Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was hoping that there would be enough flexibility in the couplings. However, although I don't have many sharp curves, I am doubtful about this. I am working on producing a more flexible connection method, hopefully by using thinner wire and having a loop in it to increase movement without too much stress. I will post updates as I progress!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see that you have announced the new detailed buckeye coupling. I will purchasing many once they go on sale. 

 

Any news on the coupling you were working on specifically for the Hattons Class 66?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another trail and happy result.

 

This time I have used the NEM Close Couple type on my Honrby OTA wagons.  As the magnetic coupling keeps the free to pivot wheels that are on this wagon aligned, I removed the plastic centring spring.  Again a quick test my 3rd radius curves the look is great.  I have also converted a rake of Bachmann VDA van wagons with the same coupling and equally good results with the free pivot wheel type of arrangement.

 

The next task will be a touch of frame dirt paint to help make the coupling "disappear" from obvious view. 

 

1209330165_IMG_1954-Copy.JPG.9d5b7841b94fcfe0e9559bbefece1f5e.JPGIMG_1953_-_Copy.JPG.375679bff2e478e72f08f22f0157a541.JPGIMG_1956_-_Copy.JPG.b5733435c90b81659473f73ae816f9c9.JPG

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/05/2020 at 16:00, Jaggzuk said:

An interesting idea Graham and they will look like vacuum pipe when painted black.  I can see that this does solve the issue of single polarity magnets, but how do these coaches go round corners, as you have basically fixed the bogies in to a rigid format between each coach?

An update to my experiment with dual magnets. The partially stripped guitar strings pass through slots cut into the end frame of the bogie and are hooked through holes in a swing bar made from a servo arm which is pivoted on a small wood screw. This should keep the magnets balanced while allowing reverse curves to be negotiated. Just need to do a few more coaches then test!

IMG_2835.JPG

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next one OMWB, POA scrap metal wagons.

 

When I bought these, I found that they derailed on tight radii.  On investigation I found that the TLC, which are screwed to the wagon type (no NEM), did not have enough flex to cope with the curves.  The result was I had to cut off the 'T' bar legs and loose screw just the TLC back in place so that it could swing to either side.

 

To convert to Hunt Coupling, I decided to use the ‘T’ bar screw version.  I cut off the T Bar legs and the two pegs supports on the wagon chassis leaving just the screw terminal.

 

Using the original coupling screw, I loose screwed the Hunt Coupling in place ensuring it could swing left and right.  This method required minimal hacking of the wagon and you could even leave the Hunt T bar coupling uncut.  But I preferred to make it look as slim line as possible.

 

The result is the closest coupling on a wagon I have so far achieved on the layout.

 

IMG_2101_-_Copy.JPG.d8db5779ea70d0f386f869f8f314a7c4.JPG

Hunt Coupling 'T' Bar legs trimmed on the left and un cut on the right

 

1260974943_IMG_2100-Copy.JPG.769ca370557086fbb26d23b4f6b4d9e0.JPG

Almost touching buffers on 2nd radii.

 

I will create fixed rake of these with TLC at one end and a Kadee at the other untile I have repalced all TLC on my tock and then it will be just Kadee and Hunt.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw a review that compared these to GLR couplings, interesting video. The problem for me, is that I have multiple 2+8 hst rakes but the coaches are all from different batches, for example my Fgw rake would only need one type, whereas my intercity set would need about 2. A few people mentioned unreliable connections, nice to see a new coupling. But I don’t understand the hype behind it. And it doesn’t really seem suitable for shunting layouts, however they look great on dean parks layout, especially for push pull 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Class 158 productions said:

But I don’t understand the hype behind it. And it doesn’t really seem suitable for shunting layouts, however they look great on dean parks layout, especially for push pull 

 

I'm not sure where people have got the idea they're good for shunting from?

I've never seen them promoted in that way.

 

I think the hype comes from the fact they're perhaps better for fixed rakes as the connection is a lot more stable than kadees. They will never be good for shunting. But a 75mph DMU will never be good for express passenger. Both have uses.

