Why are tension couplings still legal?

[newbryford]

Then model stock which uses Buckeyes

 

Not easy when the layout is set in 1950........

 

Unless it's US/Canadian.

[Clive Mortimore]

Having spent a weekend of coupling and uncoupling with three links I know why I like tension lock.

 

They do look rubbish.

They couple without me having to do so.

They can be made to uncouple at set places with a uncoupling ramp (clear plastic type).

They can be uncoupled with a simple plastic card uncoupler.

They do look rubbish.

Most line up with each other, those that don't get sorted and normally never need readjusting.

They fall out the boxes with them on, no added expense.

They work for me and my layout.

They do look rubbish.

[37114]

Could be worse - have you tried to couple 3-link or screw link under a corridor connection whilst the public watch you at an exhibition.......................?

 

Cheers,

Mick

Not yet, but I will have that pleasure when the new layout is finished in a years time...

 

I converted to 3 link 15 years ago, as I wanted to model diesels with full sets of snowploughs and pipes and they are the only real options in this case. They are not perfect and for a carriage siding they will prove a challenge more than with my previous layouts. The hand of god is not great but having operated S&W and Kadees I find the shuffling back and forth equally disruptive.

 

Maybe the future is a DCC controlled electro magnetic 3 Link?

Edited March 27, 2018 by 37114

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

I thought the only buckeye couplings used on UK steam locomotives were on corridor tenders used with Gresley Pacifics. Am I wrong on this? 

 Correct, the most advanced steam loco designs in the UK at time of construction, it was a necessity for the functioning of the Pullman gangway. Latterly I believe the LMS (or possibly LMR) made provision for putting a buckeye on Princess Coronation tenders for use when working royal train stock.

 

Not easy when the layout is set in 1950........

 

Unless it's US/Canadian.

 Just choose the right location and it is simple: anywhere on the former LNER territory, and quite extensively on SR. No concidence, in that both these groups had acquired experience with the Pullman car company dating from the pre-group period: which company had imtroduced the superior coupling and gangway tech developed for North America. Think 'advanced railways'...

[John Tomlinson]

Having spent a weekend of coupling and uncoupling with three links I know why I like tension lock.

 

They do look rubbish.

They couple without me having to do so.

They can be made to uncouple at set places with a uncoupling ramp (clear plastic type).

They can be uncoupled with a simple plastic card uncoupler.

They do look rubbish.

Most line up with each other, those that don't get sorted and normally never need readjusting.

They fall out the boxes with them on, no added expense.

They work for me and my layout.

They do look rubbish.

 

Sums up the issue for me in a few sentences!

 

It depends really on how much weighting you give to the sentiment in lines 1, 5 & 9, and indeed how your layout is designed. Mine has the stock in rakes, seldom reshuffled, so scale couplings are fine. If I had a layout with lots, or even some, shunting, the men in little white coats would have carried me off long ago.

 

John.

[Steamport Southport]

 Correct, the most advanced steam loco designs in the UK at time of construction, it was a necessity for the functioning of the Pullman gangway. Latterly I believe the LMS (or possibly LMR) made provision for putting a buckeye on Princess Coronation tenders for use when working royal train stock.

 

 Just choose the right location and it is simple: anywhere on the former LNER territory, and quite extensively on SR. No concidence, in that both these groups had acquired experience with the Pullman car company dating from the pre-group period: which company had imtroduced the superior coupling and gangway tech developed for North America. Think 'advanced railways'...

 

It's not really that simple. They were used mainly on stock that was not regularly uncoupled/coupled. Which in a way is what this thread is about. The SR and LNER coaches usually ran as fixed sets. Between the locomotives and coaches, and other sets/coaches they still used screw couplings.

 

If you were modelling those sets then you might as well just make them fixed sets rather than fitting Kadees.

 

 

 

Jason

[jonny777]

These are a few of my Bachmann suburbans, which are not on tracks because I haven't laid any yet, and the background was just a temporary lash-up for the photos. 

