Identification of a railcar...

It is a Budd RDC-9...which is a cabless, single-engine version of the RDC-1 (RDC-1 has cabs at both ends, and two diesel engines).

Being an RDC-9 narrows it down...only two roads purchased them, those being the Boston & Maine and Canadian National.

It's a RDC-1. Built by Budd between 1949-62. 336 were made and over 2 dozen roads had them.

Without a look a a builder's plate there's no way of knowing who owned this car originally. I believe the end door is non-standard.

Statistically since Boston and Maine owned 109 of the units or 34.4% of the production it's most likely it was orginally a B&M unit.

Eric

Jan Kohl wrote:

"Can someone help me out with this? Found in Raleigh, NC, in 2004, in a private fenced lot. Couldn't get close enough to see any reporting marks."

What original railroad and car, if anyone knows?

If it is an RDC-1, then it would have end cab windows. This car does NOT, and the ends appear to be original, though as you noted below, the door is non-standard. Without the cab windows, it is an RDC-9.

If it is an RDC-1, then it would have end cab windows. This car does NOT, and the ends appear to be original, though as you noted below, the door is non-standard. Without the cab windows, it is an RDC-9.

Another item that lends credence to my statement about it being an RDC-9.....note that there is NO engine compartment right near the front truck. RDC-9's had only ONE engine, vs. two on RDC-1,2,3,4.

The two pictures are of RDC Budd Railcars and the top one is one of 14 RDC Rail Budd Cars on Vancouver island operating on the Esquimalt and Namimio Railway which will shortly be in local hands once agai after 100 plus years...It will no longer be owned by Canadian Pacific Railways and part of the track owned by railamerica..But locals hope to buy that part of the line back as well.

Located in Victoria BC Canada ..35 miles from seattle washinton state usa via ferry and 3 hours by ferry from vancouver bc canada.

Brock R Bailey Victoria BC Canada

Still with the arrogant (and utterly mistaken) Mickeysoft propaganda. All it means is the eedjit was too poor an HTML programmer to create a site without Mickeysoft non-standard coding.

SC> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 21:51:58 GMT, Brock Bailey wrote: SC> >

SC> Still with the arrogant (and utterly mistaken) Mickeysoft propaganda. All SC> it means is the eedjit was too poor an HTML programmer to create a site SC> without Mickeysoft non-standard coding.

Just really *stupid* boilerplate JavaScript. Disabling JavaScript shows the page just fine with Mozilla (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030717). The JavaScript is making an *unnecessary* test. The page can be downloaded with wget and 'viewed' with lynx. The

*HTML* is actually quite standard and portable -- nothing wrong with the HTML, other than the *crap* in the ... tags, and even that is *syntacticly* correct. Just stupid.

The JavaScript is doing somewhat bogus ("impossible") things: preventing right mouse clicks (to allow things like "save page as", "view page source", "save image as", etc.). And disabling 'text copy' (eg 'copy-and-paste'). Between disabling JavaScript in Mozilla, Netscape, etc., wget, and Lynx, these hacks are trivial to get around. There really is no sane point in bothering. I *suspect* that JavaScript can probably be disabled with InterNet Explorer too (don't know -- don't have a system where IE will run -- I run a 100% pure Linux shop here).

Disabling JavaScript has no affect on actually visiting or navigating at

other than bypassing their *stupid* and useless copy protection games. They really should put a proper copyright notice (there is none) and leave it at that. What is *really* strange is that the JavaScript functions test for Netscape! There is no reason to re-direct if the browser is not IE! Whoever wrote the JavaScript is clueless.

Also: pages have MacOS newlines (CRs without NLs).

I sent a 'telegram' to Agent at Cordova Bay Station explaining all of this.

SC> SC> -- SC> Steve SC> SC> "The liberties of the people never were nor ever will be secure when the SC> transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." SC> SC> - Patrick Henry SC>

\/ Robert Heller ||InterNet: snipped-for-privacy@cs.umass.edu

|| snipped-for-privacy@deepsoft.com /\FidoNet: 1:321/153

I've always thought that the height of pretentiousness. Especially from this guy! Like I want his page code!

Thanks, Steve and everyone for the input, I'll update the page to reflect that. I don't like not knowing what something is (or not being able to tell others)...

Cheers!

Jan

Steve Hosk>