Kirkby Luneside (Original): End of the line....

[Physicsman]

Hi Jeff and Andy,

 

I am also thinking of Kadee and will be watching closely, I am a little concerned about the volume of stock I have to change how do you choose what to change or do you change everything

 

Jeff,

I have finally got round to casting my first sections of stone walling, I'll let you know how it goes tomorrow. Like you I will have scale miles of it - did you mention CRAZY a little while ago?

 

Evening Mike,

 

I'm glad to see that someone else doesn't have a great deal of knowledge about Kadees. At times I feel a bit thick! I won't be getting round to the uncoupling sections - ie. goods yard - for quite a while. So you may get there first. However, once I know what to buy (I'm sure Andy will tell me) I'll buy some and set up a test rig - and send you the details!

 

As for the walling - yes, please. If you come up with a valid method it'll be great!

 

I'm off to do some plastering. I'll try and post something around 11.30 - midnight.

 

Jeff

[Andrew P]

I have just put another bit of Kadee footage on Glen Roy, page 11

 

Bodgit

[Andrew P]

You only need to change the stuff that you want to uncouple.

I.e the coupling on a loco/tender and the first and last end couplings on a rake of coaches. If the coaches are to remain as a set you can leave the originals in place or fit fixed close couplings.

Same applies to goods, just fit where you want to split up the wagons, but I'd have them on both ends of a brake van.

You can of course replace them all but it can get expensive.

Think carefully where you want to uncouple, then you can use under track magnets before laying the track, the between track magnets are not very nice to look at and totally un prototypical.

Ray.

Unless you can use them as Barrow Crossings, (that's NOT Barrow in Furness by the way) hhahaaaa

 

Bodger

[tender]

There's a bit of (rather poor quality) video here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/51879-avago-the-old-sidings/ post #9

Showing 'delayed action' shunting (only one magnet before the point ladder), the loco pushes the wagon back into the siding after uncoupling without recouping.

Edited March 27, 2013 by tender

[jukebox]

Another strong vote for you to try and dabble in Kadees, Jeff.

 

Not proto-British, but a less-obtrustive, proven and well supported system, that has couplers of so many varieties, there is just about one for every application.

 

Scott

 

(so I guess that makes me Lunester Prince of Kadees)

[Andrew P]

Nice one Scott,

 

Bodgit

[tender]

Unless you can use them as Barrow Crossings, (that's NOT Barrow in Furness by the way) hhahaaaa

 

Bodger

I did think of that but they always ended up in strange places, like half way along the platform. I forgot to fit some on 'Camel Quay' so I'm going to have to retrofit some neodymium magnets as shown here

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/60560-pwllheli-next-stop/page-2 post #44

Edited March 27, 2013 by tender

[Jason T]

See, couplings is something that I still have to think about because at the moment, the majority of my stock is fitted with Bachmann slimline tension locks which in my view are just as obtrusive as Kadees; you still get that awful lump on the underside end of each wagon. If it wasn't for the fact that propelling rakes of wagons relying on the buffers not interlocking is a bit of a nightmare, I would go 3 link/ screw link without hesitation as they look a million time better than both Kadees and tension locks. AJ couplings are an option, as used on BCB, but you do need to have them set up accurately and you do need a jig to build them. Paul (Wordsell Forever) did suggest another type that I aim to look into as well but Kadees definitely get a thumbs down from me, apart from using them to close couple DMU's.

[Andrew P]

Kadee close coupling on Glen Roy, closer that tension locks and almost as neat as you can get in a MODEL COUPLING THAT WORKS,

 

 

Bodgit

[tender]

Kadee close coupling on Glen Roy, closer that tension locks and almost as neat as you can get in a MODEL COUPLING THAT WORKS,

 

Bodgit

You don't have to convince me Andy, I'm already hooked. Like you say 'a MODEL COUPLING THAT WORKS' I've yet to see another type that is as reliable (and robust).

[Physicsman]

Wow - one heck of a discussion on couplers over the last hour or so!

 

You lot will be making me a nervous wreck when I think of all the decisions I have to make.

 

I'm not hurrying into that, though. I've also decided I'm spending too much money on wood etc, so I'm not re-stocking tomorrow. I'm going to "botch" - so I can then be called "Botchit" (watchit!!!!!) - the remaining bits of ply I need by glueing/screwing smaller bits together. Since they will end up under the fell, out of sight, why bother spending money when I don't need to...