 

I've used them on some DMUs, which has helped them stay together better than Kadees.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

 

I'm not sure where people have got the idea they're good for shunting from?

I've never seen them promoted in that way.

 

I think the hype comes from the fact they're perhaps better for fixed rakes as the connection is a lot more stable than kadees. They will never be good for shunting. But a 75mph DMU will never be good for express passenger. Both have uses.

 

I've used them on some DMUs, which has helped them stay together better than Kadees.

Agreed they are clearly more suited for that, one thing I have noticed that they do fall down upon against the glr design, Is that they can only work one way. But I suppose that’s a pitiful of using magnets, wonder if we could ever see electromagnetic systems used, the continental scene appears to offer it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Perhaps one day someone smarter than I will be able to adapt the magnets so they can be activated to turn on/off at a push of a button, therefore making them usable for shunting purposes! Just thinking out loud as a possible development option for the intelligent ones out there!. 

Edited by ianLMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting why the Hunt Coupling system id being negatively commented on as not being any good for shunting, as a number of members have already said, they are NOT designed for hands free uncoupling actions.  Having had a number of really useful customer service conversations with the Hunt designer, their prime design purpose of operation is in fixed rake formations and to create a more reliable connection in both push and pull operations.

The issue of polarity on one hand could be problematic if you regularly want to turn individual coaches or wagons around, but when would this happen in the real world?  Most passenger coach formations are fixed rake as are a lot of modern day wagon trains.  Yes, you need to pre-plan which side of each a coach or wagon you want to see on each side of the layout when fitting the magnets, but are there many vehicles that have dramatically different sides which would require mid-running session turn-arounds?

 

As for locos with magnetic couplings, I can see that there could be an issue if they turn around during operation (e,g, Steam and turntables or reverse triangles) and so end up have similar magnetic poles to wagons.  But if you want to “uncouple”, I think that you would perhaps not use magnetic couplings on the locos but use one of the many “hands-free” coupling systems to couple up with the fixed rakes.  For me, I plan to have an eventual mix of magnetic and Kadee, using the Kadee on locos and for wagons I want to shunt.

 

The GLR Twin pole MagNEM, does appear to offer the flexibility of being able to turning around individual vehicles within fixed rakes, but it still does not offer hands free uncoupling.  One issue I foresee with the first version of the ‘OO’ GLR MagNEM, having watched the introduction video Link to Using the MagNEM OO Magnetic Omni Couplings, is that the coupling is a draw bar type and as such is designed to move freely back and forth within the NEM pocket.  The reason cited in the video is to allow buffer to buffer push shunting moves.  Unless you have large radius points or only shunt short wheelbased wagons, you will get buffer lock over points due to reverse wheelbase over swing.  You do not get this with Hunt Coupling as they fit snugly in the pocket.  I think you would end up gluing the GLRs in place.

 

For me, aside from the much improved close coupling look and the significantly more reliable connection from magnet couplings, is the ease with which you can just separate and lift each vehicle off the layout during fiddle yard working or at the end of a running session, is the real advantage.

 

It does perhaps look like we are heading for a raft of new magnetic coupling systems and types, Hunt Couplings, already offer 15 different versions for OO.  I see that a new one was published today - a Hunt Couplings that work with Tension Locks Hooks.  I for one am jsut a satisfied customer of Hunt Coupling and will soon have got rid of all my TLC!!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree with @Jaggzuk, the whole point of the Hunt system is for fixed rakes rather than shunting- plenty of different options for that. 
Personally, I really like them and as most of my rakes are fixed, they are a very reliable, secure method, especially with the various gradients on my layout. Kadees used to uncouple at the exits to the lower level storage yard. 
Well worth the money IMHO as a very satisfied customer. 

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ianLMS said:

Perhaps one day someone smarter than I will be able to adapt the magnets so they can be activated to turn on/off at a push of a button, therefore making them usable for shunting purposes! Just thinking out loud as a possible development option for the intelligent ones out there!. 

