O Gauge Auto Couplings

[DJTrains]

It's nice to see I'm not the only one asking this question.   as a newcomer to 7mm modelling,   I was very surprised at the amount of 'fiddling' required to couple up.      The 'hand of god' at some shows is almost constant with operators struggling with penlight hooks and the like.

 

3 links & screw links are obviously more accurate and prototypical, but for my own 'home' use  I am quite happy to forego this for something more user friendly....  I have bought some of the MagClic couplers,  but so far have not been able to get to the back of my Dapol Pannier bufferbeam to replace the hook.   here's the link -  and I will certainly be looking into the options given above also.

 

 

[railwayrod]

On my fixed rake of Sidelines coaches I have now changed the internal couplings to M & M magnetic couplings. The end vehicles are fitted with the Bachmann TL's mounted on a brass strip attached to the floor. This makes it easy for me to turn the intermediate coaches around to "ring the changes" to the rake without the impossible task (for me) of attaching loops to hooks under overhanging corridor connections. I am amazed how much "effort" is required to pull the magnetic couplings apart so I would have no qualms in running 10+ coach trains if I had space to do so; a 6 coach train is about the maximum that Ramchester can handle. 

 

My stock have had T:'s in use for sic or seven years and operation has been very reliable during that time. As I have stated on this thread before 3 link/screw couplings are prototypically correct But I want to enjoy operating Ramchester not fiddling around trying to do the "impossible" when shunting.

 

Each to his/her own.

 

Rod

[Simond]

Rod,

 

i rather imagined the magnetic couplers would be “north” at one end of the vehicle & “south” at the other.

 

does this not mean that the whole rake needs to be reversed?

 

best

Simon

[Barnaby]

I'm back to this old quandary which auto coupling to use.

I'm looking for:   simple to fit, tough enough to work reliably without the need to constantly tweak & to be not too obvious.

I've tried most available from TL's, Lincs, Sprat&winkle, & Dinghams all have their advantages but it seems to me that the more realistic the operation the more critical to set up they become. 

I had decided to revert back to a variant of the Linc coupling but using the fundamental method of operation but instead of having a separate pivot for the wire hook I will make the hook part of the pivot.  

This simplifies the build quite a bit while losing none of the operational ease of this system. 

.

.

.That was until I saw the Magclic system [ https://www.magclics.co.uk/   ] as mentioned above here.  I have ordered some [the swing version] to have a play as I have some ideas about how I can use them that I think is worth a try.

It will be my intention to deliver my wagons on my shunty plank then use a mini paint brush or coffee stirrer stick as a shunters pole for wagon separation.  I can involve myself in the shunting process as it would be in the 12 inches to the foot world.

Failing any success with the Magclic I will revert to the [modified] Lincs system which will work hands off completely.

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by Barnaby

[Simond]

Barnaby

 

you might want to consider AJ’s, Alex Jackson couplers.  
 

http://www.mmrs.co.uk/technical-articles/alex-jackson-coupling/

 

they are entirely hands free, remote and delayed uncoupling, and if not damaged or disturbed, work well.  And they are very cheap to make.

 

but if they do get damaged, they’re a b****y nuisance...

 

Atb

Simon

[CME and Bottlewasher]

3 hours ago, Barnaby said:

I'm back to this old quandary which auto coupling to use.

I'm looking for:   simple to fit, tough enough to work reliably without the need to constantly tweak & to be not too obvious.

I've tried most available from TL's, Lincs, Sprat&winkle, & Dinghams all have their advantages but it seems to me that the more realistic the operation the more critical to set up they become. 

I had decided to revert back to a variant of the Linc coupling but using the fundamental method of operation but instead of having a separate pivot for the wire hook I will make the hook part of the pivot.  

This simplifies the build quite a bit while losing none of the operational ease of this system. 

.

.

.That was until I saw the Magclic system [ https://www.magclics.co.uk/   ] as mentioned above here.  I have ordered some [the swing version] to have a play as I have some ideas about how I can use them that I think is worth a try.

It will be my intention to deliver my wagons on my shunty plank then use a mini paint brush or coffee stirrer stick as a shunters pole for wagon separation.  I can involve myself in the shunting process as it would be in the 12 inches to the foot world.

Failing any success with the Magclic I will revert to the [modified] Lincs system which will work hands off completely.

 

Hi,

 

I'm revisiting Kaydees. Not prototypical but robust and reliable on the whole.

 

Not an easy fit to diesel shunters with big bufferbeams though, plus magnetism can be an issue.

 

I've got magiclic for coaches - yet to fit them.

 

Other than that, it's goal posts on locos, tension locks on stock. I've experimented with droppers and I'm looking at brass etch replacement hooks too.

 

Atvb,

 

CME

 

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by CME and Bottlewasher

[CME and Bottlewasher]

This looks interesting, I wasn't aware of the latest developments, I'm sure Magiclic et al won't mind me re-posting hereunder....

 

I use coffee stirrers with mini rare earth magnets for my TLs.

