RTR OO9 Locos and Rolling Stock: Compatibility (physically and prototypically)

[steveNCB7754]

On 05/01/2021 at 15:01, PaulRhB said:

Ok compatibility is well dealt with above but also note the wide variety of stock run together on real ng lines. The FR has Victorian bug boxes running alongside modern large bogie stock and while the GVT coaches are indeed bigger than the L&B 4whl goods stock the same goods stock ran behind the much longer L&B coaches. 009 covers from small 2ft gauge to large and up to 2ft 6in prototypes so the vehicle size can vary a lot. 
 

Manufacturers

Peco do an excellent range of L&B, GVT and increasing range of Festiniog stock. 
These look great with the Heljan Manning Wardles, (the MW’s are probably the most troublesome 009 rtr loco due to not liking 12” radius or below without minor mods, see the thread on them in Heljan), the Fourdees GVT locos and the Kato FR England & Fairlies are sure to be a fine runners too. 
The Bachmann Baldwin is superb and available in several prototype and a couple of freelance liveries such as Southern to match L&B stock. 
The Minitrains range offers some nice European prototypes plus a nice Bagnall that look good with most Peco stock. 
Also see Bachmann’s 009 Thomas range as the Talyllyn coaches and slate wagons are lovely models although the other  goods stock is just reboxed Peco models at a slightly higher price!

 

 

Hi there,

 

Thanks for the 'roundup' and suggestions (a lot to take in).  Also, admire your own work here -  saw 'Harz' at Narrow Gauge South in 2018.  Lets hope such events make a return in some form, in (hopefully) the not too distant future.

 

Steve

[Font T]

For manual uncoupling, am I right in thinking that the hook and loop couplings need an object underneath to push up and release them?

And knuckle style couplings can be released by using a bamboo skewer to prise them open?

Haven’t used either yet, just going on snippets I’ve read online.

Which method is the easiest do people find?

[PaulRhB]

19 minutes ago, Font T said:

For manual uncoupling, am I right in thinking that the hook and loop couplings need an object underneath to push up and release them?

 

yes, a small ramp raised up to push up both together. 

 

19 minutes ago, Font T said:

And knuckle style couplings can be released by using a bamboo skewer to prise them open?

Well yes a skewer works in the HO standard gauge ones but very difficult with the Dapol or Microtrains N gauge ones as the knuckle is so tiny. They are really intended to be operated by a magnet under the track. Whether you mount it permanently in the baseboard or have it drop down to deactivate it when not needed is up to you. I find the permanent mounting causes problems if a loco stutters and uncouples from the train. I know prefer to cut a hole and hinge them.

 

You can see three of the hinged magnets and the string that pulls them up into position when needed. I cover the hole with thin plasticard right against the bottom of the sleepers.

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, Font T said:

Which method is the easiest do people find?

The ramps for hook and loop are more intrusive visually, the magnets need more work to install. It really is 50/50 depending on taste. 

[009 micro modeller]

1 hour ago, Font T said:

For manual uncoupling, am I right in thinking that the hook and loop couplings need an object underneath to push up and release them?

And knuckle style couplings can be released by using a bamboo skewer to prise them open?

Haven’t used either yet, just going on snippets I’ve read online.

Which method is the easiest do people find?

 

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

 

yes, a small ramp raised up to push up both together. 

 

Well yes a skewer works in the HO standard gauge ones but very difficult with the Dapol or Microtrains N gauge ones as the knuckle is so tiny. They are really intended to be operated by a magnet under the track. Whether you mount it permanently in the baseboard or have it drop down to deactivate it when not needed is up to you. I find the permanent mounting causes problems if a loco stutters and uncouples from the train. I know prefer to cut a hole and hinge them.

 

You can see three of the hinged magnets and the string that pulls them up into position when needed. I cover the hole with thin plasticard right against the bottom of the sleepers.

 

 

 

The ramps for hook and loop are more intrusive visually, the magnets need more work to install. It really is 50/50 depending on taste. 

 

@Font T did you want to know about manual rather than ramp uncoupling?

[PaulRhB]

The simplest manual uncoupler is a simple piece of wire bent to around 90° and slipped under the edge of the loops, between the bumper faces, and just lifted. A lot easier than a skewer in the knuckles. 

[D9020 Nimbus]

2 hours ago, Font T said:

knuckle couplings can be released by using a bamboo skewer to prise them open?

