With the pending replacement of the Washington Metro's original Rohr-built cars, already rebuilt in the mid-1990s by Breda, the National Capital Trolley Museum has taken a proactive step in securing for future preservation a pair of the original Washington Metro subway cars.

The NCTM has identified two original, largely unmodified cars for preservation: 1028, now used as a clearance car after its sister car was damaged in a wreck in 1982, and 1076, whose sister car was damaged in a 2004 accident. (Four other cars were relegated to "money train" status, but their armor and security modifications made them unsuitable for preservation.)

The cars are now being held aside at the WMATA's Greenbelt, Md. facility for eventual transfer to the NCTM's new facility in Colesville, where trolley poles will be fitted for eventual demonstration runs. More is being posted at the NCTM website at http://www.dctrolley.org/carcollection. ... sWhatAgain" target="_blank?

That... is the RIGHT way to do that thing. Talk to them early and get the equipment reserved.

And hey - anyone want to preserve BART cars? Better get in line.

I think most of us have written off preserving BART cars because they are 5'6" gauge. But I have it on good authority that these WMATA 1000-series trucks are substantially compatible with the original BART cars, and of course, they are standard gauge.

Getting them "now" will assure that preserving BART cars in the future is possible.

Convincing story, except that there is no way that a Metro car would fit into the NCTM carbarns.

Now, after this April Fool's joke from SIX YEARS ago, it's time to get serious.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/tr ... story.html

I won't even begin to say it will look less strange, but Rockhill Trolley Museum put a trolley pole onto their ex-P&W bullet. If anyone is desparate enough to preserve one, it would be easiest to do that because, as far as I know, no museums have third rail trackage.

No way to run a funeral train to the scrappers or does that tiny gauge difference matter? And why is that anyway?

Laying third rail all that way could get expensive...

OK, joking aside, you can't couple to them, the air brakes aren't compatible, they're not inspected for interchange, the list goes on and one. It's simply not possible.

The gauge difference would probably not be an issue for practical purposes, though I don't know if the wheels would fall outside of allowable standards or not.

Does anyone know why they did that? Are the wheelsets also narrower or is just the track gauge? Maybe the track was held 1/4" tight for less lateral play? (I am guessing, I don't know if the wheelsets are different)

When design of the WMATA system commenced in the 1960s, there was virtually no expertise in rapid transit trackwork outside of transit agency personnel in New York, Philadelphia, Boston and Chicago. Deleuw Cather & Company, the consulting engineers who were managing the WMATA project, therefore hired several trackwork engineers who had previously worked for the Baltimore & Ohio. For better or worse, those fellows (two of whom I knew professionally) elected to use both ¼ inch tight gauge in main tracks and cylindrical profile on the wheel treads. The wheel mounting gauge was kept at AAR standard dimension, with the effect that gauge freeplay was reduced. These measures were an attempt to control “truck hunting”, and both were fairly common on the nation’s passenger railroads back in the day. Track gauge in WMATA’s yard track was kept at the standard 56 ½ inches, since truck hunting was not an issue at slow speeds.

Unfortunately, the cure was determined to be worse than the disease as wheel and rail wear were severe, particularly in sharp radius curves. The problems were exacerbated by rotationally “stiff” trucks, yet another attempt to control hunting. The cylindrical wheels were therefore replaced by a conical/tapered wheels beginning around 1978. The track gauge in main tracks is still 56 ¼ inches. But, since the Rohr cars have wheel profiles and wheel gauge that are virtually identical to those used by the freight railroads, a “funeral train” would theoretically be possible. It would, however, require the cooperation of CSX or Norfolk Southern, which is doubtless the same thing as saying “ain’t gonna happen.” The mechanical issues cited by Brother Harbison pretty much seal the issue. Moving these cars by truck is quite possibly cheaper than trying to deal with the freight railroads.

/s/ Larry
Lawrence G. Lovejoy, P.E.

IRM runs their CTA El cars off the trolley wire. I got an opportunity to motor one of the train sets last fall at the ATRRM conference and had a blast-got to motor the full length of the main line at track speed.