MODEL RAIL No. 237 August 2017

[dibber25]

You couldn't get much simpler than the system I used on the china clay wagons. I used a Kadee in a draft gear box, screwed in the hole that had been used to attach the tension lock. I find that 'crude' methods of doing things seldom work for me. Certainly, the position of the uncouplers on my layout requires proper sideways movement of the coupler that couldn't be accomplished by screwing through the fishtail, so I stand by the methods I demonstrated. (CJL)

Edited July 10, 2017 by dibber25

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Hi Chris....

 

There is certainly nothing wrong with your methods!

 

In our case, we are not simply fitting Kadees....though that is the probable end aim.

 

We are fitting NEM pockets, so as to be able to use any coupler (we have even got some PECO type couplings that have been grafted onto NEM fittings! An openeing for PECO?).

 

 

There was a system (souned like anoeba?) for fitting NEM pockets, I saw something about it in a magazine a little while ago.

 

The Parkside Dundas mounting blocks have, so far, been rayjer useful....

[dibber25]

Hi Chris....

 

There is certainly nothing wrong with your methods!

 

In our case, we are not simply fitting Kadees....though that is the probable end aim.

 

We are fitting NEM pockets, so as to be able to use any coupler (we have even got some PECO type couplings that have been grafted onto NEM fittings! An openeing for PECO?).

 

 

There was a system (souned like anoeba?) for fitting NEM pockets, I saw something about it in a magazine a little while ago.

 

The Parkside Dundas mounting blocks have, so far, been rayjer useful....

Sorry, I wasn't criticising your methods. It was Chris Ellis's system that wouldn't suit my layout. (CJL)

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Simply screwing on a NEM coupling is a little bit crude!

 

Some NEM pockets do not pivot I believe. Such as those on bogies, Loco and stock.

 

In the case of Hornby's older Bullied locos, there is no "pocket" as such, the NEM coupling slots into a slot in the front bogie frame. This has a degree of "slop", both fore-and-aft, as well as sideways wobble....

[Ruffnut Thorston]

The link for the competition still seems not to be working. Since the Dynamis competition ended that link just takes you to a page saying 'sorry this promotion is no longer avaliable'. I couldn't find a link from the Model Rail home page. Is this competition actually live and open to enter?

 

There are two competitions in the magazine, the Baseboard and the Books, with the same Website Address.....so both are not working.

 

The Warwell competition has a different address, but there seems to be a problem, as nothing happens when you click on "enter" after clicking on an answer and filling in your details.

 

That is three two not-working competitions. (EDIT...Warwell site now working!)

 

 

The "WIN" link on the page top (MR Site) seems to go to a 3rd party site offering Holiday stuff like luggage, 12" to the Foot scale I thnk!

 

So....help?

Edited July 11, 2017 by Sarahagain

[rue_d_etropal]

Does anyone remember someone doing a transparent coupling a couple of years ago. Someone saw it at York, but have not seen anything since.

 

The traditional continental coupling (as Bachmann actually use to connect DMU coaches in OO) or the smaller OO9 version, can look a lot better, especially as all you need on loco is a small hook. I have done it with a simple piece of bent wire. Getting the hook high enough, but not too high is the challenge, especially if you only fit loops on one end enabling blade in grass uncoupling to be used.

On a British steam loco I still think a Kadee looks horrible. Even on some diesels it is just as bad, but could be justified on some multiple unit stock, but they rarely get shunted, unless you are splitting a train.

And before someone says this subject has been discussed too much for too many years, I just want to say that too many people seem to follow ideas just because 'so and so' says that is best way, and every so often we do need to look at what we are doing, and review it.

[Ruffnut Thorston]

Certainly transparent N Gauge "Rapido" couplings have been made.....Mathieson Models wagons.

 

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/10-avmod/am-mathies.htm

 

The company seems to have gone...from the Internet Archive....

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20140517221915/http://mathiesonmodels.com/

 

 

Sometimes, looks have to be set aside....the tension lock is also "horrible" to some.

 

 

It is sometimes best to agree to differ!   "Tomatoes and Tomatoes"

Edited July 11, 2017 by Sarahagain

[Butler Henderson]

 

On a British steam loco I still think a Kadee looks horrible.

 Does have some authenticity as one of the Ironstone lines used them.

[rue_d_etropal]

 Does have some authenticity as one of the Ironstone lines used them.

yes, but not on a mainline loco, and also the majority of standard gauge industial lines.

[dibber25]

Really, the only coupling that looks OK on a British steam loco is a scale screw-link. However, you can rule them out if you want remote uncoupling. I don't like wire loops or wires across buffer faces. Tension-locks not only look awful but I can't contrive a reliable uncoupler for them. Hence my use of Kadees. I have experience of them on North American stock and, having been brought up with the old Hornby-Dublo coupler, I see the Kadee as just a smaller, neater version. I'm not trying to suggest that they are authentic but as non-authentic couplers go, at least they work as intended. (CJL)

[Revolution Ben]

Certainly transparent N Gauge "Rapido" couplings have been made.....

Hi there,

 

I had some of the ATM couplers moulded in clear and posted the results here:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/83387-couplers-in-n-is-the-answer-clear/

 

I felt they were effective, and the majority of those who saw them seemed to agree. However, that coupler tool got damaged and is now being repaired, so I have not been able to offer any more.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

[rue_d_etropal]

that transparent coupling looks interesting, but I think someone did one for OO/HO as well .

