One hook tension lock coupling operation

[deltic9014]

Hi all

I've been thinking about removing the hooks from the tension lock couplings at one end of each item of rolling stock in an attempt to make shunting easier and stop the hooks getting tangled/the wrong way round when coupling on curves. Has anyone done this, and are there any potential problems I should be aware of?

Thanks in advance 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Which design of tension lock coupling?

 

Even the very similar looking miniature tension locks from the current manufacturers are all to different designs. I established by test that the path to reliability was to use a single manufacturer's design. Mix them and the slightly different hook lengths, hook profile and latching detail on the fixed bar, resulted in tangles, poor coupling, random uncouples.

 

If it's a mix of the large, medium and small versions in all their variations, that's a formula for hell on wheels.

[Il Grifone]

I did this with my TT stock back in the day.

 

Advantages:  Easy to uncouple by hand and avoids couplings tangling.

 

Disadvantages: Stock will only couple one way around, locomotives will need one end with a hook* so the usual bare loops for realism cannot be adopted and a slightly increased tendency to spurious uncoupling.

* Both ends if the layout incorporates a turntable.

 

It might also affect resale value, but the couplings are quite easy to replace in this case, especially if the rivet is removed rather than breaking off the bracket.

 

With some of the more modern couplings the hook unclips and is easy to remove and replace for trials. In the case of the Mainline couplings take care not to lose the spring!

[philsandy]

All my stock use Bachmann tension locks. I have removed the hooks from all my locos, both ends, but all rolling stock still has a hook at each end.

When uncoupling the loco from the train it does make the procedure much easier, as only the one hook is involved.

I kept the rolling stock with a hook at each end so stock can be coupled together any way round, as Grifone above has pointed out.

Edited July 19, 2017 by philsandy

[MartynJPearson]

I've found it a necessity, particularly for my old Hornby HAA wagons which derail without the slightest provocation. One of their many excuses for an excursion off the rails was the loco couplings placing too much sideways pressure on the coupling, but removing the loco coupling hook seemed to help.

[The Johnster]

Not sure it would work reliably enough if, like me, you have a mixture of stock from different manufacturers and periods with different coupling profiles and mountings.  On a layout with only 50 items of stock from 5 manufacturers spanning 40 years, I have several (I have not actually counted different types of t/ls and several types of mountings, and though the more modern items mostly feature NEM pockets, a recent production Baccy small prairie doesn't, and even NEMs have at least 3 profiles incorporating cranked couplings and 'shaped to avoid fouling detail on the buffer beam' hooks, and I have had some trouble getting the bars all the same height..  If you can standardise on NEM pocket mounted couplings from a single manufacturer, and your trackwork is scrupulously level and smoothly laid, with any curvature in the horizontal or vertical planes incorporating smoothly laid transition curves, you should get away with it, but,despite the undeniable advantage of easier uncoupling, I wouldn't recommend it otherwise.  

 

There is more to tension lock couplings that first appears.  A standardised height, mounting, bar, and hook profile would go a long way to solving some of the issues, but we are nowhere near that situation from the manufacturers, and while at least NEM pockets offer interchangeability, Ratio kits for example cannot mount them and use a non-standard coupler.

[deltic9014]

Thanks for all the replies. Most of my stock is old Hornby and Lima with the large tension locks, the only exception being a Bachmann class 08 which doesn't seem to care whether there is a hook on the adjacent coupling or not. My layout doesn't feature any gradients, doesn't have a turntable, and most of the locomotives are diesels - the 3 steam locomotives will probably be left alone as they don't get used much for shunting anyway. I'm also not planning to fit wire loop couplings, as it would be a lot of work to equip all my locomotives. 

[wn 1A]

I did this with my TT stock back in the day.

 

Advantages:  Easy to uncouple by hand and avoids couplings tangling.

 

Disadvantages: Stock will only couple one way around, locomotives will need one end with a hook* so the usual bare loops for realism cannot be adopted and a slightly increased tendency to spurious uncoupling.

* Both ends if the layout incorporates a turntable.

 

It might also affect resale value, but the couplings are quite easy to replace in this case, especially if the rivet is removed rather than breaking off the bracket.

 

With some of the more modern couplings the hook unclips and is easy to remove and replace for trials. In the case of the Mainline couplings take care not to lose the spring!