Rix Products make a plastic uncoupling tool for use with Microtrains couplers on US models—you insert it between the knuckles, twist clockwise, and job done. Should be available from N Scale American Trains in the UK.

 

It works with Dapol Easi-Shunt couplings too, but I haven't had any luck getting them to couple on Peco 009 wagons. Might give it another try, seeing @PaulRhB's video above. Be aware though that some 009 models do not have NEM mounts—especially Minitrains.

 

As far as I can tell from his YouTube videos, Ted Polet appears to use standard N gauge couplings on the Craigcorrie and Dunalistair…

[Font T]

1 hour ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

 

@Font T did you want to know about manual rather than ramp uncoupling?

Yes, I was wondering if it was possible to use an object rather than a ramp. I think Paul has answered that now below with the wire suggestion.

 

Im planning an end to end layout, so would need to uncouple a loco regularly at each end of the layout before it runs back round its stock.

 

Something like a piece of wire would appeal to me if it’s simple to do, as I wouldn’t need to stop the loco in exactly the right spot every time for a ramp or a magnet.

 

Not sure exactly which way I’m going to go yet though. Magnets do appeal to me if they’re reliable and if I’m able to get the hang of stopping in the right place routinely. Would be interested to know peoples thoughts on which are the most reliable magnetic couplers also.

[PaulRhB]

23 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

Be aware though that some 009 models do not have NEM mounts—especially Minitrains.

Peco sell them to add to other stock GR 103

 

25 minutes ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

As far as I can tell from his YouTube videos, Ted Polet appears to use standard N gauge couplings on the Craigcorrie and Dunalistair…

He does and if you want to ask Ted anything he’s a regular on NGRM online and an absolute gent. 
 

[D9020 Nimbus]

Some standard 009 couplers can be uncoupled using a magnet from above, but some can't—Peco, Bachmann and recent Lilliput for example; "old" made-in-Vienna Lilliput can be magnetically uncoupled.

[Andy Kirkham]

I think the choice of rolling stock will be influenced by the back story of the railway. Any railway that opened from, say the 1880s onward, would be likely to have had bogie coaches and mainly six-coupled locos from the start. 

[Hobby]

On 04/01/2021 at 15:20, Sir Madog said:

IMHO, OO9 is a kind of generic gauge, which summarizes British NG from 1´ 11 1/2`` up to 2` 3`` (Talyllyn) railway.

 

Just a minor point but as the 009 Society say it represents up to 2ft 6ins, not 2ft 3ins. 2ft 3ins is the exact gauge 9mm gauge/1:76 scale comes out as but the Society suggests around 3ins or so either side. So includes amongst others the Glynn Valley and Welshpool railways!

 

On 04/01/2021 at 15:49, steveNCB7754 said:

My 'gut feeling' (and I say this having just suffered a tummy bug myself!), is that my fictional narrow gauge 'feeder', will be more of the Welshpool & Llanfair, rather than a Vale of Rheidol.  Perhaps something that started life as a horse-drawn tramway, serving lead-mining operations (with a bit of timber and the odd, sparse, community), that later went 'steam' and obliging decided to run the occasional passenger coach on market days/'high days & holidays'. 

 

TBH you describe the Glyn Valley Tramway very well with that statement, and that included both facilities to transfer from railway to canal and later NG railway tom SG railway, so fits all your criteria!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyn_Valley_Tramway

Edited January 17, 2021 by Hobby

[009 micro modeller]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

TBH you describe the Glyn Valley Tramway very well with that statement, and that included both facilities to transfer from railway to canal and later NG railway tom SG railway, so fits all your criteria!

 

And also increasingly well-served by kits and RTR.

 

22 hours ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

Some standard 009 couplers can be uncoupled using a magnet from above, but some can't—Peco, Bachmann and recent Lilliput for example; "old" made-in-Vienna Lilliput can be magnetically uncoupled.

 

And lots of them could technically be uncoupled with a magnet from below, but this would require modification.

[steveNCB7754]

7 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

TBH you describe the Glyn Valley Tramway very well with that statement, and that included both facilities to transfer from railway to canal and later NG railway tom SG railway, so fits all your criteria!

 

 

Hi, thanks.

