Ray Von Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Ashamed to admit it, but I haven't the faintest clue how the loco's on my layout would actually uncouple from their coaches, despite this being a big part of my intended day to day operations. Just for clarity, era is late seventies / early eighties, rolling stock are diesel with BR Blue Grey coaches. So how's it done? Do I need to make provision for railway personnel to perform the job - especially on trackwork away from platforms? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Driver destroys the brake (zero pressure). Pipes are broken with air brake cocks left open/vac pipe off holder. Other air pipes, control jumpers and eth are disconnected. Then the coupling (screw) is loosened and unhooked. Brake pipe on loco is seated/cock closed so brake can be recreated. Done. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Buckeye couplings 33/73 loco's require a chain pulled whilst the driver eases up (squashes loco against train). On 3rd rail, uncoupling is done away from 'the juice' where possible. It's a normal thing on models to see stock separate and move away too quickly. Uncoupling should take a few mins. 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Oh, and you always need a shunter or guard. Secondmen only ever uncoupled locos in tandem or multiple. They weren't (normally) trained to cut train heat supply (on the Suvvern anyway..). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Dagworth Posted September 15, 2020 RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted September 15, 2020 4 minutes ago, woodyfox said: Driver destroys the brake (zero pressure). Pipes are broken with air brake cocks left open/vac pipe off holder. Other air pipes, control jumpers and eth are disconnected. Then the coupling (screw) is loosened and unhooked. Brake pipe on loco is seated/cock closed so brake can be recreated. Done. From my days of being the bloke doing the uncoupling. *loco changeovers at Ipswich from 47 to 86 and vice versa, the secondman did the uncoupling. Train Driver, as you say, destroys brake pressure. Relief driver takes over from Train Driver, Train Driver waits on platform. Secondman unplugs ETH from outside the buffer area. Ducks under buffers and closes brake pipe cock on loco ONLY. Closes cocks on main res pipes on loco and train. Splits brake pipes. Splits main res. Stows brake and main res on loco front brackets. Moves under other buffer to split ETH connections. Stows loco ETH cable in its socket. Coach ETH cable lays on ground. Moves back between loco and coaches. Yells to driver "SQUEEZE 'EM UP!" Secondman is still under loco/coach coupling position. Driver applies power to loco to compress buffers and ease coupling. Secondman gets under coupling with it over his shoulder and heaves it off the hook on the coach. Secondman drops coupling with a clang against front of loco and yells "EASE AWAY" Driver releases loco brakes and the buffer pressure will push the loco away from the train. Loco moves off to neck and replacement loco draws towards train. Loco stops six foot short Loco moves up to train and compresses buffers. Secondman goes between and slings coupling onto hook on coach. Yells "Ease Away" Driver releases straight air brake and loco is pushed back by buffers. Driver closes down loco cab. Secondman releases ETH cable from loco socket and plugs it into coach. Connects air brake pipe and main res pipes. Drops taps of air brake on loco and main res on loco and coach. Exits from under buffer and connects other ETH cable. Driver that brought the replacement loco hands back to Train Driver Train Driver and Guard carry out Brake Continuity Test. That is exactly how it was done when I was doing it from 1985-87 at Ipswich. We were allowed 8 minutes on the down and 12 on the up to perform the operation. Andi 1 19 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Von Posted September 15, 2020 Author Share Posted September 15, 2020 Wow, thank you for that! Forgive my ignorance, am I to assume that this is going on from platform level and right in amongst the couplings? Also, I have a siding straddled by two other tracks - when uncoupling here, is it commonplace for crew to perform this task on the ballast between lines or should there be a footway of some kind. (Bearing in mind the era I'm modelling.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmdon Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 17 minutes ago, Ray Von said: Wow, thank you for that! Forgive my ignorance, am I to assume that this is going on from platform level and right in amongst the couplings? Also, I have a siding straddled by two other tracks - when uncoupling here, is it commonplace for crew to perform this task on the ballast between lines or should there be a footway of some kind. (Bearing in mind the era I'm modelling.) No, track level 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted September 15, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 15, 2020 Andi 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Von Posted September 15, 2020 Author Share Posted September 15, 2020 That's great, really enjoyed watching that - so much to see! I never realised how bl**dy dangerous the job was! So at about 2 mins in there's a chap to be seen on the platform, in uniform I think, was he taking part in the uncoupling? Also, (to add to your woes) how does the practice differ when a rake of coaches or wagons is delivered by a shunter, do they tend to carry crew enough to perform the task AND how does the person doing the uncoupling communicate with the driver if they are, for instance, detaching half a rake of coaches, say, four carriages away from the engine? (Sorry!