Powered Tenders

[John Tomlinson]

12 minutes ago, JDW said:

 

 

Interesting, I didn't know that, thanks for taking the time to point it out. I do speak German, but am neither a steam nor German railway fan! 

 

 

Fair point, though given some of what 'we' seem to want on models which would be barely discernible if properly scaled down, swivelling bogies (if they should indeed swivel) would seem like a basic ask! (Over-bright lights are the first that come to mind!)

 

Yes, we modellers are a stroppy lot when you think about it! Demand lots of fine detail, but moan when in a journey of thousands of miles across the oceans little bits drop off and are loose in the box. The lights issue is a classic, up to the late 90's when the high intensity headlights appeared in Britain, they were barely discernible. And anyone who'd ever tried to read in a Mk1 coach at night, even with the extra individual lights on, would know it was near impossible and a sure path to eye strain.

 

I do plastic military modelling sometimes, and on modern jet aeroplanes there has become a fashion for highlighting panel lines, so they look as if they've been ploughed. This is totally unrealistic, and I was reliably informed by active RAF engineers that any aircraft with such gaping hollows in its surfaces would never get off the ground. Yet folk do this on their models, and win competitions in the process!

 

Funny old  world.

 

John.

Edited April 21 by John Tomlinson
typo

[GrumpyPenguin]

1 hour ago, John Tomlinson said:

 

I take your point, but on the real thing the actual swivelling of the bogies would be indiscernible as real railway curves are far less sharp than we use on our models.

 

The other thing, and I confess some ignorance here, I'm sure that on some German tenders the apparent bogies weren't bogies at all as we understand them, simply fixed frames. IIRC this was true on the Br52 Kriegsloks for one. I'm happy to be contradicted on this as I don't speak German and have struggled to understand the literature, so may be wrong.

 

John.

Without physically checking the fleet I would say that all of my European tender drive locomotives have fixed "bogies" & use sideways movement to enable curves to be negotiatd.

[GrumpyPenguin]

3 hours ago, DCB said:

 

It's the interface issue.  

 

But the real thing which irritates me is the  unrealistic operation DCC enthusiasts think is good. Full size Trains can't creep for extended periods unless Slow speed fitted for MGR operations , but they can stop to the nearest 6" or less so coaches never move when couping up.
I am working on sound,  So many  sound locos chuff like they are pulling 400 tons when running light.   Real ones usually give 4 or 8 chuffs then coast.

 

But its the  interface.  I want a speed control knob  Hand held  one handed.  ideally wireless.  Everything else can be on the console,  Whistle button would be nice 

If you can bear to look at a European Manufacture have a look at a Roco Z21 & 2 x wi-fi Multimaus - everything you asked for.

[The Johnster]

2 hours ago, John Tomlinson said:

The lights issue is a classic, up to the late 90's when the high intensity headlights appeared in Britain, they were barely discernible. And anyone who'd ever tried to read in a Mk1 coach at night, even with the extra individual lights on, would know it was near impossible and a sure path to eye strain.

 

 

100% with you on this one, John.  Before high-intensity lights on locos the lamps, if lit, could not be discerned in any but the very poorest daylight; the marker lights would illuminate perhaps a dozen sleeper in front of the loco, dimly, not much use at 90mph.  The filament bulbs used to illuminate (probably not the right word, illumination was more of an intention than a fact) until the mid-60s refurbishments were 25 watters running off a 24v dc supply, and basically useless though you could find your way along the corridors with them.  In normal layout ambient lighting they should not be visible, neither should building interior or semaphore signal lights.  Sodium discharge street lamps, maybe. 

 

A passenger train at night, viewed from the side and some distance away from streetlit areas (which were far more extensive then), looked a bit like a glow worm. especiallly as many of the compartments would have the main lights dimmed and the reading lights off.  Modern lights are much brighter, but even so are usually ridiculously overbright on layouts even before the usual exhibition trope of flashing roadworks, emergency services blues, and factory warning retina-burners are encounted.  Look at my lights, aren't I clever, my layout's got lights, lots of lights, bright lights, flashing lights, red lights on the back of locos pulling trains, and the back of green-liveried dmus, look, look, look, LOOK AT MY LIGHTS!!!

 

Actually, I think I'll go and look at another layout, thanks.

[RexAshton]

Will someone PLEASE get back to what the OP originally asked?

[GrumpyPenguin]

17 minutes ago, RexAshton said:

Will someone PLEASE get back to what the OP originally asked?

You could probably make that comment on the great majority of RMWeb threads.

[RexAshton]

18 hours ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

You could probably make that comment on the great majority of RMWeb threads.

True

 

[GWR-fan]

On 20/04/2024 at 20:08, Michael Hodgson said:

That's a very interesting approach to effectively double heading with an engine and powered tender, I've not heard of anybody doing that before.  I wonder whether you have lower maximum tractive effort with a differential than without though.

 

........................................................................................................

 

 

 

Some years ago I had a Chinese made Hornby A3 5-pole driven tender and a Chinese made super detail 5-pole loco drive A3 and wondered what a powerhouse it would make if combined.  I was wrong.  I did separate haulage tests with the tender drive and the loco drive separately and found the tender drive hauled more coaches.  I mistakenly thought that the combination of tender drive and loco drive would haul more coaches.  In fact with the loco drive/tender drive combination the coaches hauled was actually less than with just the powered tender. 

[Michael Hodgson]

11 minutes ago, GWR-fan said:

I mistakenly thought that the combination of tender drive and loco drive would haul more coaches.  In fact with the loco drive/tender drive combination the coaches hauled was actually less than with just the powered tender. 

Was this DC or DCC? 

 

It would be important that their speeds were more or less the same.  With mismatched speeds on DC they might waste energy fighting each other, but I think with DCC using separate decoders you should be able to set speed curves that balanced them out.

 

Alternatively there may have been voltage drop using an analogue controller as the two locos together require more current than either on its own.

Edited April 23 by Michael Hodgson