 

The couplings were unscrewed, the small fixing lugs cut away with a sharp knife and the couplings (at the moment) are simply superglued about 5mm further back from their original position. At some point I will fill the original hole and drill another one further back - but from a realism point of view I think the result is good and for a fraction of the price of replacing them all with Kadees.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The coaches still need to be flush-glazed, weathered, and renumbered but that is for the future. 

[newbryford]

 Think 'advanced railways'...

 

3 links - Think "someone else's model railway that you won't be too keen to go back and play with................."

 

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Wickham Green]

It's not really that simple. They were used mainly on stock that was not regularly uncoupled/coupled. Which in a way is what this thread is about. The SR and LNER coaches usually ran as fixed sets. Between the locomotives and coaches, and other sets/coaches they still used screw couplings.

 

If you were modelling those sets then you might as well just make them fixed sets rather than fitting Kadees.

 

 

 

Jason

A slight over simplification there ....... the most multi-part train in the UK ( and probably the world ) was the Atlantic Coast Express which divided I don't know how many times on its way west - each branch line getting a couple of coaches detached ( and reattached on the return ) using buckeye couplers. 

[The Johnster]

Oh, if only! I'm surprised Wizards et all haven't commissioned a version as I'm sure there's a market. Something like an injection moulded baseplate with NEM fitting and sprung plastic hook (much like modern T/Ls) with a fine wire drawbar. At that point you're basically making a finescale T/L by another name but RTR manufacturers seem to be set on keeping things "chunky" which is a big negative aspect for modelers.

 

 

 

Unfortunately that's a tradeoff that the modeller has to make; Kadees are so easy to fit and work nigh flawlessly, and for American layouts I absolutely adore them, but for English prototypes it sticks out like a bulldogs ######. S&W couplings are, as you accurately surmised, a lot of faffing around, especially because the design itself is very simplistic. Rather than a proper axle to pivot the coupling on we have the "staple" hinge design, and a large counterweight rather than a spring. There's potential for leaps and bounds in improving the S&W coupling, but part of the beauty of the current iteration is that it's just an etched fret, some magnetic chain links and some fine gauge wire, which makes it extremely cost effective for both the retailer and the consumer. Part of what sold me on S&W couplings is that I can buy a big fret of 32 couplings for not a lot of money.

 

 

 

I feel like people have "forgotten" that the original intended S&W drawbar was a "staple" shape set to a predetermined length from the drawbar, rather than a long bar across the buffers (which is more obtrusive but discovered to be much easier to install).

Regarding buffer lock, I recall an ancient guide that recommended reaming out the hinge holes slightly to enable a bit of lateral motion on the hook which helps with tight corners and close coupling. Or you can be a crazy person like me and replace fully half your buffers with sprung units

 

I have changed my mind about sprung buffers, which I once regarded as a gimmick.  Traditional ones were always too powerful, defeating their own object, though the ones on Peco 'Wonderful Wagons' were not too bad.  Modern RTR ones have a soft action that suggests that they might, in some circumstances, help prevent buffer locking on tight curves.  But there is a lime imposed by the iron laws of geometry and the locus of points on objects moving relative to each other; sharpness of curvature will cause buffer locking on sharp curves, especially reverse ones, and the only remedy is to increase the size of the buffer head, which will then be overscale.  Even this will not remedy the situation if the coupling cannot stretch enough to avoid forcing the vehicle off the road to the outside of the curve.

 

Tension lock bars (when you have finished driving yourself potty trying to get them all the same height) will act as de facto buffing plates, keeping your actual buffers, which serve no practical function on a t/l fitted vehcile, apart on all curves that the model is recommended for.  But at the cost of an unrealistic distance between vehicles.  Of course, scale curves are the ideal, and, where these are employed, a system with scale couplings, suitably sprung buffers, and suitably sprung drawhooks, will work as well as it does on the prototype.  But very few people have the room that is needed for this on even a small layout.

