Looking to upgrade some UC & P type passenger car air brake systems. Anyone care to comment with their own experiences. We would prefer to go with a graduated release system.

http://www.readingrailroad.org/
mtillger@adelphia.net

> would prefer to go with a graduated release
> system.

You're kind of limited to either D22 or 26C brakes. You could likely find somebody to give you the D22 brakes, but the maintenance cycle isn't as long as the 26C brakes. 26C material is available, as well. Contact me off board for some ideas on sources.


prr8404@aol.com

> Looking to upgrade some UC & P type
> passenger car air brake systems. Anyone care
> to comment with their own experiences. We
> would prefer to go with a graduated release
> system.

If you go through with your proposed change, be aware that there are organizations that will be interested in the UC and P equipment.

Brian Norden

bnorden49@earthlink.net

You'll have no trouble finding homes for the parts you replace!

We could provide a very good home for a complete brake cylinder, on a 1923 CNR First Class coach...

Wink wink nudge nudge...


Steve Hunter,
Cardinal, Ontario

> If you go through with your proposed change,
> be aware that there are organizations that
> will be interested in the UC and P
> equipment.



http://www.magma.ca/~sfrm/
s.c.hunter@sympatico.ca

I'll probably show my ignorance of passenger car air brakes here, but would the newest ABDW freight car equipment be usable? Freight cars have gotten longer and heavier, speeds have gone up over the years, and there has been a lot of attention given to handling freight trains like passenger trains. It seems like there is a lot of overlap and/or common ground between the freight and passenger operating requirements these days.

The ABDW system seems to be more simple than the old passenger car systems, and parts should NEVER be an issue. I imagine Amtrak would require something more sophisticated on a car getting an 800 number, but the ABDW seems like a good low cost solution for tourist train service. Or am I missing something very basic here?

> Looking to upgrade some UC & P type
> passenger car air brake systems. Anyone care
> to comment with their own experiences. We
> would prefer to go with a graduated release
> system.


edm5970@earthlink.net

ABDW is only a direct release system.

TVRM followed the NS lead many years ago (before the demise of the steam program) and applied ABDW to one of our coaches. Big mistake. No matter how it's packaged and modified, ABDW is still a freight brake. UC and D22P still outperform the ABDW.

I do intend to explore a 26-C-8 system sometime and maybe begin to update our fleet our cars with that.

G. Mark - TVRM

Look at our Revamped Website
aw90@comcast.net

Please don't remove the UC valves for conversion. The UC brakes are sophisticated and offer features not available on modern brake valves. If you have a full train of UC cars set for graduated release, you will have the best system as far as train handling is concerned. Yes, parts may be difficult to find and cleanings more frequent, but it's worth it.

If, however, a coach is being upgraded for use in Amtrac trains, then the 26 C system would be more compatible.

Be aware that conversion to a freight brake like the AB series involves more than switching the valves and putting on an AB two-part reservoir. The AB reservoir is sized for one 10" brake cylinder. If the coach has large body-mounted cylinders (14"-16") or multiple truck-mounted cylinders, then the AB reservoirs will be much to small for correct equalization and brake cylinder pressure.

nnry3@mwpower.net

Well 10 years have passed since I first posted this question. I am again involved with upgrading several cars with P and UC type brake valves. It is getting harder to find parts to properly repair them and the time between failures is becoming a problem as they get their single car tests. I would like to hear both pro and con for the various conversions out there. These cars are used on longer excursions with a 1.8 ruling grade.

Thanks in advance,
Mike Tillger

Everything in our stable is being converted to ABDXL. With the proper modifications, the ABDW or ABDXL system will work fine and can be made to play well when mixed with the older passenger valves.

Please explain about proper modifications. Nice to know it CAN be done, better to know how to do it.

dave

"be made to play well when mixed with the older passenger valves"

Does that mean graduated release is possible?

Howard P.

Sorry Howard, but if you need or want graduated release you'll need to go a different route. However, if you don't need that feature, an ABDXL (or DB-60, or ABD, or ABDW) can be made to do and perform at least as well and usually better than the UC or D-22. In a non-Amtrak application I would not go any other way.

I suspect Hayneshopcat could even arrange a "test drive" for the doubters out there.

ETA

We have run UC and L-3 cars for 18 years, and haven't used graduated release yet. I think we can do without it.

We're looking at starting the UC to ABDW conversion process in the coming year. The Spencer folks, especially Mr. Barnett, have been quite helpful in 'splainin' the process to us.

Howard P.

The Spencer conversions, while serviceable, lack a great deal of the "polish" that makes the system really nice. The results and functionality of the system at Spencer is similar to what Mark Ray reported earlier in this thread. There are several modifications that we make to the basic "AB" system when we convert a car. What we do to a UC can and usually is different than what we do to a D-22 car.

I'll see if I can get you some pictures and perhaps a write up on what the "tweaks" are that make this such a good way to go.

Our first ABDXL conversion is coming up on 16 years in service without so much as a valve change. I can take the freight tester out there right now and it will test out no problem. The car will sit in emergency for 8 to 10 days before it bleeds off, longer with the water raising cut out. The XLs cost $180 per portion to get cleaned and there is a LONG list of companies that rebuild them.

Assuming you are working on a car that has more cylinder volume than a basic freight car you would keep the supply reservoir that came with the car and add a J relay valve of the appropriate braking ratio, two compartment reservoir (basic freight car air tank), an 800 cubic inch reservoir to serve as the "fake brake cylinder", H-5 relayair valve and a safety valve. First, you should be using a pipe bracket that has the #11 port and with that you will add a reservoir charging check valve. I highly recommend removing the choke from the #11 port on the pipe bracket. This will allow for quicker charging of the system. You should also remove the choke from the service portion that is screwed into the exhaust port.........Port #10 I believe. This will allow for quicker release. That's a very brief synopsis of what we are doing. We've mixed this system with cars that had D-22's and the release time is almost identical. My partner in crime tells me that one of our cars is now up to 16 years now with no servicing whatsoever. Since we are not running in "daily service" the FRA treats this as a freight car. To stay legal, your cars should be in UMLER, be tested whenever they hit the repair track, and the SCT date recorded in the UMLER file. You will need a freight car single car test device. With the exception of the relayair valve and the safety, this setup is nearly identical to what you find on articulated ABC intermodal cars. It is handy for those times when you are moving on the rear of a 100 car freight train because your car releases a little faster than others thus reducing at least a little of the risk of slid flat wheels. The final advantage to this in my opinion is the availability of clean valves should a failure occur out on the Class 1's. While the initial conversion is a little costly, we've had great success out of this in the excursion train world.