I to did this with the 'oo' coupling if you use sprung still wire you can get delayed coupling this is was copied from an article in one of the mags, I later updated to using the 'mainline' both also used hidden electromagnets for remote uncoupling. I agree with the others choose one type only for all stock. Have an arrow in the fiddle yard(s) to help you maintain all stock is the correct way round.

[DCB]

In my experience tension lock couplers with only one hook tend to pull stock sideways causing derailments with long trains.   

 

Hooks going wrong side etc is usually a result of mixing different couplings. Standardising on one coupler is the optimum, Bachmann seem to be most readily available. Airfix the neatest. Triang / Hornby metal the most reliable.  

 

If you can get the coupling heights and the hook lengths standardised, and its not easy, then running / coupling etc should be greatly improved but its going to be a lot of work.  Even under optimum conditions Tension locks are not great for shunting.  Might be easier to fit Kadees.   

[The Johnster]

Agreed with David that it is a lot of faff getting everything right, but worth the effort as I have 100% reliable coupling, and luckily managed to achieve this on a layout with only 50 items of stock, which means 100 couplings.  it is best to standardise as far as you can but in practice next to impossible unliess your stock is either a) all from one manufacturer and the same period, or b) all factory fitted with NEM pockets at the same height, in which case you can standardise on one company's couplings; most people seem to use Bachmann's.  But if you have stock from a variety of stock dating from 1977 to the present production, from Airfix, Dapol, Mainline, Hornby, Oxford, and Bachmann, the mountings are not standard, NEM pockets cannot be retrofitted to stock not designed to accept them, and you will not be able to standardise.  

 

Hopefully, now that I have achieved a constant height of my coupling bars with the resultant complete reliable operation of couplings including hauling around curves as tight as no.3 and propelling, with the couplings acting as buffers and preventing buffer lock, new stock will be NEM fitted and require no work on the couplings to run faultlessly on my layout.  This means that I will in future be very wary of buying secondhand stock and kits which are not capable of being fitted with NEM pockets at the correct height, so, effectively, I am denying myself access to kits.  And I do not have the confidence to dispense with hooks owing to the inability to standardise on hook or bar profiles, even if I can get the height's right.

 

The manufacturers are improving, but have still not proved themselves capable of providing a standardised and reliable tension lock coupling, 60 years after Triang introduced it.

 

Extractus Digitus, manufacturers!

[rue_d_etropal]

A one hook system has been used very successfully by Roger Nicholls and his blade of grass uncoupling system. It does actually work, having observed it at exhibitions.

 

If all you intend to do is pull long trains and not shunt, uncouple and couple up, then look at some way of semi permantly coupling everything together. A simple hook one end and a small loop on the other. 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... it is best to standardise as far as you can but in practice next to impossible unliess your stock is either a) all from one manufacturer and the same period, or b) all factory fitted with NEM pockets at the same height, in which case you can standardise on one company's couplings; most people seem to use Bachmann's.  But if you have stock from a variety of stock dating from 1977 to the present production, from Airfix, Dapol, Mainline, Hornby, Oxford, and Bachmann, the mountings are not standard, NEM pockets cannot be retrofitted to stock not designed to accept them, and you will not be able to standardise...

Contra: circa 800 wagons, all fitted with Bach miniature tension lock. RTR product from H-D and Triang circa 1960 and every manufacturer since with something useful to offer, kit and scratchbuilds various. There's no difficulty mounting this coupler at all, other than a few specially constructed vehicles such as Lowmacs where some ingenuity is required.

 

...The manufacturers are improving, but have still not proved themselves capable of providing a standardised and reliable tension lock coupling, 60 years after Triang introduced it.

 

Extractus Digitus, manufacturers!

 Nor has any RTR OO manufacturer looked at a dedicated OO coupler mounting system and matching auto coupler design(s) which puts the coupler where it should be, through the headstock, and is acceptably close in appearance to the correct prototype coupler: save one.

 

Step forward Bachmann, who have provided knuckle coupled modern wagons, with their Kadee clone knuckle coupler body mounted in the headstock. It's still somewhat of a kludge in that the coupler used remains the HO design, and so the magnetic dropper is out of position for magnetic actuation. But a slight DIY straightening of the dropper puts that right, and full autocoupler functionality is available.