[Steamport Southport]

A slight over simplification there ....... the most multi-part train in the UK ( and probably the world ) was the Atlantic Coast Express which divided I don't know how many times on its way west - each branch line getting a couple of coaches detached ( and reattached on the return ) using buckeye couplers. 

 

 

That means buffering up to that individual carriage at each stop to remove a carriage (rather than just loosening the screw coupling/pipes) and stowing the buckeye for when the next locomotive came along to move them. Also extending the buffers if it was one with extendable buffers. then doing the opposite to those tasks when it was put into the next train. Hardly easy tasks. And you are doing that hundreds, if not thousands of times a day? No, they did it the way that took a couple of minutes rather than half an hour.

 

Buckeyes are far from being automatic couplings in real life. Notice it's only fixed rakes that have them. If they were so useful then everything would have had them. 

 

 

 

Jason

[John Tomlinson]

That means buffering up to that individual carriage at each stop to remove a carriage (rather than just loosening the screw coupling/pipes) and stowing the buckeye for when the next locomotive came along to move them. Also extending the buffers if it was one with extendable buffers. then doing the opposite to those tasks when it was put into the next train. Hardly easy tasks. And you are doing that hundreds, if not thousands of times a day? No, they did it the way that took a couple of minutes rather than half an hour.

 

Buckeyes are far from being automatic couplings in real life. Notice it's only fixed rakes that have them. If they were so useful then everything would have had them. 

 

 

 

Jason

 

Given that all of North America, the countries of the former Soviet Union from Poland to the Pacific, China and some other places use buckeyes for everything, I'm not sure this is right.

 

John.

[Dagworth]

That means buffering up to that individual carriage at each stop to remove a carriage (rather than just loosening the screw coupling/pipes) and stowing the buckeye for when the next locomotive came along to move them. Also extending the buffers if it was one with extendable buffers. then doing the opposite to those tasks when it was put into the next train. Hardly easy tasks. And you are doing that hundreds, if not thousands of times a day? No, they did it the way that took a couple of minutes rather than half an hour.

 

Buckeyes are far from being automatic couplings in real life. Notice it's only fixed rakes that have them. If they were so useful then everything would have had them. 

 

 

 

Jason

Have you ever tried to undo a screw coupling without squeezing the buffers up first?

 

I have and believe me I'd go with a buckeye EVERY time.

 

Andi

[Titan]

Buckeyes are far from being automatic couplings in real life. Notice it's only fixed rakes that have them. If they were so useful then everything would have had them.

 

 

 

Jason

Apart from all the EMUs built from the fifties to the seventies which were far from fixed formation, and coupled/uncoupled frequently. Even the EPBs had Buckeyes on the outer ends only as they were better than screw.

[bike2steam]

Well over the decades I've gone from tension-lock with hooks on rolling stock only but not on locos, to S&W, then 3-link ( big hand from the sky, definitely not the right illusion at shows), a home-made magnet actuated auto-coupling, then as original tension-lock to NEM again without hooks on the loco - works well enough for shunting, no big hand from the sky needed. That bloody hook looks so obtrusive hanging from the buffer-beam of a loco, well it certainly does on that diminutive new P class.   

[Oldddudders]

Apart from all the EMUs built from the fifties to the seventies which were far from fixed formation, and coupled/uncoupled frequently. Even the EPBs had Buckeyes on the outer ends only as they were better than screw.

Within set the EPBs had a central buffer with a fixed three-link coupling. When the latter went bing life got difficult. Ask me how I know....

[Titan]

Within set the EPBs had a central buffer with a fixed three-link coupling. When the latter went bing life got difficult. Ask me how I know....

 

How do you know?

[Oldddudders]

Because one evening at Dartford, when I was SM, an EPB starting away for Charing Cross broke its intra-unit coupling, the power jumper pulled out with a loud bang, and everything came to a halt as the breakers went out. And we had a platform blocked for quite a while. Circa 1980.

