Nostalgia & History > Automatic Train Stop Mystery Photo

The date is Saturday, May 17, 1952. The brand new Santa Fe RDC cars are ready for trial runs starting in San Diego on May 19 & 20. But wait are they replacing the magnetized shoe on the ATS system on DC-191 or are they installing the system for the first time before their run to San Diego? Previous accounts have stated that the ATS system was installed and tested in San Bernardino. Could this be wrong? Photo one was taken in the 8th Street coach yards, Los Angeles, California. The second photo is an enlargement of the men working on the cab end trucks of DC-191. Photo taken by Ted Damon (Pacific Railroad Collection)

---

---

I can see that the " ATS Receiver " is attached on the 2ND Axle, but maybe they are doing something like attaching the Cable to the system.

On Amtrak F40's, the end of the Cable was plugged into a Box

Or they might be doing something to the Cable for the Speedometer

Same car same work crew just another angle. Photo taken from the front end. Photo by Ted Damon, Pacific Railroad Collection.

---

---

edsaalig Wrote:

> But wait
> are they replacing the magnetized shoe on the ATS
> system on DC-191 or are they installing the system
> for the first time before their run to San Diego?

Do you know for certain that the guys were under there to work on the ATS system in these photos? As miralomarail mentioned, the focus of attention appears to be the first axle, not the second where the receiver is.

Regarding ATS in general, you have a photo on p.20 of your book showing the cars at San Bernardino on 5/13/52. There is a guy standing in front of the #2 axle of DC-192 blocking a clear view of it, but the cable from the ATS receiver is clearly visible, so DC-192 at least had its ATS by that date.

.......while sitting on a pile of brake shoes.

It looks like they are routing the cable.
When I clicked on this thread intriguingly titled ATS Mystery and saw a photo of an RDC it was a major letdown.

Bob

Posted from iPhone

Automatic Train Control (ATS) pick-up "shoes" mounted on locomotive journal boxes are not "magnetized". They are simply electric coils connected to circuitry including an "acknowledge" switch.

The track in ATS territory has to have electric coils mounted on the crossties at signal locations. The track coil if energized creates a magnetic field which passes into the locomotive (or RDC car) coil creating an electrical current. If the trackside coil is not energized, the coil onboard will not have any current induced magnetically.

if the onboard coil were truly "magnetized" (permanently), it would be picking up all of the ferrous junk (spikes, scrap metal, strapping, etc) laying on the right of way!

whatever they are doing, I do not see any Blue Flag protection!

Bob, explain, "let down."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/14 10:25 by edsaalig.

Based on similar experiences at Atk over the years, and the relative pristine condition of the Budd cars, it looks to me that it's a training session for a new toy (and the blue flags would be at the far ends of the track).

Could it have been a demonstration on how to replace the disk brakes? Since it only took a hammer and about 10 minutes!

edsaalig Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob, explain, "let down."

The use of the RDCs in San Diegan service was the stupidest passenger service decision ever made by AT&SF. If the Redondo wreck hadn't have happened there would have eventually been passenger fatalities in grade crossing accidents because there were literally a hundred opportunities on every trip.

After the Redondo claims were settled, both RDCs should have been sent back to Budd or scrapped. The Santa Fe RDCs are a bad memory best left buried in the dust heap of history.

In addition, among all the vast types of streamlined passenger equipment used by the railroad, the RDCs are by far the least interesting. If you've seen one photo of them, you've seen them all.

Bob

Labiche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Automatic Train Control (ATS) pick-up "shoes"
> mounted on locomotive journal boxes are not
> "magnetized". They are simply electric coils
> connected to circuitry including an "acknowledge"
> switch.
>
> The track in ATS territory has to have electric
> coils mounted on the crossties at signal
> locations. The track coil if energized creates a
> magnetic field which passes into the locomotive
> (or RDC car) coil creating an electrical current.
> If the trackside coil is not energized, the coil
> onboard will not have any current induced
> magnetically.
>
> if the onboard coil were truly "magnetized"
> (permanently), it would be picking up all of the
> ferrous junk (spikes, scrap metal, strapping, etc)
> laying on the right of way!

You are correct that there is nothing magnetic about the ATS. The ATS electrically resembles the primary and secondary of a transformer more than anything else.

The wayside ATS circuit is not energized. Only the locomotive circuit is.

Santa Fe's ATS was pneumatic acknowledgement.

