Is there an easy way....

[shortliner]

...of replacing/refitting those dratted Kadee knuckle springs??? I have just opened a packet of #5s and found one of the couplers has lost its spring which was rolling around  loose in the envelope

[alfsboy]

I get a scalpel blade and put the point into the side of  the coil  to hold it and put one end into the knuckle and the other into the moving part .I use a bit of grease to make the blade sticky ,I sometimes put a TINY  blob of superglue on one mounting point  to hold  the spring in place .Hope it helps

[Guest 40-something]

Folk who can replace these springs deserve a knighthood if you ask me!!!

[alfsboy]

Fitting them is easy .Its finding them on the floor thats the .

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear Jack,

 

Just did 2 here which had come adrift from a pair of cars in an ill-fitting box. I 2nd ATSFboy's x-acto-knife  technique. 

 

Pre-emptive Note: if not convinced or confident, I have heard of some modellers threading the spring on a length of cotton before attempting re-installation. This allows you to use the x-acto technique above, but keep solid control of the spring if it richochets off...

Assuming you get the spring re-installed, the thread can then be slipped out in a controlled manner...

 

(Assuming you hold your X-acto knife in your right hand)
- LH index finger on the LH end of the spring
- insert x-acto kinfe tip in the 2nd or 3rd loop of the spring from the RH end

- grab the car towards the end with your left hand, coupler to the right

- pickup the knife, the spring will come up with it

- slip the "free" LH end over the pin cast in the coupler head, 
(at this point, you may want to adjust the way you are holding the car,
so your LH thumb or forefinger is holding the LH end of the spring captive as it sits in the coupler-head pocket)

- compress the spring with the knife tip, until the RH end clears the pin cast into the knuckle
- angle the RH end and slip the spring end over the knuckle cast pin,
- and slide the x-acto knife tip out of the spring

 

If you had your finger over the LH end, and the RH end doesn't quite "catch" the knuckle pocket pin, 
the spring will be retained (IE won't launch into the wide blue yonder),

and you can have another go...

 

Hope this helps...

 

Happy Modelling, 
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

[Andy Reichert]

Use Sergents?

 

Added bonus. You don't have to chop the off the uncoupling pin . . . . .

 

Andy

[shortliner]

Thank you all - I independently found the Profs system before I read his post. and managed it with a minor modification

#1 Put the back end of the coupler in a small clamp-on vice attached to the work bench/computer desk (note that it is better if the coupler is NOT in its coupler box when you do this 

#2 Visit SWMBOs sewing box and find the smallest needle she has and some fine cotton/nylon thread 

#3 Ask her to thread the damn thing!

#4 Thread the needle and cotton through the blanketty-blank knuckle spring and then proceed following Johns instructions. With the cotton threaded into it at least you have a chance of finding the ***** thing when the carpet monster tries to eat it!

NB - The plastic bag idea is good until it jumps - trying to find the minute thing in the bag will cause lots of blue air - ask me how I know!

 

PS Andy - the pins stay right where they were when they were made!  Having spend much moolah converting from X2F Horn/hooks to Kadees, there is no way I'm converting to Sergents, no matter how good they may be

[Allegheny1600]

Not having a go, Andy R but, why do some people chop the uncoupling pin off the Kadee head?

It seems to negate the whole point of using Kadee's - for the 'hands free' uncoupling!?!

Cheers,

John E.

[AnEntropyBubble]

Hi John

 

I remove the pin because use a bamboo skewer to uncouple (I have no magnetic  uncouplers) so the pin is not necessary in my case.  Also most my models also have the proper air hose modeled on the car so the one on the coupler is redundant and is removed for looks.

 

Make sense?

 

Andrew

[steve1]

John,

 

I suspect folk cut off the pins because they don't use magnets. I don't have magnets on Duncan's Mine so don't need the pins, strictly speaking, as I use bamboo skewer as an uncoupler. However, I haven't cut them off as I may use a magnet on future US layouts. Hope that helps.

 

Regarding Sergeants, I have seen them in use but I'm not all that convinced they are a big enough improvement over Kadees. For me anyway.

 

steve

[F-UnitMad]

Alledgedly (as I've not tried them), Sergents come with their own little ball of trouble - literally - that can equally match the kadee spring trouble....