[Dagworth]

Because one evening at Dartford, when I was SM, an EPB starting away for Charing Cross broke its intra-unit coupling, the power jumper pulled out with a loud bang, and everything came to a halt as the breakers went out. And we had a platform blocked for quite a while. Circa 1980.

Glad I wasn't driving that one!

 

A

[TheSignalEngineer]

A slight over simplification there ....... the most multi-part train in the UK ( and probably the world ) was the Atlantic Coast Express which divided I don't know how many times on its way west - each branch line getting a couple of coaches detached ( and reattached on the return ) using buckeye couplers. 

And then hauled away by locos using screw couplings.

[TheSignalEngineer]

These are a few of my Bachmann suburbans, which are not on tracks because I haven't laid any yet, and the background was just a temporary lash-up for the photos. 

 

The couplings were unscrewed, the small fixing lugs cut away with a sharp knife and the couplings (at the moment) are simply superglued about 5mm further back from their original position. At some point I will fill the original hole and drill another one further back - but from a realism point of view I think the result is good and for a fraction of the price of replacing them all with Kadees.

 

 

IMG_1603.JPG

 

 

IMG_1604.JPG

 

 

IMG_1605.JPG

 

 

The coaches still need to be flush-glazed, weathered, and renumbered but that is for the future. 

Years ago I moved a lot of the couplings back when I changed Mainline ones for narrow Bachmann. Setting them with the sides of the bar about level with the buffers seems to work OK on my curves. Some wagons which came with the long type could quite happily just be changed for the short version. 

[andytrains]

The big hand from the sky thing is a myth.

What about the 'big ramp underneath the rolling stock between the track'.

There is always going to be some sort of compromise.

After all we are modelling and not even the absolute scale modelling fraternitity can even claim that all the do is totally accurate.

 

Anyways up, here is my view on things:-

 

I personally hate tension locks, so I do not use them.

 

Rakes of stock that do not need uncoupling, three/instanter/screw-links.

 

I use Kadees at either end of the rakes. Coaching stock. (I find these far more user friendly and as to pushing forward and back it is a case of getting used to them).

 

OR MAINLY

 

I use rakes of wagons with 3links/instanters/screw-links at the ends.

 

If you are used to three(3) links, even as an old git like me,  you should be able to use them as it becomes second nature how to couple a loco to wagon/coach, etc.

 

So what I am saying stick to your preferred way of coupling.

 

Above is my way. If my eye sight goes completely to dog sh1te, then I may have to go to a different method.

 

Stick to what you are used to and gives you the most pleasure from our hobby.

[Dunsignalling]

And then hauled away by locos using screw couplings.

True, but screw couplings only came into play where locos were attached, detached or changed. Waterloo, Exeter Central and sometimes Salisbury.

 

The rapid and complex combining of two trains from down west, with the addition of a dining car set, into a single Waterloo express at Exeter Central, would have taken far longer without buckeyes. 

 

John

[Dagworth]

 

Above is my way. If my eye sight goes completely to dog sh1te, then I may have to go to a different method.

Don't worry, when the eyesight gets that bad you won't be able to see the tension lock anyway

 

Andi

[Dunsignalling]

That means buffering up to that individual carriage at each stop to remove a carriage (rather than just loosening the screw coupling/pipes) and stowing the buckeye for when the next locomotive came along to move them. Also extending the buffers if it was one with extendable buffers. then doing the opposite to those tasks when it was put into the next train. Hardly easy tasks. And you are doing that hundreds, if not thousands of times a day? No, they did it the way that took a couple of minutes rather than half an hour.

 

Buckeyes are far from being automatic couplings in real life. Notice it's only fixed rakes that have them. If they were so useful then everything would have had them. 

 

 

 

Jason

Buckeyes on the ACE weren't stowed, just dropped after uncoupling, the work of about 5 seconds.

 

The crew of the branch or stopping train loco picking the detached carriage/portion up after the express had departed did the time-consuming bits, but the crux of the matter was to get the main train away in the time allotted for a normal station stop. 

 

John

Edited March 27, 2018 by Dunsignalling