RMweb Premium richierich Posted April 17, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 17, 2013 These might be of interest from when I did a walk from Millers Dale in April 2011:- Another relic! Off the viaduct, the ELR and Bridge Number (well viaduct). Wish I'd got some photos of the viaduct as returned along the road and climbed back to the level of the railway. Rich 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 17, 2013 Author Share Posted April 17, 2013 Update on the farish hst. Still have chassis and roof to weather but getting there I think. Cav 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 17, 2013 Author Share Posted April 17, 2013 Cheers for those pics btw Rich. Some nice details there. Cav Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 19, 2013 Author Share Posted April 19, 2013 (edited) Ok so I had a little play with couplings last night. I have a train of HEA hoppers which are to be run as a fixed rake. As such I have applied DG couplings to the end vehicles so that they are compatible with the locos. Anyway I don't want to have to pay for and fit DGs to all of the wagons in the rake for them to never be uncoupled. To much coin and effort for nothing I reckon so my thoughts turned to fixed couplings. My initial thought was to trim the standard coupler and fit one end directly to the wagon to close the gap. Looks a million times better. Then I got thinking surely I can solder something up out of guitar string and fine chain that would look like pipework and couplings when attached. So I set about doing just that. One end of the wagon will have the coupler contraption and the other just a wire peg to sit in the slot in the coupler, viola. I wonder what peoples opinions are, whether they think the effort of soldering up the couplers is worth it over the adapted rapido. Standard Rapido Adapted Rapido Bottom of unpainted contraption Top of unpainted contraption Wagons uncoupled showing weird coupler Wagons Coupled - I accidently filled in the chain a bit with paint, maybe a bit of blackener instead is required. Anyway thoughts? Cav Edited April 19, 2013 by RBE 17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d winpenny Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 Looking good, david Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornish trains jez Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 That looks really good mate and I may just adapt this on my mk2 air con rakes. I've been thinking about having fixed rakes for a while but wasn't sure how to do it. Think you have just provided me with the answer! Cheers!! Best regards, Jeremy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Removed a/c Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 What great idea ! I will take a dozen please in OO :D Regards Scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.C.M Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 So Peter is that any better? 20130417_195756.jpg Cav Looking pretty good to me, it still looks like two little round holes/ recesses at the bottom of the body need, I think to be filled. I am sure they were sandbox filling points. Other than that spot on and the neamplates will look superb once you have painted it blue. Your other stock is looking good too the HST has come up really well as have the HEA coal wagons, I like the couplers too, though for HEAs you would only need one brake pipe. MRJ 113 and 115 1999 for the point rodding article, can't find the other article yet, will have a look tomorrow. Cheers Peter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Flynn Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 Paitent them? Hugh Ok so I had a little play with couplings last night. I have a train of HEA hoppers which are to be run as a fixed rake. As such I have applied DG couplings to the end vehicles so that they are compatible with the locos. Anyway I don't want to have to pay for and fit DGs to all of the wagons in the rake for them to never be uncoupled. To much coin and effort for nothing I reckon so my thoughts turned to fixed couplings. My initial thought was to trim the standard coupler and fit one end directly to the wagon to close the gap. Looks a million times better. Then I got thinking surely I can solder something up out of guitar string and fine chain that would look like pipework and couplings when attached. So I set about doing just that. One end of the wagon will have the coupler contraption and the other just a wire peg to sit in the slot in the coupler, viola. I wonder what peoples opinions are, whether they think the effort of soldering up the couplers is worth it over the adapted rapido. 20130419_121119.jpg Standard Rapido 20130419_120514.jpg Adapted Rapido bottom resized.jpg Bottom of unpainted contraption top resized.jpg Top of unpainted contraption 20130419_120321.jpg Wagons uncoupled showing weird coupler 20130419_120257.jpg Wagons Coupled - I accidently filled in the chain a bit with paint, maybe a bit of blackener instead is required. Anyway thoughts? Cav Ok so I had a little play with couplings last night. I have a train of HEA hoppers which are to be run as a fixed rake. As such I have applied DG couplings to the end vehicles so that they are compatible with the locos. Anyway I don't want to have to pay for and fit DGs to all of the wagons in the rake for them to never be uncoupled. To much coin and effort for nothing I reckon so my thoughts turned to fixed couplings. My initial thought was to trim the standard coupler and fit one end directly to the wagon to close the gap. Looks a million times better. Then I got thinking surely I can solder something up out of guitar string and fine chain that would look like pipework and couplings when attached. So I set about doing just that. One end of the wagon will have the coupler contraption and the other just a wire peg to sit in the slot in the coupler, viola. I wonder what peoples opinions are, whether they think the effort of soldering up the couplers is worth it over the adapted rapido. 