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steamport Southport Posted September 15, 2020 Share Posted September 15, 2020 Watch a few of these videos. This and the recommendations on the right. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted September 17, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 17, 2020 @Dagworth, very near the start of your video, the easing away of the locomotive as the buffers uncompress is very nicely shown. May I ask, why were 4 min longer allowed in the up direction? Was it there something that took longer with the electric than the diesel? Or was it just a by-product of timetabling and paths? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted September 17, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Compound2632 said: @Dagworth, very near the start of your video, the easing away of the locomotive as the buffers uncompress is very nicely shown. May I ask, why were 4 min longer allowed in the up direction? Was it there something that took longer with the electric than the diesel? Or was it just a by-product of timetabling and paths? The up direction changeover was allowed an extra four minutes because of the way the light loco movements happened. This shows where the locos would be waiting for each changeover Down direction: 86 hauled train arrives into platform four. Loco is uncoupled. 86 moves off onto centre road and driver changes ends. 47 comes from No1 neck onto train Loco is attached and train departs after brake test. 86 moves to centre road within platforms. Up direction 47 hauled train arrives into platform two Loco is uncoupled 47 moves off through tunnel to reach far crossover and driver changes ends 86 moves from centre road between platforms into tunnel mouth and driver changes ends 47 uses far crossover to return through platform four to no 1 neck (driver goes to crew room for cuppa) 86 moves from tunnel mouth onto train Loco is attached and train departs after brake test. As you can see. the down direction changeover flows much more smoothly, the 86 gets out of the way onto the centre road and the 47 is already in a good position to approach the train. The up changeover needs the 47 to get out of the way from the up road (which relies on nothing being in the way on the down) and the 86 needs a pair of moves and a driver to change ends. We got pretty quick at it, I could unhook a loco quicker than I could tell you how to do it! The secondman was meant to stay with the driver and the loco so one would uncouple and leave with the departing loco and another would arrive on the new loco and couple up. What often happened in practice (especially in the evening) was that two secondmen would get away early and the other two would work one up - one down, so the light engine movement happened without secondmen on board and we would uncouple, wait on the ground and then couple the new loco on. Fun days, if anyone ever saw my Dagworth layout it was my attempt to recreate the operation. Andi Edited September 17, 2020 by Dagworth 3 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted September 17, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 17, 2020 Many thanks for the explanation. There's no substitute for learning how it was done from the men who did it. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted September 17, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2020 For most model railway purposes and periods from about 1860 until around 1990 and the domination of different types of coupling on freight and the use of multiple units almost universally on passenger trains, there are 4 types of coupling, as follows:- 1) 3-link chain. Dates back to the Liverpool and Manchester, used with side chains on passenger stock. For 20th century use, it is used in conjunction with a shunting pole, think barge pole with a twisted hook on the end, and swung by the shunter to drop it over the drawhook of the adjoining vehicle. The vehicle it is part of has a cutout in the the shank of the drawhook and the coupling ftis into this by means of a flat in the casting, and can be removed and replaced easily in the case of breakage, not infrequent. Uncoupling was also done with the pole, placed over the buffer shank and levered upwards off the drawhook. There is either a collar around the end of the buffer shank or a cast 'pip' to prevent the pole being trapped when the buffers are compressed, and obviously the buffers must be compressed for there to be sufficient slack in the 3-link to be swung over the hook or lifted from it. Use of the shunting pole is an essential skill in goods work, both for guards and shunters. 