Bob

It always amazes me that people like Bob speak out with emotion rather than fact. There were only 7 grade crossing accidents with the RDC cars. There were many more with the regular San Diegans. After Santa Fe changed the paint scheme there was not one. I challenge you to prove me wrong! The RDCs had the fastest schedule on the Surfline to date. (2hrs 15 min) As I stated in my book; The success of the RDCs was immediate. Railway Age noted that, "An out-of-pocket operating profit, and definitely improved public and community relations, have been won by the Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe as the result of the additional passenger services, the volume of traffic increased by 12%. As one Santa Fe official stated in 1953, RDCs had "paid off like a slot machine." Well, what about that, a passenger train that made money. To continue ... The effective interstate fares between Los Angeles and San Diego in 1952 were believed to be the lower (per mile) of any railroad fares in the country. And they still made money! The RDCs are almost as affordable as a custom made dining car. In 1950, a dining car cost about $115,000, compared to the RDC-1's price of about $122,000. I'll be! They made more money than a dining car! Maybe this will show you how stupid your statements were. And I have only starched the surface of how amazing these cars were.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/14 21:16 by edsaalig.

>You are correct that there is nothing magnetic about the ATS. The ATS electrically resembles the primary and secondary of a transformer more than anything else.

Transformers do their thing with magnetism, the rising and falling of it, and an inductor is a specialized transformer (has no secondary winding). The combination of wayside inductor and locomotive-borne receiver, technically an inductor too, constitutes an air core transformer, if only when the locomotive borne receiving coil passes over the wayside inductor.

The very first paragraph describing the operation of US&S Bulletin 121, "Intermittent Inductive Automatic Stop System", commonly referred to these days as "IITS" says:

"The automatic brake application is initiated by a magnetic receiver on the engine passing over wayside inductors".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/14 21:41 by EtoinShrdlu.

edsaalig Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It always amazes me that people like Bob speak out
> with emotion rather than fact. There were only 7
> grade crossing accidents with the RDC cars. There
> were many more with the regular San Diegans.
> After Santa Fe changed the paint scheme there was
> not one. I challenge you to prove me wrong! The
> RDCs had the fastest schedule on the Surfline to
> date. (2hrs 15 min) As I stated in my book; The
> success of the RDCs was immediate. Railway Age
> noted that, "An out-of-pocket operating profit,
> and definitely improved public and community
> relations, have been won by the Atchison Topeka &
> Santa Fe as the result of the additional passenger
> services, the volume of traffic increased by 12%.
> As one Santa Fe official stated in 1953, RDCs had
> "paid off like a slot machine." Well, what about
> that, a passenger train that made money. To
> continue ... The effective interstate fares
> between Los Angeles and San Diego in 1952 were
> believed to be the lower (per mile) of any
> railroad fares in the country. And they still
> made money! The RDCs are almost as affordable as
> a custom made dining car. In 1950, a dining car
> cost about $115,000, compared to the RDC-1's price
> of about $122,000. I'll be! They made more money
> than a dining car! Maybe this will show you how
> stupid your statements were. And I have only
> starched the surface of how amazing these cars
> were.


If, as it is claimed above, the Santa Fe RDCs were

1. Economical
2. Extremely profitable
3. Fast
4. Safe

then why did the Santa Fe only buy 2, and after the Redondo incident, shove them to the badlands of New Mexico? The outcome runs counter to the claims.

Two RDC-1s were purchased as an experiment for commuter service between San Diego and Los Angeles. As it became apparent that they were profitable equipment and equipment shortage was evident when the RDC were serviced or repaired the plan was to replace all the San Diegans. After all two RDCs would replace a baggage car, lounge car, four 44-seat coaches and usually two engines. Great savings! When the wreck happen the media covered the story for weeks and 30 million dollars in settlements did not help. Santa Fe felt that after all this attention to the accident no one between San Diego and Los Angeles would ever ride them again. Years latter SP ran one and was successful. Santa Fe has also looked into the possibility of replacing the El Cap with RDC cars. The union stopped such ideas.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/14 09:26 by edsaalig.

edsaalig Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> When the wreck happen the media
> covered the story for weeks and 30 million dollars
> in settlements did not help. Santa Fe felt that
> after all this attention to the accident no one
> between San Diego and Los Angeles would ever ride
> them again.

