 have sufficient range such that this operation could be omitted?
 
The one thing I was wondering about re two locomotives is whether it would make a difference for refuelling. IIRC from the TVO documentary, the RDCs make a refuelling stop en route. Would 2x F40 have sufficient range such that this operation could be omitted?
F40s routinely do 1052 km (MTRL-MCTN) without refueling on the Ocean. SUDB-WHTR is 484 km…
 
Is therev

Is there a wye in Sudbury as well? Two locomotives for such a small train is a huge waste of fuel and reasources. Unless one is dead in tow but dragging it for hundreds of kms is not a good use of reasources either. If it doesn't matter which order the cars are in, it would be easier to disconnect the locomotive and wye it separately and then reconnect the train. I guess they will have extra HEP coaches on hand to meet demand? Some trains are 2 and others are 3 cars.
The nearest wye is near Coniston. Alternatively, the CP yard does have a turntable.
 
It comes back to the question, what is the problem we are trying to solve? For the 3 trains a week, it would likely be cheaper to just turn the locomotive at each end (or run with two locomotives), than it would to retrofit the RDCs and continue to maintain equipment that isn't used anywhere else on the network.
Although it does beg the other question, if an equipment change is coming, about accommodating baggage (RDC-4??). I don't know specifically about this service but if it is anything like the Northlander and former Algoma Central Soo-Hearst train, it services trippers, hunters, fishers and folks who summer along the line like at Biscotasing (accessible by road but it's a long rough trip).
 
Although it does beg the other question, if an equipment change is coming, about accommodating baggage (RDC-4??). I don't know specifically about this service but if it is anything like the Northlander and former Algoma Central Soo-Hearst train, it services trippers, hunters, fishers and folks who summer along the line like at Biscotasing (accessible by road but it's a long rough trip).
There are extra HEP baggage coaches not being used in the corridor. The RDC's can handle the weight of an extra baggage car so that's not the issue. Would be nice to make use of the RDC's in the corridor if they are not used in Sudbury.
 
Although it does beg the other question, if an equipment change is coming, about accommodating baggage (RDC-4??). I don't know specifically about this service but if it is anything like the Northlander and former Algoma Central Soo-Hearst train, it services trippers, hunters, fishers and folks who summer along the line like at Biscotasing (accessible by road but it's a long rough trip).
Maybe VIA should get hold of a couple of flatcars and build canoe cars like ONR did with 4507. It would be a start.
 
There are extra HEP baggage coaches not being used in the corridor
True. The VIA website says they have 19 of them (serviceability u/k).

Would be nice to make use of the RDC's in the corridor
And do what with them? Seems to be the wrong direction from fleet modernization.

Maybe VIA should get hold of a couple of flatcars and build canoe cars like ONR did with 4507. It would be a start.

OK for canoes, not so much for things like vehicles, provisions, moose bits, etc.
 
There are extra HEP baggage coaches not being used in the corridor. The RDC's can handle the weight of an extra baggage car so that's not the issue. Would be nice to make use of the RDC's in the corridor if they are not used in Sudbury.
I don’t have my copy yet but a poster on groups.io indicated that VIA is listed in the Trackside Guide as having 17 total HEP baggage cars to cover all current obligations. After covering Ocean, Canadian, Churchill, plus I think one is used for either Jonquiere or Senneterre, and allowing for maintenance cycles, that leaves few if any.

It’s a shame VIA neither has nor can obtain a couple of Superliner Baggage Coaches for this route, given its loading/unloading door would be closer to the ground than a high floor coach.
 
I don’t have my copy yet but a poster on groups.io indicated that VIA is listed in the Trackside Guide as having 17 total HEP baggage cars to cover all current obligations. After covering Ocean, Canadian, Churchill, plus I think one is used for either Jonquiere or Senneterre, and allowing for maintenance cycles, that leaves few if any.
The minimum service requirement for HEP baggage cars is 14:
2 for Ocean
1 for JONQ
1 for SENN
3 for Canadian
1 for train 3/4 (if it returns)
3 for CHUR
2 for Skeena

However, you absolutely need guards at VMC and MMC, so you are already down to a single spare, provided that all 17 cars are serviceable, so there indeed is little (if any) room to deploy additional baggage cars…
 
Which leaves me thinking that the RDC-4 might stick around, and if more space is needed.... just remove some seats from a HEP-II coach and call it a RDC-2 successor.

- Paul
 

Back
Top