3-link couplings went out of use by and large with BR's cull of older wagons in the early 50s, but survived into at least the 80s on some departmental stock. They were the coupling used on most freight and mineral stock until the advent of Instanters in the late 20s I think. 2) 'Instanter' couplings, like all the best things a GWR invention. This was a version of the 3-link chain with a shaped central link that could be 'long' or 'short' coupled. Attached to the drawhook in the same way as the 3-link chain, it can be coupled to the adjoining vehicle and the 'horns' used to position the central link in a vertical position, shortening the distance between the buffer faces and enabling a smoother ride for the guard, less transit damage for goods, and higher speeds to be employed. They introduced an extra dimension to shunting with a pole, especially on curves when it was sometimes necessary to ask the driver to 'ease up', compressing the buffers so that the couplings, already coupled to the next wagon, could be shortened. If used in the 'long' position, of course they were easier to couple and uncouple with the pole, and this was useful on pickup or mineral work where a lot of shunting had to be done, but limited the speeds of those trains to 25mph. Up to 60mph, depending on speeds allowed the vehicles in the train, could be allowed where all the instanters were coupled in the 'short' position. They were of heavier construction than 3 link, and more or less eliminated coupling breakages; in 7 year as a freight guard at Canton in the 70s I never heard of an instanter or screw link coupling breaking under load. 3) Screw link couplings. These were required on locos, passenger, NPCCS, and goods stock rated to run in passenger trains (XP branded). The end links were 'D' shaped and could be drawn closer together by a central bottle screw link with a tommybar through the middle of it. This was not designed to be used with a shunting pole but skilled pole handlers could couple screws with a pole and tighten the tommybar. This was to some extent showing off, as in almost all cases where a screw link coupling was provided you had to go 'in between' anyway to couple the vacuum, air, and/or steam heating hoses, which we called bags on the WR; you couldn't do this with a pole. Going in between is obviously dangerous, and all too many deaths have occurred to railway staff doing it; you needed a very close understanding between yourself and the driver. A particular peril was to ask him to 'ease up' to compress the buffers so that you can drop the coupling over the hook and tighten the bottle, traditionally to 'two threads' (I know there's only one helical thread on the bottle screw, but you know what I mean), which leaves the buffers 'kissing' on straight track. Thus, as the drawhook is sprung and the buffers are either sprung or under pneumatic pressure, there is no snatching or bumping in the train and the passengers have a smooth ride. The driver's inspector riding in the restaurant car with a full cup of coffee sees that it does not spill, and will take the matter up with the driver later if it does. To uncouple a screw coupling, you also have to go in between and get the driver to ease up to release the coupling; you undo the bottle and lift the D hook off the drawhook. 4) Buckeye centre buffer/coupling, called Janney after inventor in the US and probably the greatest contribution to shunting safety ever devised. It needs the movement of a bogie and cannot be used on a rigid framed vehicle, hence it's slow take up in the UK (there are Gresley tenders still in existence that prove me wrong), but the Pullman Company and ECJC were early adopters. The British type has a pin on a chain which can be withdrawn to drop the coupling to reveal a conventional drawhook so that the 'normal' stock and locos can be coupled to it. Buckeye stock (Pullmans, ECML, Bulleid, and BR standard mk1 and 2, some later converted NPCCS, Class 33 74, etc Southern Region, SR EMU stock and TC sets, Clacton electrics), also has extendable buffers with 'hoods' that fit over the shanks to enable the buffers to contact those or 'normal' stock, and are usually fitted with 'Pullman' gangways, which need a gangway adaptor to couple the gangways to normal stock. Nobody has to go in between until the loco is in mid gear and the brakes are applied both to it and the train as the coupling is automatic, but requires a 'firm' contact to operate so passengers will feel a bit of a jolt. The model equivalent is the Kaydee. Inside the guard's compartment of a train of passenger or NPCCS stock is a spare, red painted, screw coupling. There are rare but occasional failures of screw couplings caused by lack of greasing the screw and dirty operating conditions; they became stiff and lifted off the drawhooks. Instanters were still being fitted to new MGR and similar wagons in the 70s, but I think these were about the last. 1 2 1 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted September 17, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 17, 2020 13 minutes ago, The Johnster said: To uncouple a screw coupling, you also have to go in between and get the driver to ease up to release the coupling; you undo the bottle and lift the D hook off the drawhook. It was very rare that we needed to undo the bottle at all. Occasionally it would be good to tighten one up but by compressing the buffers it was always possible to unhook. Then again the parts of platforms at Ipswich where we were shackling were straight. 