 

I rate these the best RTR OO vehicles ever made, simply on the basis that they are supplied with a coupler both in the right location, and that actually looks acceptably close to prototype.

[Il Grifone]

The Hornby HAAs have their awful semi-bogies I believe, As supplied there is no control over the axle other than the bit of plastic that tries to imitate a spring. My solution is to glue them solid which then enables the pivot to be removed and the buffer height to be set right. I first met this system on some Kleinbahn wagons. OK in traction as the Continental loop coupling holds the axle central (unlike tension locks which pull sideways on curves), but propelling stock was another matter and the axles would go skew and derail, I solved it with a diagonal piece of wire from one semi-bogie to the other across the wagon, so that twisting one axle to the side forced the other to turn in the opposite direction. I would think this would work on the Hornby wagons, but I haven't tried it on them as yet.

 

I can't claim any originality for this; I pinched the idea from the Corgi missile trailer. The wire link can be seen here:

 

https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fthumbs.ebaystatic.com%2Fimages%2Fg%2Fwe8AAOSw74FXPHfC%2Fs-l225.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.ie%2Fsch%2FDiecast-Vehicles-%2F222%2Fi.html%3F_sop%3D13%26_nkw%3Dcorgi%2Bcorporal%2Bmissile&docid=1nsTBXYVLk-cJM&tbnid=a44JaySvqFnvEM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwiFz-K-3JjVAhXEIcAKHQtuD68QMwg5KBEwEQ..i&w=225&h=169&itg=1&bih=745&biw=1447&q=Corgi%20missile%20trailer&ved=0ahUKEwiFz-K-3JjVAhXEIcAKHQtuD68QMwg5KBEwEQ&iact=mrc&uact=8

 

For any type of coupling it is essential than they all operate freely and are set at the same height within close limits. Ideally they should all be the same make and type, but this is not always possible. Any that give trouble should be weeded out and repaired or replaced. That said, I had two Dublo wagons which would uncouple at odd moments, Both were fine with other wagons and I could see nothing wrong with either. In the end I cheated and just made sure they were never coupled together.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Il Grifone

[Butler Henderson]

When I used tension locks I had all shunting locos with loops only; preferably the large metal loop of the Hornby X171 coupling. Where stock had hooks and loops of different sizes if possible I fitted a few wagons with a different tension lock at each end to allow for easier coupling/running together. All wagons had an individual card with coloured dots on indicating the coupling types fitted so using those cards as a wagon distribution / train assembly system it was possible to work out the best order of marshalling a train together. From memory the Lima and the mini Airfix tension locks were a definite no go for coupling together.

[Stubby47]

I use a single hook per wagon, with the Brian Kirby adaptation of a magnetic staple.

Pros and cons as above, one extra con is if the hooks don't quite engage any slight misalignment of track can cause an uncouple to occur. Even when using all Bachmann stock.

Electro magnets are better than the permanent ones.

Edited July 21, 2017 by Stubby47

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... I had two Dublo wagons which would uncouple at odd moments, Both were fine with other wagons and I could see nothing wrong with either. In the end I cheated and just made sure they were never coupled together.

If that was the metal simplex coupler, I can propose the most probable reason, although the data I obtained was from measuring a sample of the Peco version, as supplied in their not-really-that wonderful wagon kits. (One hopes that Peco would manufacture their device to design standard.)

 

The base design may have been adequate considered in isolation, but the repeat precision of the manufacturing process for the coupler pressing was inadequate to deliver reliable performance on track, when combined with the large variance present in lateral positioning of OO stock. With the variances of coupler form and vehicle summed, the variance present allowed two adjacent couplers to lose engagement, (relatively small probability event) and they will then uncouple. What was required to make it perform reliably - as far as remaining coupled was concerned - in that form was a recentering spring.

 

As far as I am concerned the Kadee is the fulfilment of the underlying potential of the simplex coupler design; significantly developed from the basic concept for superior functionality such as contactless uncoupling and delay, and by design recentering to make it fully tolerant of the lateral variance in vehicle position.

Edited July 21, 2017 by 34theletterbetweenB&D

[deltic9014]

I know that it is best to have all the same type of coupling at the same height, and I have also read about the advantages and disadvantages of different coupling systems. However, as much as I would like to standardise my couplings or change to a 'better' system, I am modelling within a very limited budget. Therefore if your suggestions involve spending money, they are probably not helpful to me.