[Andy Reichert]

Alledgedly (as I've not tried them), Sergents come with their own little ball of trouble - literally - that can equally match the kadee spring trouble....

 

Kadee springs are on the outside of the coupler, hence the replacing the spring problem if they become detached. Assembled Sergents have their locking ball bearing totally enclosed in the coupler head. Hence there is no replacement problem to allege.

 

If you build them from the kit, then yes you do have to make sure any tiny parts don't get lost. But I don't see that as an equivalent issue.

 

Using Sergents to better imitate prototype coupler looks and operation can cause it's own issues. Model "operations" has it's own traditional set of rather un-prototypical short cuts which definitely both ease and speed things up otherwise.

 

Andy

[BR60103]

Jack:

be warned that you may have to replace springs on couplers that are already installed.

Kadee make a spring tool that has a metal rod with a dimple on each side to hold the spring. I don't know if this is any improvement on an X-Acto blade.

I don't think the needle is necessary for threading the spring -- the hole in the spring is usually bigger than the one in the needle.

[w124bob]

I tried Sergents couplings (pre assembled) and decided that as you have to hold the magnet wand over the coupler head there was little to be gained from using scale Kadee's. Trip removed and all uncoupling done with cocktail sticks. The scale coupler is actually easier to uncouple than a #5. On loco's with ploughs removing the trip pin also you to use a standard or even short coupler. 

[The Bigbee Line]

I tried Sergents couplings (pre assembled) and decided that as you have to hold the magnet wand over the coupler head there was little to be gained from using scale Kadee's. Trip removed and all uncoupling done with cocktail sticks. The scale coupler is actually easier to uncouple than a #5. On loco's with ploughs removing the trip pin also you to use a standard or even short coupler.

I prefer the scale Kadees on UK stock. I think they couple more easily and the springs are retained slightly better than on the originals.

[shortliner]

Thanks, guys!   David I have one of the Kadee tools - and the scalpel blade seems to work better - My lady has some really small needles - but that is why I had to get her to thread the darn thing for me! That needle now lives in my RIP track box with the knuckle springs. I'm also wondering if one of those needles, pointed end in a piece of dowel, and the top of the eye ground off (forming a tiny, two prong, fork) might work to help position the ends of the coil spring - some experimentation might be in order

[F-UnitMad]

Kadee springs are on the outside of the coupler, hence the replacing the spring problem if they become detached. Assembled Sergents have their locking ball bearing totally enclosed in the coupler head. Hence there is no replacement problem to allege.

 

If you build them from the kit, then yes you do have to make sure any tiny parts don't get lost. But I don't see that as an equivalent issue.

 

Sorry, I wasn't directly comparing the ball bearing to the spring as a "replacement" issue, just - as you say - care is needed in assembly, and from what I've read, painting the coupler, so the ball doesn't become 'sticky' and ruin the whole operation. Therein lies the 'trouble' comparison.

 

Pelle Soelleberg mentioned recently in Model Railroader that he found Sergents uncoupled at a dip in the track that Kadees didn't notice, so each system has it's own foibles...

[HeavyDuty]

Folk who can replace these springs deserve a knighthood if you ask me!!!

Post them off to me and get the paperwork started. Do I get a horse out of the deal, too?

[HeavyDuty]

I've been using Sargents on and off for years now. Yes, they are better looking than Kadees, but they are not as practical for an operating layout in my opinion. I still use them for passenger cars but not for freight.

 

I'm not willing to wear a hair shirt when operating - I've found Kadees sans hose to be the best compromise between appearance and function.

[Andy Reichert]

I've been using Sargents on and off for years now. Yes, they are better looking than Kadees, but they are not as practical for an operating layout in my opinion. I still use them for passenger cars but not for freight.

 

I'm not willing to wear a hair shirt when operating - I've found Kadees sans hose to be the best compromise between appearance and function.

 

My goal has always been to operate my models hands-free.  So the idea of remote uncoupling, especially if you want parts of your layout to be delicately scenicked, or where humans can't reach, immediate knocks out the "skewer " method.