Edited January 31, 2020 by CME and Bottlewasher

[Barnaby]

Hello CME yes that article is what interests me particularly David's ref to only fitting one swing unit to each wagon.  The chain off the blind wagon gets attracted to the swing-magnet and couples up. 

I want to have a play to see how the chain links respond to being pushed and also look at what I can do to remotely uncouple them.  It would be simple to set up a mechanical push/pull mech that lifted a wire pin to go behind a wagon  wheel axel to hold it while the rest of the train reverses away to break the link.  It will depend on all the magnetic swing-links holding with the same grip.

 

Plenty to play with there.

 

Hello Simon I still have my jigs for making the Jacksons from when I was in P4.  I seem to recall they were quite a complicated bend formation and quite fussy on being equal in height to each other but that was some 30 years ago so there may be some improvements since then?

 

Best

[CME and Bottlewasher]

1 hour ago, Barnaby said:

Hello CME yes that article is what interests me particularly David's ref to only fitting one swing unit to each wagon.  The chain off the blind wagon gets attracted to the swing-magnet and couples up. 

I want to have a play to see how the chain links respond to being pushed and also look at what I can do to remotely uncouple them.  It would be simple to set up a mechanical push/pull mech that lifted a wire pin to go behind a wagon  wheel axel to hold it while the rest of the train reverses away to break the link.  It will depend on all the magnetic swing-links holding with the same grip.

 

Plenty to play with there.

 

Hello Simon I still have my jigs for making the Jacksons from when I was in P4.  I seem to recall they were quite a complicated bend formation and quite fussy on being equal in height to each other but that was some 30 years ago so there may be some improvements since then?

 

Best

Hi Barnaby,

 

Looking forward to seeing how your experiments progress then, sounds interesting.

 

Kind regards,

 

CME

[robertc]

I find the  smaller Kadee couplers sold for S gauge or On3 to be nice and unobtrusive in O scale if the glad hands are removed. The shanks are too short for regular length buffers to be used unfortunately. A long shank version would be very useful; something for a budding entrepreneur.

Uncoupling with a kebab stick is easy even with my shaky hands.

cheers

Bob

 

[CME and Bottlewasher]

19 hours ago, robertc said:

I find the  smaller Kadee couplers sold for S gauge or On3 to be nice and unobtrusive in O scale if the glad hands are removed. The shanks are too short for regular length buffers to be used unfortunately. A long shank version would be very useful; something for a budding entrepreneur.

Uncoupling with a kebab stick is easy even with my shaky hands.

cheers

Bob

 

Sounds interesting Bob.

 

Any photos of such? Excuse my ignorance, I'm not sure what "Glad Hands" are.

 

Regards,

 

CME

[davefromacrossthepond]

CME

 

From the Kadee primer:

"Glad Hand: Railroad term for air line hose and fitting hanging down at the end of a car or locomotive. Also used to define Kadee’s Trip Pin, see Trip Pin."

Here's a link to the Kadee Primer - I've used Kadees for years, but still found it useful:

https://www.kadee.com/documents/primer.pdf

 

Dave

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Hi Dave,

 

Got that understood - thanks for posting.

 

Kind regards,

 

CME.

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Something was hammering away at the back of my mind re magnetic couplings etc.

 

Railway Modeller Plan of the Month October 2007 is a layout called "Dreckleigh" by Peter Cecil a nice WR region layout in a relatively small space.

 

Mr Cecil spends a whole page (remember those days, articles rather than soundbites) describing, with drawings and photos how he also used 3mm x 1mm neodymium magnets, with chain and a dropper hook. In between the rails he has a pop-up, pull down 'goalpost' to uncouple them.

 

All looks very neat and was on my to do list for trialling couplings, but I filed the list and article away and mislaid them both LOL!

 

ATVB,

 

CME

 

Edited February 3, 2020 by CME and Bottlewasher

[robertc]

For the enquirer ( no name supplied), I have put a photo of a small loco fitted with an 802 Kadee on my thread (the great Australian outdoors) to demonstrate how unobtrusive it is, particularly with the glad hand removed. I do the same on the full size ones too.

 

cheers

Bob

[CME and Bottlewasher]

21 hours ago, robertc said:

For the enquirer ( no name supplied), I have put a photo of a small loco fitted with an 802 Kadee on my thread (the great Australian outdoors) to demonstrate how unobtrusive it is, particularly with the glad hand removed. I do the same on the full size ones too.

 

cheers

Bob

Is that for me?

 

I've just had a quick look, nice layout - thanks.

 

Do you know if there are specific numbers for On30 or S scale Kadees? I'm wondering if they'd be too small for most British outline stock?

 

Many thanks.

 

ATVB,

 

CME

Edited February 4, 2020 by CME and Bottlewasher

[railwayrod]

I have not visited this site for quite a while which is very remiss of me considering than I was the one who started it way back in 2012. I am still using Bachmann TL couplings with much success and feel that a programme to change over to something else is somewhat daunting. However I like the idea of the swing couplings mentioned above. I may well give them a try in the not too distant future but in the meantime I will watch closely how you all get on with them. Some of my trains are run in "set rakes" like my empty coan wagons and my full coal wagons and of course my rake of Sideline LMS coaches (all fitted with magnetic M & M couplings as mentioned earlier in this thread). It would seem to be a nice idea to have swing couplers which do the job that my eyesight cannot do. I will follow progress closely before I commit to a major change.