[Stubby47]

A lot depends on how happy you are with the 'hand of god' style of uncoupling.

 

DLT's Bridport Town uses small hand-held bent shovels to lift the tension hooks, which gives flexibility to where uncoupling can take place.

 

I've used fixed permanent and fixed electro-magnets - limits the flexibility but provides a hands-off style.

 

Other have used simple mechanical levers under the baseboard to a small plate between the rails to lift the hook droppers.

 

You can make the uncoupling mechanism as cheap or as expensive as you wish (of want to spend) - single or double hooks is again a matter or preference. 

[jamesg]

I experimented with a coupling hook at one end when restoring some old wagons.  Every wagon has one or two small Bachmann tension lock couplings; those with one have a loop made from plastic card using the Bachmann coupling as a template.  They are fiddly to make but work reliably on the level.  With just one hook they are slightly easier to couple and uncouple using a bent piece of wire taped to a pencil as a tool.  Problems will occur when mixing small Bachmann type couplings with old Hornby ones, even if the hook is removed from the Hornby one.

 

 

[The Johnster]

Airfix construction kit locos and wagons came with 'Peco' automatic couplings', which you couldn't get from Peco.  Peco couplings as suppled with 'Wonderful Wagons' and as a separately available item from them were the same, or at least very similar, to Hornby Dublo 'buckeye' ones from the pre 'super detailed' era which introduced a new improved plastic version.  To get back to the ones in Airfix kits, they were a simple plastic moulding which, apart from probably not being strong enough to cope with very heavy trains, I thought had a lot going for it.  They were, if this makes sense, a double sided buckeye on an angle, screwed into a moulding on the vehicle floor and with a hook on the 'inner' end.  The kits came with an elastic band of suitable length and strength to automatically centre the couplings when it was attached between the two inner hooks.  To couple, you buffered up and the angled couplers pushed each other aside until they cleared each other, at which point the springs engaged them, spring pressure making sure that they remained engaged.  A droppr both simulated a three link or screw coupling hanging down in side profile and prevented them parting by overriding each other if they encountered differences in level.  To uncouple, you 'eased up' and pulled one coupling aside with a stick of some sort against the spring pressure, and drew away, either properly with the loco or cheating with the Hand Of God.  I think I remember something somewhere about an arrangement between the rail that automatically uncoupled using the droppers.

 

This seems to have been an excellent design that has vanished into the mythical mistical misty mists of time.  I could be fitted to almost any wagon that could have a hole drilled into the underside of the floor with a self tapping screw, and I believe was a staight swap for any HD coupling.  I imagine a modern version could be devised that utilised NEM pockets and individual springs to re-centre the coupler; the spring is, of course, the most important part of the whole gubbins.  It would have the advantage over tension locks that it is a one piece moulding, and also that it enables vehicles to be lifted directly out of a train if necessary; changing ends in fiddle yards with locos and brake vans would be much easier.  I had a rake of Airfix minerals years ago that used it within the rake, and found it excellent, as the rake was filled with coal at one fiddle yard and emptied at the other for the return journey; all you had to do was lift the wagon out and tip the load, stuck to a card former, into a box.

 

I doubt if the moulds for these still exist, but it's a thought...

[naugytrax]

The one-piece couplers that came with the Airfix kit wagons were apparent attempts to copy the "horn-hook" device which used to be a de facto standard on the cheaper American brands of railway models, and was sometimes called "X2f" and sometimes "NMRA coupler" because it was invented by a group of NMRA members - although it was never adopted as an NMRA standard. The Airfix ones did not work with the US horn-hooks, and in my experience they didn't work very well with each other. They suffered from the defect of all couplers of this type, in that you can't lift the coupled vehicles straight up out of the train: you have to wiggle and twist them and in this respect they are even worse than tension-locks. If you really want to use this type of device you can still get them from U.S. suppliers.

My original Airfix 16t minerals and Type B tanks are still running, but very early in their life they gained Kadee couplers!

I doubt if the Airfix kit couplers were ever known as "PECO Automatic Couplers". The Dublo post-war couplers were of course similar to the PECO Simplex type because Meccano Limited licenced the design from Mr. Pritchard's Patent Company.

[Campaman]

The Aifix couplers are still on the sprues of the Dapol wagon kits, I have a load of them in my could be usefull one day box.