That's a pretty tall order, ianLMS. Modern permanent magnets are so much stronger than any comparable electromagnet, and I know of no foreseeable way to "turn off" their magnetism. Even though I am researching the possibility of using twin magnets to get around the "non-reversing" polarity issue, (see my previous posts), I still see the Kadee system as the best available if magnetic uncoupling is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Graham_M said:
19 hours ago, ianLMS said:

Perhaps one day someone smarter than I will be able to adapt the magnets so they can be activated to turn on/off at a push of a button, therefore making them usable for shunting purposes! Just thinking out loud as a possible development option for the intelligent ones out there!. 

That's a pretty tall order, ianLMS. Modern permanent magnets are so much stronger than any comparable electromagnet, and I know of no foreseeable way to "turn off" their magnetism. Even though I am researching the possibility of using twin magnets to get around the "non-reversing" polarity issue, (see my previous posts), I still see the Kadee system as the best available if magnetic uncoupling is required.

 

I can just picture the chaos with electromagnets when the layout power is removed, everything decouples :o

 

 

Steve

Edited by 55020
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Graham_M said:

Even though I am researching the possibility of using twin magnets to get around the "non-reversing" polarity issue,

 

That makes me think of 'Take Along Thomas' They use magnetic couplings inside a cover where the magnet twizzles round in some fashion when pushed together so they couple either way round.

 

They are admittedly of a less than scale appearance.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Take-Along-Thomas-Friends-Lights/dp/B000X6KIYO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, 30801 said:

 

That makes me think of 'Take Along Thomas' They use magnetic couplings inside a cover where the magnet twizzles round in some fashion when pushed together so they couple either way round.

 

They are admittedly of a less than scale appearance.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Take-Along-Thomas-Friends-Lights/dp/B000X6KIYO

That's a new one on me 30801. But it got me checking up on smart magnets and polymagnets. Some interesting stuff out there which might eventually have applications for our hobby!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/05/2020 at 23:08, Jaggzuk said:

Another trail and happy result.

 

This time I have used the NEM Close Couple type on my Honrby OTA wagons.

 

Hiya

Can you tell me how long I'm total the couplings are when connected?

 

Also, if anyone has any of the ultra close couplings, I'd also like to know the total length of those coupled together.

 

I have some stock that already has very close couplings using a double sided NEM clip (think Bachmann Voyager) but not sure which I need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

These are the dimensions I know of.   

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/151728-hunt-coupling-system/&do=findComment&comment=3965624

 

I can measure others that I have if needed.

 

But it is a bit arbitrary as the distance from the face of the NEM pocket to the buffer face varies from item to item.  Also, the amount of buffer beam over swing on corners really dictate what coupling you actually need.

 

Personally, I have found that the NEM Standard version is way too long and ends up separating wagons more than with TLC.  I have used the Close NEM version the most.

 

If you need subtle variations in the coupling length, try using a NEM Standard version with the bobble legs cut off and filing the wider sides down and then glue into the NEM pocket to the length required.  I did this for my Bachmann BDA Bogie Bolster wagons.

Edited by Jaggzuk
Spelling
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jaggzuk said:

These are the dimensions I know of.   

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/151728-hunt-coupling-system/&do=findComment&comment=3965624

 

I can measure others that I have if needed.

 

But it is a bit arbitrary as the distance from the face of the NEM pocket to the buffer face varies from item to item.  Also, the amount of buffer beam over swing on corners really dictate what coupling you actually need.

 

Personally, I have found that the NEM Standard version is way too long and ends up separating wagons more than with TLC.  I have used the Close NEM version the most.

 

If you need subtle variations in the coupling length, try using a NEM Standard version with the bobble legs cut off and filing the wider sides down and then glue into the NEM pocket to the length required.  I did this for my Bachmann BDA Bogie Bolster wagons.

 

Maybe Hunt can do an "equivalent to a Kadee #18" or similar as a description?

 

I have the close coupled Hunts on my PCA rake and until they actually get used in anger on my layout (which is not likely to be until October-ish when I test it ready for Warley - if it happens)

Although they have had a check on similar sized pointwork, I don't truly know if they will work OK on DL. 