 

Incidentally my Ramchester layout is scheduled to appear in the April edition of Railway Modeller if anyone is interested.

 

Rod

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Hi Rod,

 

I followed your lead with TL couplings. They're pretty good but do require some fettling of wagonry and stock. Time and energy aren't always on my side, so doing 'easy' is always on my radar (I'm not a lazy person, and elegance is often found in the simple solutions/equations in life.......I usually have to learn the hard way, but that's okay too, most of the time).

 

I too would like to try these newer versions of magnetic couplings, I have some for my coaches already. Looking forward to seeing/hearing of Barnaby's progress.

 

Congratulations re RM article - always good to see Ramchester in print, it's a cracking layout and a credit to you and Howard. At least the Peco photographer didn't have too far to come/visit! Was it Craig Tiley (from my home town) or Steve Flint (of The Great Model Rly Challenge fame)? Exciting stuff, as the RM is still the hobby's biggest hitter.

 

Atvb

 

M.

 

 

[Happy Hippo]

I read this information about the magnetic couplings as opposed to couplings activated by magnets interest.  I have a set that couples up the inner ends on my Dapol 'B' set, and they are excellent.

 

But surely as soon as you need some form of manual intervention, albeit a wooden stick to either make or break the coupling it cannot be considered truly automatic?

 

You still have a 'hand of god' appearing to do the connection/disconnection.

[Barnaby]

Hello HH you do have a point about the MagClic not being truly automatic in fact I do state that in my post above.

My problem is not with the hand of God but my eye sight so using a shunters [coffee stirrer] pole imamates more closely the hand of the Railway worker.

At least that's what I tell myself.  In my world I am building a 12ft shunty-plank and I was interested in seeing if I could make their couplings a little more automatic uncouple tolerant.

 

I do have a few ideas but using a stirrer would be a last resort as I'm more interested in how easy the stirrer would uncouple them or will they ping across the layout like some jet propelled wagon.

 

So far when coupling up the wagons keep their position and only the magnets swivel up and connect so auto coupling is sweet.

Being magnetic as CME reminded me the wagons become handed but that's not a problem for me as I don't turn my locos however I could use the push away effect to remotely site a wagon, still playing about with that.

 

The swing version is a very neat unit and simple to fit but not made for auto-uncoupling but fantastic for coaches.

 

Best

 

[CME and Bottlewasher]

I'm planning on a small exGWR turn table......can't quite get my head around how that and diesels running around will work with magnetic couplings.

[Barnaby]

Hello CME

Just saying if you take the magnetic poles to be + and -- then all the wagons will link up if each pole is opposite ie + will connect to -- on the wagon next to it.

If you draw into a station + on your loco front all you will need to do is run through the run round loop and collect the rear wagon which has a -- and off you go running loco tender first.

 

That's just how my layout will be set up to run if you want to have your loco turn on a table you could have a wagon with 2 + on it one + on each end which will allow you to connect to the loco and then collect the train but that wouldn't be very pro-typical.

 

I pays my money and I takes my chance?

 

Best

Edited February 6, 2020 by Barnaby

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Thanks Barnaby that's a good idea and explanation - much appreciated.

 

Food for thought! Looking forward to seeing and hearing more of your progress with magnets.

 

ATVB

 

CME

Edited February 7, 2020 by CME and Bottlewasher

[philsandy]

On 15/06/2014 at 12:01, jcm@gwr said:

 

I have also made a jig to get the position on the wagon correct. This

is simply a piece a thin brass, long enough to bridge the buffers.

On the centre line I have soldered a length of brass wire (to line up

with the hook) and then a slot (to the dimensions given) to line up

the end of the Lincs in. This means getting consistency in fitting.

 

The biggest problem I've had, is that the lateral 'slop' in your average

'0' gauge wagon (due to the fact that they use parallel bearings not

pin-point) is more than the tolerance in the couplings. I am thinking

about shimming the axles to reduce this.

 

Also, after a days shunting at our open day, I had 3 failures. All were

down to the bonding of the steel to brass, 2 fell off and 1 just rotates!

 

I am thinking about grinding some grooves in the steel to give a bit of

purchase for the solder.

 

I will let you know, Jeff

 

Jeff, I know this post is going back a bit, but do you have a photo/drawing of this jig. I have made one myself but it's not really doing the job, and I've got about 50 wagons to fit.

 

Phil.

[jcm@gwr]

1 hour ago, philsandy said:

 

Jeff, I know this post is going back a bit, but do you have a photo/drawing of this jig. I have made one myself but it's not really doing the job, and I've got about 50 wagons to fit.

 

Phil.

 

Phil,

 

Sorry, I haven't got a photo, or a drawing, of the jig, but I know it's in a box, with the 

other jig (that is used to solder them at the correct angle) and the rest of the bits, to

make more.

Trouble is, I'm not sure where it is! I'll get some pictures once I find it, ok.

 

Jeff