 

Yes, I was fortunate enough to see Paul Holmes “Hulme End” at the 2019 Mid-Wales Model Railway Exhibition at Welshpool Town Hall (what a grim, wet and windy day that was!!).  His layout features that NG to SG 'exchange' system (standard gauge wagons moved on narrow gauge transporter wagons), albeit as per the Leek & Manifold.  Spent far too long that day, just watching the moves on his layout :-) [Happy days]

 

[009 micro modeller]

39 minutes ago, steveNCB7754 said:

 

Hi, thanks.

 

Yes, I was fortunate enough to see Paul Holmes “Hulme End” at the 2019 Mid-Wales Model Railway Exhibition at Welshpool Town Hall (what a grim, wet and windy day that was!!).  His layout features that NG to SG 'exchange' system (standard gauge wagons moved on narrow gauge transporter wagons), albeit as per the Leek & Manifold.  Spent far too long that day, just watching the moves on his layout :-) [Happy days]

 

 

To be honest though, transporter wagons were very rare in the UK. Those that did run (aside from the Leek & Manifold and overseas examples) were more usually of the kind where the transporter is on the larger gauge (e.g. the Padarn Railway). Transshipment from one wagon to another was used on the Glyn Valley.

[steveNCB7754]

4 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

 

To be honest though, transporter wagons were very rare in the UK. Those that did run (aside from the Leek & Manifold and overseas examples) were more usually of the kind where the transporter is on the larger gauge (e.g. the Padarn Railway). Transshipment from one wagon to another was used on the Glyn Valley.

 

True, and I suspect trying to incorporate such a thing on the layout I intend, would; a) Be pushing my abilities somewhat, and b) Probably lead to a even greater loss of hair than I have already experienced, whilst just shunting!

 

 

[colin smith]

They're not cheap, but it's worth mentioning Fourdees OO9 locomotives if only for the size of the range 
https://www.fourdees.co.uk/locomotives They have some recently released 'tramway' locomotives which would suit a GVT style operation.

I'd also recommend taking a look at the https://ngrm-online.com/ site which is dedicated to narrow gauge modelling.

But I think the starting point would be to brush up on NG prototypes, assuming your knowledge of it is a bit sketchy. For example, the Clogher Valley Railway was a 3' gauge Irish tramway and might be a useful source of inspiration alongside the GVT. 

 

[colin smith]

On 16/01/2021 at 17:09, Andy Kirkham said:

I think the choice of rolling stock will be influenced by the back story of the railway. Any railway that opened from, say the 1880s onward, would be likely to have had bogie coaches and mainly six-coupled locos from the start. 

 

Not to be a contrarian, but the Glyn Valley converted to steam in the mid 1880s with 0-4-2 locomotives and small 4-wheel carriages. The Lynton & Barnstaple, Welshpool & Llanfair,  and Vale of Rheidol Railways do fit your description but they opened around 1900.

Edited January 17, 2021 by colin smith
missing word

[PaulRhB]

46 minutes ago, steveNCB7754 said:

 

True, and I suspect trying to incorporate such a thing on the layout I intend, would; a) Be pushing my abilities somewhat, and b) Probably lead to a even greater loss of hair than I have already experienced, whilst just shunting!

 

 

Note liliput do HOe transporter wagons you could repaint and use for a British layout. As long as there’s a backstory there’s no reason you couldn’t have a second line inspired by the Owners visiting the L&M  If the L&M hadn’t done it I suspect everyone would be saying you wouldn’t see that here  

[Andy Kirkham]

1 hour ago, colin smith said:

 

Not to be a contrarian, but the Glyn Valley converted to steam in the mid 1880s with 0-4-2 locomotives and small 4-wheel carriages. The Lynton & Barnstaple, Welshpool & Llanfair,  and Vale of Rheidol Railways do fit your description but they opened around 1900.

True enough. Perhaps I should have said the 1890s. I was supposing the Glyn Valley had been earlier. On reflection I think my generalisation applies to lines conceived as common carriers rather than primarily as mineral lines.

Edited January 17, 2021 by Andy Kirkham

[Andy Kirkham]

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

Note liliput do HOe transporter wagons you could repaint and use for a British layout. As long as there’s a backstory there’s no reason you couldn’t have a second line inspired by the Owners visiting the L&M  If the L&M hadn’t done it I suspect everyone would be saying you wouldn’t see that here  

The Ashover did buy one one of the Manifold's transporter wagons but after narrowing the gauge to 60cm it proved unstable and was never used. Are there any instances of tranporters being used successfully on gauges of less than 75cm?