15 minutes ago, The Johnster said: also has extendable buffers with 'hoods' 'Saddles' in my part of the world. Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Tomlinson Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 On 15/09/2020 at 20:30, Ray Von said: That's great, really enjoyed watching that - so much to see! I never realised how bl**dy dangerous the job was! So at about 2 mins in there's a chap to be seen on the platform, in uniform I think, was he taking part in the uncoupling? Also, (to add to your woes) how does the practice differ when a rake of coaches or wagons is delivered by a shunter, do they tend to carry crew enough to perform the task AND how does the person doing the uncoupling communicate with the driver if they are, for instance, detaching half a rake of coaches, say, four carriages away from the engine? (Sorry!) In terms of being dangerous, a lot worse I suspect was the necessity in gravity shunting yards of men running after unfitted wagons to pin the brakes down - this whilst on the move and involving running over rails and points. This carried on at least until the 1960's, but is something no longer needed on the modern railway - in Britain anyway. John. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium iands Posted September 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 20, 2020 A follow-up question if I may. When coupling a loco to a coach/van/wagon it always seems to be (to me at least) that the loco's coupling is used to "attach" to the coach/van/wagon and never(?) using the coach/van/wagon coupling to attach to the loco, why? I assume it is for a very good reason, but the reason escapes me. Thanks in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 The short answer is because that's what it said in the General Appendix. Why it said that I don't know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium iands Posted September 20, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 20, 2020 55 minutes ago, Wheatley said: The short answer is because that's what it said in the General Appendix. Why it said that I don't know. Thanks Wheatley. Perhaps another "reason" lost in the mists of time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesysmith Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Iirc the loco coupling was used because they were stronger, especially where they were connected to the loco frame/body. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 That was what I've always assumed but I don't actually know. But surely that just transfers the risk of a broken coupling one coupling further along ? I suppose every little helps. I remember it being drummed into me in training but no-one ever said why. Stationmaster might know. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steadfast Posted September 20, 2020 Share Posted September 20, 2020 Coupling strength is: Loco (strongest) Continental screw BR screw Instanter 3 link If you have mixed couplings, (eg one wagon with instanter, one with screw) you use the stronger of the two. Some locos don't have a screw coupling, in this case the wagon one is used. Jo 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tomparryharry Posted September 21, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 21, 2020 15 hours ago, Wheatley said: The short answer is because that's what it said in the General Appendix. Why it said that I don't know. The operating reason is because the locomotive is meant to be checked over before use. As such, it receives more inspections than a wagon. If a train parts, then an investigation will occur. Blame will then be apportioned to the owner of the vehicle. Lack of C&W inspections, etc. Blame culture has always been a wonderful thing. What or how it works nowadays, I wouldn't know. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted September 21, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 21, 2020 How is the locomotive coupling stronger? Surely the coupling shackles are the same? Or is it the drawbar that is stronger, so there's less likelihood of the train parting due to a drawbar failure? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mervyn Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 I have often attended call outs to wagon couplings breaking ( send the bits off to Derby for testing ) but never a loco ! And I have never had to change a Loco coupling either. Lost count of Loco buffers I have changed !! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now