I do not have a problem with that as my solution is as yours. Ease the couplings slightly outwards in the NEM pockets and glue them in place to increase the wagon to wagon gap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, Jaggzuk said:

These are the dimensions I know of.   

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/151728-hunt-coupling-system/&do=findComment&comment=3965624

 

I can measure others that I have if needed.

 

Although those measurements seem to be not the total length of one?

Going by the measurements there, even the ultra close will be too long :blink:.

 

If you have any of the "close" and/or "ultra close" to measure the length of the whole thing, that would be great!

 

It's only really an indulgence though.
I just worry that clicking the couplers in and out all the time is going to damage them in the end.

 

This is the coupling I want to replace (next to Kadee #18) - very short!

 

IMG_20200611_094601.jpg.228b3a4e88d63aa4b0661db707739ce8.jpg

Edited by Sir TophamHatt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

 

IMG_20200611_094601.jpg.228b3a4e88d63aa4b0661db707739ce8.jpg

 

I'd be grateful, Sir Topham, if you could tell me what that bottom coupling is, and where I can get them?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SirTopham, below are the combined coupling dimensions.  These measurements would equate to the physical gap between the two NEM pocket faeces when coupled up.

 

I have never seen such a  short NEM coupling as the one you showed!.  What rolling stock are you actually coupling together as the NEMs look like they must almost be touching?  I assume there are no buffers on this stock.  Very interesting.  But yes you are right I do not think there is a Hunt Coupling this short.  Worth communication with them directly on possible future design options?

 

301645237_2020-06-1111-12-29-Copy.JPG.dacc91e382d16dc3bf74ef0683ee4d7b.JPG1301758033_2020-06-1111-08-35-Copy.JPG.33aeecedaf5ad5765b78f828cc7d0235.JPG2096327613_2020-06-1111-10-15-Copy.JPG.fec56cb80baca8b542154d712ed84228.JPG

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The tiny coupling came with my Roco RailJet coach pack.

 

I guess they may be [url=https://www.roco.cc/en/service/spareparts/index.html?p=y&ssp=64189]spare part[/url] available as a spare part? Not sure what the part number is though but I can check and report back.

 

You're right though, no buffers on the coaches.

Perhaps the cutting and gluing method will be the way forward. I guess even a Kadee won't be that short.

 

The total length of the RailJet coupling is just 19mm - from tip to tip.

 

IMG_20200611_170536.jpg

IMG_20200611_170713.jpg

IMG_20200611_170645.jpg

Edited by Sir TophamHatt
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah I see.  Even with a "new" NEW magnet version, there is not much space between the pockets to accommodate two magnets.  Are you precious about modify the pockets to create more space, I guess ideally not as the model looks mint.  Could you not create your own couplings out of NEM TLC parts and some thin rectangular Neodymium Magnets, such as these https://www.first4magnets.com/rectangular-c35/self-adhesive-10-x-5-x-1mm-thick-n42-neodymium-magnets-0-6kg-pull-p2450#ab_1_1|ps_2_683 

 

On an aside, that is very nice looking train the OBB RailJet.  I came across it when do some design work on High Speed.  Just look mat the compartment based business class - https://cloud.panono.com/p/4ba1dfd61606/album/8c1ba560d7e5 Nothing like that on UK UK network!!  But that’s not for discussion here ;-)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like a lot of European (and now UK) stock, the inter-car couplers on fixed formation sets can be made very close - hence the use of a very short coupler. Look at the length of the bar with the NEM socket on the end.

And further complicated when electrical connections pass through those couplers.

 

Fixed bars are great for close coupling - but a real PITA when it comes to assembling sets on the tracks and difficult to use unless you leave your stock on the rails as much as possible.

 

The same applies to any "fixed-bar" coupler - such as those used on Bachmann Voyagers etc.

I have a dedicated extra long box that holds all my 2 car DMUs as well as 3/4/5 car units, but I try and split them as 2+1 or 2+2 or 2+2+1 to minimise handling and damaging the fixed bar couplers.

These are un-proportionately  time consuming at exhibitions when compared to individual vehicle couplers, as the stock as to be assembled upside down and then gently rolled over to be placed on the rails.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.