[Hobby]

There probably are, Andy, but I can't think of any offhand. I am pretty sure someone in mainland Europe did some experiments and found that under 750/760/762mm gauges they weren't stable enough to transport SG wagons safely, I can't remember where I read it, though. The two main ways of transporting wagons was the transporter wagon and transporter bogies, in the case of bogies one goes under each axle, for the wagons it would depend on the length of the mainline vehicle, one for a short one and two for a long one! The Czech line I model started with bogies back in 1907, experimented with wagons in the 20s/30s found them to be not as good and reverted to bogies which are still used today.

 

For a UK model, though, I'd suggest that the influence of Calthrop would have made the use of transporter wagons the chosen one, rather than bogies. The Padarn Railway mnetioned earlier is better described as a "Piggy Back" railway rather than the conventional use of transporters as it carried NG on SG rather than the other way round, it wasn't the only one to do so, there's a Norwegian example I know of as well, probably others. SG wagons have also been transported on Broad Gauge using this method, and still are in some parts of the world.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollbock

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporter_wagon

[Font T]

14 hours ago, colin smith said:

14 hours ago, colin smith said:

They're not cheap, but it's worth mentioning Fourdees OO9 locomotives if only for the size of the range 

 

 

What are people’s thoughts on Fourdees, can anyone recommend their locos? Have seen a distinct lack of feedback on them on forums.

They look fantastic to me from looking at their website, but wondering if anyone owns one and can give their opinion? Hoping they’re as reliable as they are good to look at.

In a bit of a three way quandary at the moment as to whether I wait and buy the yet to be released VoR locos, Bachmann quarry hunslets, or a Fourdees Russell and a couple of others.

[PaulRhB]

4 minutes ago, Font T said:

 

What are people’s thoughts on Fourdees, can anyone recommend their locos? Have seen a distinct lack of feedback on them on forums.

They look fantastic to me from looking at their website, but wondering if anyone owns one and can give their opinion? Hoping they’re as reliable as they are good to look at.

In a bit of a three way quandary at the moment as to whether I wait and buy the yet to be released VoR locos, Bachmann quarry hunslets, or a Fourdees Russell and a couple of others.

A friend bought two for his Clyre Valley, that was in RM last year, and was so pleased with them and bought a third. They are the ones based on Farish 08 chassis and he runs it so much he wears out chassis so they get used a lot. His only comments were they were a bit light for his big hill so he added weight and being 3D prints some of the detail is quite delicate. 
On that basis and others comments on NGRM they seem to be good value. 

[Font T]

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

A friend bought two for his Clyre Valley, that was in RM last year, and was so pleased with them and bought a third. They are the ones based on Farish 08 chassis and he runs it so much he wears out chassis so they get used a lot. His only comments were they were a bit light for his big hill so he added weight and being 3D prints some of the detail is quite delicate. 
On that basis and others comments on NGRM they seem to be good value. 

 

Thanks Paul, good to know. Deep down I want to wait for the VoR locos to come out, but id have to base my layout on the VoR- I couldn’t bring myself to do anything else.

The quarry Hunslet appeals as I could do a completely freelance layout and have fun with it. But how small would they actually be?

And the Fourdees has appeal as in I could buy them now and devise a fun layout, but maybe I don’t have quite as much of an affinity for the locos there, nice as they look! 

Decisions...

[steveNCB7754]

16 hours ago, PaulRhB said:

Note liliput do HOe transporter wagons you could repaint and use for a British layout. As long as there’s a backstory there’s no reason you couldn’t have a second line inspired by the Owners visiting the L&M  If the L&M hadn’t done it I suspect everyone would be saying you wouldn’t see that here  

 

Have been looking into this online.  So far, all I have come up with is what appears to be a double-bogie transporter wagon (each bogie=3 axles), presumably to allow for at least more than one two-axle, or perhaps a single double-bogie bolster wagon, is that what you meant?  If so, it seems a little large for a potential rural narrow gauge line in Mid-Wales (although I appreciate I can do whatever I like of course).

Had really only envisioned transporting one standard gauge wagon per transporter.

 

Edited January 18, 2021 by steveNCB7754