 

Just taken a couple of pics of tonight's plastering. Will upload in 2 mins...

 

Jeff

Edited March 28, 2013 by Physicsman

[Physicsman]

Right, here we go. The first photo shows the hillside has been extended right through the two right arches to (almost) the back wall:

 

 

The second photo shows that the embankment beyond the viaduct has been built in. This will be attached to the hillside that adjoins the cutting:

 

 

Can you see what it is yet? Lol!!!!

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

Update on Lunester totals (I'm only doing this every 500 posts now).

 

Upto and including post 5500:

 

AndyP 476 / Andy 283 / Jason 232 / Duncan 192 / Jonathan 164 / Michael 159 / Peter 126 / Polly 121 / Mike (Stationmaster) 111 / Scott 105 / Larry 97 / Jim 90 / Rob 83 / Mike(61680) 82 / Bill and Billy 77 / Chris 59 / Al 50 / GordonS and James 49 / Don 44 / John (Allegheny) 43 / Ian 38 / Ray 13 / Simon (Kingmoorkid) 9/

 

Jeff

[uax6]

Re couplings....

 

I've been thinking (yes it does hurt!). I have used and was planning to use the old Mainline style of tension lock coupler. These can be converted to auto/delayed action quite easily, and are a damn site cheaper than kadees. Yes they are both unsightly, but with careful placement you can get the mainline ones to give realistic loose coupled effects on wagons. Set the bar level with the buffer heads and bingo they buffer up (but don't lock) and when you pull away they pick up individual wagons. A Kaydee cannot do this. Out of the two which would I prefere to see on the stock? The m/line one! It's horrible, but it is obviously wrong, whereas the kadee is sort of right, but soo wrong on British wagons that it looks worse to my eyes!

 

But of late the worm has been a changing.... I'm wondering wether to go three link/screw. As I build a lot of my own stock, sometimes its easily to just put three links on instead of mainlines..... The disadvantage is that they are not automatic are expensive, and under gangways on coaches a pain in the arse.

 

I have through of mixing the two, but that decomes a pain with translator wagons.

 

I have seen various other methods of coupling, but all have disadvantages.

 

The little Bachmman/Hornby Airfix style couplings are just as bad, but maybe they are worth investigating to see if they can be made delayed action/automatic.

 

I think the choice comes down to how much shunting you intend to do, and how much storage you have. If you are running fixed rakes of stock, with no shunting required, then scale couplings are perfect (or those wonderful brass coach couplers that have the pipes etc shown), if you are doing a lot of shunting then you want something automatic, unless you can easily reach the areas where you are shunting, (and you are using very long radius curves/points) then you can stay scale.

 

The other thing to look at is this: if the couplings are handed (ie a loop at one end of the wagon and a hook at the other) you cannot turn the vehicle around, and you have to have some way of coupling to a loco at each end....

 

I'm tempted to go scale, but then I have a lot of stock to convert, so will probable stay tension lock....

 

I am throughly lost! The wagons I'm building (every now and again) are staying coupling less at the minute until i can work out what to do! (but its not going to be kadee!)

 

Andy G

Confused coupling Lunester.

[Andrew P]

Wow - one heck of a discussion on couplers over the last hour or so!

 

You lot will be making me a nervous wreck when I think of all the decisions I have to make.

 

I'm not hurrying into that, though. I've also decided I'm spending too much money on wood etc, so I'm not re-stocking tomorrow. I'm going to "botch" - so I can then be called "Botchit" (watchit!!!!!) - the remaining bits of ply I need by glueing/screwing smaller bits together. Since they will end up under the fell, out of sight, why bother spending money when I don't need to...

 

Just taken a couple of pics of tonight's plastering. Will upload in 2 mins...

 

Jeff

WATCHIT BOTCHIT YOU WILL TAKE OVER FROM BODGIT

[Donw]

If Jeff will excuse me adding more on coupling into this thread;
I have used scale couplings in EM and 0 I much prefer them but they do slow down shunting which I didn't mind. I had little trouble with buffer locking but I wasn't using really tight curves. I also used lightly sprung buffers and built things with minimal side play on the axles which helps. I will stick with them in 0.
AJs work well but do not stop buffer locking. You can make and fix them so the hook it retainined and the links are used to operate the AJs which means wagons parked in the sidings look sensible.