Chris, I think the problem is that the discussion is polorized , and it needs new thinking, hence my mention of the blade in grass idea which Roger Nicholls designed. I have seen it in operation up this way and it works very well. This was with tension lock type, but he also used it for continental types. I think that maybe using a modified OO9 type coupling would work even better. I have no objection to using Kadees where they don't look out of place, given that they are a USA design. Ok for modern stock here as well. I am also not keen on fitting magnets  in track myself,as the blade of grass is easier to fit , cheaper and if it needs moving can be done .

I am just trying to broaden the discussion, as not everyone wants or is able to follow the same narrow path.

[dibber25]

that transparent coupling looks interesting, but I think someone did one for OO/HO as well .

Chris, I think the problem is that the discussion is polorized , and it needs new thinking, hence my mention of the blade in grass idea which Roger Nicholls designed. I have seen it in operation up this way and it works very well. This was with tension lock type, but he also used it for continental types. I think that maybe using a modified OO9 type coupling would work even better. I have no objection to using Kadees where they don't look out of place, given that they are a USA design. Ok for modern stock here as well. I am also not keen on fitting magnets  in track myself,as the blade of grass is easier to fit , cheaper and if it needs moving can be done .

I am just trying to broaden the discussion, as not everyone wants or is able to follow the same narrow path.

 

What I was presenting was simply a feature on what I used and why. Broader debate wasn't really part of my remit. So long as what I've got works, couplers don't really interest me enough look at alternatives. (CJL)

[Chris116]

Has anyone managed to enter the three competitions in this issue?

 

I have tried nearly every day since the issue dropped on my doormat but it says that the competition is no longer available!

 

EDIT:- I sent a message to the editor and have received a very prompt reply which is below and I hope will help others:-

 

Thank you for your message to Richard Foster.

 

It appears there is a problem with the links and I give below updated ones.

 

Baseboard

http://www.model-rail.co.uk/modelrailwin

 

Book

http://www.model-rail.co.uk/bundlewin

 

Kind regards,

 

 

 

Jane Skinner

Editorial Assistant

 

 

Edited July 13, 2017 by Chris116

[Edwardian]

Excuse me, but I am experiencing an Ed Reardon Moment.

 

Please can someone with a basic grasp of English grammar please explain to the Twelve-year old who sends me emails concerning the forthcoming edition why he, or she, but not "they", should not write "Here's the Highlights"?

 

You can then, please, pass on my apologies for being so rude as to point this out! 

 

I might have added a smiley face at this point, but, then, I am not twelve.

[Jongudmund]

I guess it's because it's short for "Here is the highlights" which is grammatically incorrect but explains the apostrophe.

 

Unless "the highlights" is a solid block like a highlight reel then it would be OK to use a singular.

 

If you were saying it then you'd probably say 'Here's the highlights' 

 

Could have been worse. Could have been "Here're the highlights".

[Jongudmund]

 

Has anyone managed to enter the three competitions in this issue?

 

I have tried nearly every day since the issue dropped on my doormat but it says that the competition is no longer available!

 

EDIT:- I sent a message to the editor and have received a very prompt reply which is below and I hope will help others:-

 

Thank you for your message to Richard Foster.

 

It appears there is a problem with the links and I give below updated ones.

 

Baseboard

http://www.model-rail.co.uk/modelrailwin

 

Book

http://www.model-rail.co.uk/bundlewin

 

Kind regards,

 

 

 

Jane Skinner

Editorial Assistant

 

 

 

 

Thanks for sharing this. Although of course now if I win I might feel a tiny bit guilty.

[Edwardian]

I guess it's because it's short for "Here is the highlights" which is grammatically incorrect but explains the apostrophe.

 

Unless "the highlights" is a solid block like a highlight reel then it would be OK to use a singular.

 

If you were saying it then you'd probably say 'Here's the highlights' 

 

Could have been worse. Could have been "Here're the highlights".

 

Indeed, in unabbreviated form, the email continues with "here are the highlights".

 

Obviously with the economy going down the tubes, the increasing menace of North Korea's nuclear weapons programme, and the very existence of Donald Trump, some may feel that adherence to certain rules of grammar is not the most important issue facing us right now.

 

They'd be wrong, of course!

[dibber25]

Indeed, in unabbreviated form, the email continues with "here are the highlights".

 

Obviously with the economy going down the tubes, the increasing menace of North Korea's nuclear weapons programme, and the very existence of Donald Trump, some may feel that adherence to certain rules of grammar is not the most important issue facing us right now.

 

They'd be wrong, of course!

 

I'm afraid it's impossible for the editorial team to sub everything that goes out from this building. (CJL)

[Hilux5972]

And the grammar police are here again.

[andyram]

I picked up a copy of this issue earlier in the week as holiday reading. I was tempted to do so because of the articles on developing different types of Inglenook layouts. I found all of these articles interesting, especially the one about developing a card system for such a layout. I can see this becoming a future project. 

 On the subject of reviews - I note that in MR the DJM class 71 was rated as being a slightly better model than the Hornby one. However in Hornby Magazine the opposite was the case. 

[dibber25]

I picked up a copy of this issue earlier in the week as holiday reading. I was tempted to do so because of the articles on developing different types of Inglenook layouts. I found all of these articles interesting, especially the one about developing a card system for such a layout. I can see this becoming a future project. 

 On the subject of reviews - I note that in MR the DJM class 71 was rated as being a slightly better model than the Hornby one. However in Hornby Magazine the opposite was the case. 

Those two Class 71s are really neck-and-neck. I reviewed both of them for Model Rail and as I said in the DJM review, the better provision for DCC sound nudges the DJM ahead of the Hornby, but I actually prefer the higher quality finish and 'feel' of the Hornby model. (CJL)