I was under the impression (mainly from this website) that only my generation suffered from a lack of fortitude, fragile psyche, fear-mongering press, and aggressive personal injury lawyers. Certainly that generation, had they studied the accident in detail, would have realized that a conventional passenger train most likely would have derailed at the same speed on the Redondo curve. I'm no accident investigator, but I reason the loss of life would have been less had it occurred with a conventional passenger train, so one can conclude that overall a conventional passenger train is safer than an RDC passenger train. The debate is not unlike today's debate with cab-cars leading a passenger train.


> Santa Fe has also looked into the
> possibility of replacing the El Cap with RDC cars.
> The union stopped such ideas.

This seems like a bad idea. It may be tolerable to ride an RDC for two hours, but not over 39 hours. Having experienced both, my memory says that an El Cap high level was as about as close to levitation as earthly possible. And what about the amenities such as lounge, baggage and dining service? I suspect it was not the unions that killed this idea (BTW, what did the union object to exactly?).

Though I appreciate the RDC for the added dimension it brought to the post-war passenger business, and admire Budd's attempt to recapture the short-haul passenger traffic, the RDC was a small footnote, and can't be judged a success. Not many railroads owned them, and those that did were mostly numbered on one hand. Face it, people love automobiles more than they love trains. We are the minority.

All the glowing numbers and happy officials that you reference above may have been more a PR face than reality. What ever profits the Santa Fe made with the RDCs were surely lost, and then some, in the terrible accident at Redondo. A sad outcome to a short story.

Please check your sources. There were, between 1949 and 1989, 72 railroads that owned RDC cars. From a ad by Budd entitled "40 RDC's For the Progressive New Haven." If anybody should know how to carry passengers profitably it's the New Haven. Nearly half its income is derived from this source, in contrast with most railroads where freight is king. This adds significance to the fact that the New Haven has become the largest purchaser of Budd RDC's. In the really three years RDC's have been operating in this country and abroad they have complied an impressive record. In performance, they have improved every schedule they were assigned to. In operation they have proved both reliable and economical--two RC's saved one railroad $600,000 in a year. (I wonder what railroad that was, hint, Santa Fe) In the comfortable, air-conditioned service they render, RDCs have increased passenger patronage--one RDC, operating in a new service between Worcester and New London, picked up 944 passenger in its first week. In a second Budd ad entitled "Western Pacific Achieves 100% Availability with RDCa." It would be difficult to find a more rugged assignment for RDC than that given by the Western Pacific. Altitudes range from sea level to nearly six thousand feet. Temperatures range from forty degrees below zero to a hundred and five degrees above. The run is 924 miles between Oakland and Salt Lake City. From September, 1950, two Bud RDCs have been in this service. They have never missed an assigned run. As of October 16, 1953, one car had traveled 420,244 mile. As of October 18, the other had completed 428,957 miles. Santa Fe's idea of replacing the El Cap was to make it a business man's run. The business man could travel to one city do his business then in a couple of hours pick up the next RDC train to take him to his next town and so forth. As I stated this was only an idea that Santa Fe had. It never came about. I would say that they were not such a "small footnote" and they were judged a success by many railroads, Santa Fe, Western Pacific, Boston and Maine, New York Central, B&O, Canadian Pacific do I need to mention more? all found the operation of RDC cars a success!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/14 22:59 by edsaalig.

As was stated in Chuck Crouse's book; "Among engineers and mathematicians, the term "elegant" has a special meaning, denoting the simplest and most direct way of attaining a goal. By that standard, the RDC was highly successful. It made its debut on schedule, performed as advertised (or better), and contains very few bugs, which is more than can be said for many other major products, before or after. Beyond that, Budd conceived and developed the RDC on its own account, sustained by the belief that it had a meritorious concept. It had no orders in hand from railroads, and no public subsidy. the car demonstrated that a state-of-the-art product could be built from off-the-shelf components. By selling 404 unit -- including the "Roger Williams" -- the RDC probably exceed Budd's expectations. It certainly outsold any other non-electric self-propelled passenger car ever introduced, a fact that earned for the RDC a pace in the railroad hall of fame. In its Centennial Issue of September 5, 1956, Railway Age printed a list of forty "high points in the evolution of the passenger car." One was "1949 -- Rail Diesel Car." "Perhaps most remarkable about the RDC is the way it embodied, in fact and symbolically, all of the lessons learned by Budd in both automotive and railroad manufacturing. Budd components have gone into millions of automobiles and trucks. Thousands of passenger cars, from the "Zephyrs" to Amfleet II, have borne Budd builder's plates. But it was the RDC which spontaneously became known to railroaders and public alike as the Budd Car."



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/14 23:24 by edsaalig.