20130419_121119.jpg Standard Rapido 20130419_120514.jpg Adapted Rapido bottom resized.jpg Bottom of unpainted contraption top resized.jpg Top of unpainted contraption 20130419_120321.jpg Wagons uncoupled showing weird coupler 20130419_120257.jpg Wagons Coupled - I accidently filled in the chain a bit with paint, maybe a bit of blackener instead is required. Anyway thoughts? Cav Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 19, 2013 Author Share Posted April 19, 2013 (edited) I believe that they were in 4mm. I think JSW was looking into it. Anyway the concensus seems to be that they look good. I will therefore make a load of better ones as that one wasnt so good, I made it too short and had to bend it straighter than I wanted it. The ones for coaches would need to be pivoted at both ends and also feature a buckeye type coupler but I also have a design for that too so might make a prototype. Cav Edited April 19, 2013 by RBE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D1059 Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 (edited) It is N gauge yes, really got the N bug now. Im even considering selling off all of my 4mm stuff now. Anyway a little play with couplings. Got myself some dg couplings and I must say Im very impressed. Easily built and work a treat. Heres a pre blackened one and a loopless one fitted to the 47. 20130323_105543.jpg IMG_20130323_193944.jpg Cav Great looking layout concept - look forward to following this one. I'm using MBD couplings on my layout, very similar to DGs. Any chance of a shot of how you mounted the coupling to the 47 please, especially the loop end with the tail. They've been the biggest challenge I've come across with MBDs on certain locos where space is tight. Thanks Edited April 19, 2013 by D1059 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 19, 2013 Author Share Posted April 19, 2013 Hi Steve. The etch is trimmed width wise to fit into the NEM pocket and then folded over so that it can be simply pushed into the pocket held in be friction. Its a tight fit. I dont put the loops on locos as it looks better without just the delay latch so no issue with loop tails. Cav Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Worsdell forever Posted April 19, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 19, 2013 Great couplings Cav, look fiddly to make though! Lots of this type of coupling in 4mm as discussed here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D1059 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Hi Steve. The etch is trimmed width wise to fit into the NEM pocket and then folded over so that it can be simply pushed into the pocket held in be friction. Its a tight fit. I dont put the loops on locos as it looks better without just the delay latch so no issue with loop tails. Cav Thanks - I did something similar with the MBDs, but had to have the loops on one end as my layout is an end to end shunting operation Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Once you perfect the coupler size, why not get them 3D printed rather than build them individually. Will be easier than soldering each one individually. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 hi Cav, the couplings look really good mate. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
emt_911 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 Cav That's what I would call a very neat solution. Duncan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 22, 2013 Author Share Posted April 22, 2013 Once you perfect the coupler size, why not get them 3D printed rather than build them individually. Will be easier than soldering each one individually. I have considered this. Does anyone with 3D printing knowledge have any idea what it would cost to print these? If it was a goer then I could do the designs for coaching stock and maybe do more realistic hose routing. As Peter (PCM) said the hoses were wrong for the HEA however it was more a case of getting something that worked and looked better than a rapido rather than going prototype accurate. With 3D printing I may be able to realistically do various versions for differing stock. Cav Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Depends how much material is used. If you need a surface thickness below 1mm then it'll got a little more. But it shouldn't cost that much. Probably comparable if take into costs such as metal, solder, flux, time. It wont take long to design in 3D its not large or particularly detailed. If you design one you can upload to shape ways and their system will give you a range of materials and tell you how much it'll cost and you don't need to buy any! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 22, 2013 Author Share Posted April 22, 2013 Sounds good. As a 3D CAD designer I reckon I could knock something up! As you say its not got a lot (or needs a lot) of detail so as long as it does the job and looks better than a rapido whats to lose? I'll do some prelims over the next few days and see what the crack is. Cheers. Cav Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Cav, would it work in OO? using the same size but giving a close coupling for a fairly strait layout? Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 22, 2013 Author Share Posted April 22, 2013 Its perfectly do-able in OO I would say Andy. You wouldn't want them the same size as those though as they would be well under scale. Could do them pretty much bang on correct scale for OO I would think. Cav Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Its perfectly do-able in OO I would say Andy. You wouldn't want them the same size as those though as they would be well under scale. Could do them pretty much bang on correct scale for OO I would think. Cav That's interesting, I was looking at your pipes and wondering if I could just get away with using a pipe on each wagon hooked around each other as per a pair of fingers pulling apart if you understand what I mean. It would be permenantly coupled in a rake but would be almost buffer to buffer. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBE Posted April 22, 2013 Author Share Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) It would have very limited cornering ability though as there would be virtually no side play. The N ones I designed above will do a 1st radius curve. Edited April 22, 2013 by RBE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew P Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 It would have very limited cornering ability though as there would be virtually no side play. The N ones I designed above will do a 1st radius curve. Sounds a better plan that 200 Kadees mate. Andy 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