I have also used Dinghams in 0 these look close to scale. However they are recommended to be used handed i.e loop at one end only which is a bind if you use cassettes or a traintable.

For 2mm I find DGs are the best these include a buffing action are not scale looking but if blackened are less obtrusive. They include delayed action.

 

There are other choices such as S&W or Lin cups but I haven't much experience of them.

Don

[uax6]

Don,

 

What would use in EM now? I'll have to have another look at the brass coach couplers to see if you can detach so that you can change formations in the fiddle yard, but as I'll have a through coach to deal with I'm not sure how that would work, scale couplings and corridor connections can be a pain.

 

I'm springing buffers as I go, as they do help out round curves..

 

Andy G

[billyb_imp]

WATCHIT BOTCHIT YOU WILL TAKE OVER FROM BODGIT

I am looking forward to some cooperation from the two of you and maybe a co-production of videos by Botchit & Bodget 

[Physicsman]

If Jeff will excuse me adding more on coupling into this thread;

I have used scale couplings in EM and 0 I much prefer them but they do slow down shunting which I didn't mind. I had little trouble with buffer locking but I wasn't using really tight curves. I also used lightly sprung buffers and built things with minimal side play on the axles which helps. I will stick with them in 0.

AJs work well but do not stop buffer locking. You can make and fix them so the hook it retainined and the links are used to operate the AJs which means wagons parked in the sidings look sensible.

I have also used Dinghams in 0 these look close to scale. However they are recommended to be used handed i.e loop at one end only which is a bind if you use cassettes or a traintable.

For 2mm I find DGs are the best these include a buffing action are not scale looking but if blackened are less obtrusive. They include delayed action.

 

There are other choices such as S&W or Lin cups but I haven't much experience of them.

Don

 

Don - please keep going! This is fascinating stuff - I never knew there were so many possibilities.... truly an education!

 

Jeff

[Physicsman]

WATCHIT BOTCHIT YOU WILL TAKE OVER FROM BODGIT

 

 

 

I am looking forward to some cooperation from the two of you and maybe a co-production of videos by Botchit & Bodget 

 

Sounds like some kind of funeral directors.... anyone remember Bootsie and Snudge from the 1960s?

 

Just re-stocked with another 15kg of plaster powder. Time to go and do some botching of plywood in the bunker.

 

It'll be interesting to see what you've been discussing when I next look on here!

 

Jeff

Edited March 28, 2013 by Physicsman

[southern42]

Sounds like some kind of funeral directors.... anyone remember Bootsie and Snudge from the 1960s?

 

Just re-stocked with another 15kg of plaster powder. Time to go and do some botching of plywood in the bunker.

 

It'll be interesting to see what you've been discussing when I next look on here!

 

Jeff

 

...or these...

 

Pollymix

[emt_911]

Don - please keep going! This is fascinating stuff - I never knew there were so many possibilities.... truly an education!

 

Jeff

Totaly agree. At the moment I don't know wether I'm confused or learning.

 

Duncan

[billyb_imp]

Sounds like some kind of funeral directors.... anyone remember Bootsie and Snudge from the 1960s?

 

Just re-stocked with another 15kg of plaster powder. Time to go and do some botching of plywood in the bunker.

 

It'll be interesting to see what you've been discussing when I next look on here!

 

Jeff

I certainly do remember Bootsie & Snudge, I think it was a follow up to The Army Game with Alfie Bass & Bill Fraser.

 

They don't make them like that any more 

 

Although I think we need to wait & see how a full series of Botchit & Bodget    

[tender]

Back to coupling, one of the cheapest options I've seen is to retain the standard Hornby / Bachmann tension locks but remove one hook from each piece of rolling stock. 'Tufts' of g***s are then placed in the centre of the track where uncoupling is required. Reversing over this in the right direction lifts the hook to uncouple.

It's very effective if you can put up with the sight of tension locks.

 

Ray.

[uax6]

Ray,

 

I've see two differring designs that actually make the tension locks delayed action as well, so that you uncouple in one location (at the throat of the fan of sidings) and then propel back into the siding where you just reverse and pull away.

 

The decison is a difficult one...

 

Andy g