RDC Questions

I recently purchased a couple of the Proto-1000 RDC units for my freelance railroad. I have a few questions about the prototype, as well as these
particular units.
The text on the back of the box says that the prototypes were first built by Budd in 1950. It also mentions the NYC doing some experiments with one as late as 1966. What it does not mention is whether or not the RDC-1, RDC-2, and RDC-3 were manufactured at the same time (a la the S1 and S2), or if one type was a replacement for another (a la FA-1 and FA-2,etc.). Did they all start production around 1950, or did the RDC-2 and -3 follow later?
How many different road numbers did Proto 1000 produce for MBTA? I have #6303. I checked the Walthers catalog, but they don't list the Proto 1000/2000 offerings out like they do for other manufacturers.
This last question is not about the RDCs, but instead about the Doodlebugs. The ones that Walthers is offering or about to offer are supposedly based on a prototype from the 1920's by EMC. Were the Spectrum Doodlebugs supposed to be based (or loosely based) on a newer EMC prototype?
Thanks! Mike --
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I can't answer all your questions but RDC-1, RDC-2, etc aren't series numbers like S-1, S-2, etc. The RDC numbers designate body style; all passenger, combination baggage & passenger, etc. I think there were four RDC body styles - RDC-1, RDC-2, RDC-3 and RDC-4.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 00:41:45 GMT, Charles Seyferlich

And RDC-9 which was a cabless mail carrier designed to work in multiple with the others.
RDC-1 was the original, followed by RDC-2 (a combine) and 3 (combine plus mail). RDC-4 was mail only.
Would you believe that a modified RDC briefly held the world rail speed record? They gave it a streamlined plastic nose and mounted a couple of aircraft jet engines on the roof.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:32:44 GMT, Christopher A. Lee

The RDC-9 was NOT a "cabless mail carrier". It was basically an RDC-1 coach with no cab controls (blind ends) and only one engine underneath.
Boston & Maine and one of the Canadian roads had 'em.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Actualy the RDC-9 had normal cabs. only cars built without cabs were the Roger Williams mid train B cars. only difference between a RDC1 and RDC9 was the 9 only had one engine and was not to be run by itself but with a 2 enginne RDC.
Jaap van Dorp
wrote :

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Not according to Duke & Kielty's reference book on RDCs "RDC The Budd Rail Diesel Car". The drawings show the RDC-9s had end vestibules (which is where the cab was on a regular RDC) but no driving position.
Two streamlined Roger Williams cab cars are at Danbury.

When I bought my Hallmark RDC-2 the store had various RDCs including cabless RDC-4s. These were the only cabless units I had seen until I checked the book, apart from the North-Western Pacific unit rebuilt after an accident with one blind end replacing a damaged cab giving a single-ended RDC. So I assumed these were RDC-9s. My mistake for assuming the brass manufacturer got it right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:50:07 GMT, Christopher A. Lee

Santa Fe also had a similar situation. They had a pair of RDC-1's, which were heavily damaged in a 1956 wreck just outside Los Angeles downtown area.
When they were rebuilt, one of them got a baggage compartment, so it became (sort of) an RDC-2. The compartment was not the standard size that came from Budd. And the opposite end of the car was de-cabbed, and the windows blanked over. The other RDC-1 also became single ended, so the cars had to operate back-to-back and finished out thee days on the Albuquerque-El Paso run (after doing some time in Kansas).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote :

No, the RDC-9 did NOT have cabs. You might want to check the two books out on RDC's.....no cabs, blank ends (no windows).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote :

They were basically all available concurrently, just as different configurations for different railroads' needs.
The New Haven, for example, had all four varieties (RDC-1,2,3,4) plus some custom-built units (the "Roger Williams" trainset). Boston & Maine had the RDC-9 (cabless, one engine) variety on their roster.
RDC-1 was all coach RDC-2 was coach-baggage RDC-3 was coach-baggage-mail RDC-4 was baggage-mail only, short length than RDC-1,2,3 RDC-9 was like an RDC-1 but no controls and only one engine (I understand one of the Canadian roads bought them along with B&M) The original RDC-1 demo was built in 1950, but production did not get well underway until late 1951 or 1952.
The only "replacements" in RDC production were the ones with the newer style ends in later years of production. Not sure who got them, I know Reading Company was one such customer. This variety had the headlight cowling above the roof instead of recessed into the ends.
While NYC was experimenting with an RDC in 1966 -- it was an experiment in which a jet engine was mounted on the roof and the thing hit a gazillion miles an hour in Ohio -- RDC's continues to run right into the 1990's in some places.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Hoskins wrote:

Did they use an engineer or a test pilot to run that one? ;-{)
--

Rick Jones
Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dear Sir, My guess would be that Big John ran it. Cordially yours, Gerard P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
MichaelPowell) I recently purchased a couple of the Proto-1000 RDC units for my freelance railroad. I have a few questions about the prototype, as well as these particular units. -----What it does not mention is whether or not the RDC-1, RDC-2, and RDC-3 were manufactured at the same time--- --------------------------------------------------- This site will provide some information:
http://www.bevteccom.co.uk/Rail/rdc/rdcmain.html
Also explains the different configurations of RDC-1, -2, -3, etc.
Here are some pix of EMC Doodlebugs: http://www.northeast.railfan.net/self_prop1.html
Bill Bill's Railroad Empire N Scale Model Railroad: http://www.billsrailroad.net Brief History of N Scale: http://www.billsrailroad.net/history/n-scale Resources: Links to over 700 helpful sites: http://www.billsrailroad.net/bills-favorite-links Bookstore: http://www.billsrailroad.net/bookstore.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The Bachmann are "loosely" based on a different carbody, same era. EMC didn't build bodies. _Most (?)_ bodies were supplied by St Louis Car. Some by Brill. And others. The bodies were sorta the last gasp of the trolley and interurban body companies.
CTucker NY
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for the input! It's been helpful and educational.
Mike
--


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Bachmann gas-electric is based on EMC/St. Louis characteristics roughly from 1926 to about 1930. The model has the typical St. Louis round top windows closest to the rear vestibule. Pullman was the supplier of the majority of carbodies to EMC in the 30's, and they did not use the round top windows. The car has a 70' car body with an 11 window passenger section, a large baggage section, and no RPO section. Reviewing Kielty's books, no EMC car had this combination of characteristics. It comes close to an EMC drawing reprinted in "Interurbans Without Wires", but apparently no car was built to these plans, and the Bachmann model has an extra sliding door to access the engine compartment which is not shown on the drawings.
In spite of these flaws, I like the way the Bachmann runs. It uses the same self contained power trucks Bachmann used in the earlier 44 and 70 tonners. I don't have personal experience with the Walthers, but this newsgroup has had some posts about drive problems with it.
And if you're after a doodlebug that is prototypically accurate, consider looking for one of the older metal sided Walthers kits. These were dead-on for some C&NW gas electrics. Gary Q

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gareth Quale wrote:

I have the old Walthers craftsman kits for the GM&O doodlebug and trailer, including the power truck. Someday I'll get around to building them. I also have a second doodlebug kit from LaBelle for a, IIRC, Nevada Copper Belt unit. Again, someday I'll find time to work on it.
--

Rick Jones
Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I believe the only doodlebug LaBelle made was the HO-86 kit for a D&RGW car. This was not a gas-electric, but rather an old wood combine converted to a self-propelled unit with bolt-on under-floor engines directly driving the inner axles of the trucks, so it was a gas-mechanical car. It did not work out and soon was converted back to a conventional combine. See: http://www.labellemodels.com/dhot.htm#top

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gareth Quale wrote:

Hmmm, now that I actually took a look at mine, yes, it's a D&RGW prototype, but my box says HO-85, not 86. It also says limited edition.
--

Rick Jones
Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.