 

Andy

[F-UnitMad]

In reality, coupling/uncoupling operations are not 'hands free'.

 

With buckeyes, they couple automatically, but need the Switchman to pull the pin to uncouple, and the air lines need connecting by hand but uncouple automatically.

Therefore, in model form, any method involves some form of compromise from reality.

[Andy Reichert]

When modelling, one very common level of compromise is to have invisible or stationary model people apparently performing needed operations.  But actually using cunning hidden (sometimes in plain sight) mechanisms that fool the viewer. E.g. passengers, brakemen.

 

http://www.proto87.com/media/serge.gif

 

In my 1:87 scale (hopefully) almost deluded mind, that doesn't equate to the 50 ft descending hand of the Sky God.  My personal efforts in this regard are far from finished, but I did manage this along the way. I am working on making Sergents fully automatic in a another year or so. Also see model "Birmingham New Street" for the original Air Hose Solution invention.

 

IMHO an exhibition layout should work in the former way, not then latter. (past happy experiences of the Boys and Girls Exhibitions, etc.)  But maybe I'm in the minority on that?

 

Andy

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear RMWebbers,

 

Whether a skewer "comes down from the sky" to twist a Kadee kunckle,
or a Sergeant's magnetic-wand "comes down from the sky" to magnetically lift the locking ball in a Sergeant's coupler,

 

either way there is "Some dirty great big thing coming down out of the sky and interacting with the trains"...

 

Whether such visual offends, or "breaks the suspension-of-disbelief", of the modeller or layout-viewer in question is an entirely seperate issue,
but let's not be under any mis-illusions that both "manual operating practises" are any more of less "hand from sky" than each other...

 

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

 

PS am actively A/Bing Kadees (skewers) and Sergeants (Sergeant wand) as we speak. Have to say I have yet to see any untoward-attraction/car-end-detail damage using either technique, (must be the upside down gravity here),

 

and in the case of Kadees we're talking a testing period exceeding 10 years now, under both Public (from the front of the layout) Show and Home layout conditions.

 

PPS As opposed to the "operate from over the backscene" technique,
when operating from the front in/with the crowd, such "hand from sky" issues seem to be altogether ignored by the crowd in my experience.

 

When asked why it's not a problem,
the viewers expressed that with the operator "in the pit with them" (not attempting to play Wizard of Oz "...pay no attention to that man behind the curtain..."),
the emulation of proto railroading as a "honest hands-on human<>equipment interaction" exercise was successfully communicated, understood, and appreciated...
(although thankfully they also still respect the "look but don't touch" signage, esp when self-same layout crewmember is right there in the pit with them...)

[Andy Reichert]

Dear RMWebbers,

 

Whether a skewer "comes down from the sky" to twist a Kadee kunckle,

or a Sergeant's magnetic-wand "comes down from the sky" to magnetically lift the locking ball in a Sergeant's coupler,

 

either way there is "Some dirty great big thing coming down out of the sky and interacting with the trains"...

 

 

Prof,

 

An uncoupler disguised as a Derail switch stand  (as shown on the link) isn't anything close to a hand from the sky. (BTW it moves in and back fast, not as shown in my stop motion clip). And a Sergent opened by a future mechanism inside a car is going to be virtually invisible. That's already being done with Kadees.

 

Many other aspects you just can't do with a sky hand and skewer are: Fly shunting, uncoupling when there is complex OHLE., under bridges, inside buildings, out of reach and behind tall obstacles.

 

Andy

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear Andy,

 

If I had to choose between:
- a non hand-from-sky Sergeants solution which literally only allows me to uncouple at one location +/- 0.25"
(independent of any external scenery/structure clearance issues, it's still limited to that physical track location)

 

or

- a hand-from-sky Sergeants wand solution which allows me to uncouple anywhere I can physically access the couplers
(even with physical restrictions such as seen on "Brooklyn : 3AM", that's still a lot more "uncoupling position accessibility/flexibility" than a single +/-0.25" "spotting target",

and as above, the vast majority of General Public punters who view my layouts don't seem to mind.

 

...Indeed, they completely "get" the analogy between "manual brakeman on the ground" and "manual human uncoupling a miniature train" actions...)

 

I know which option presents more operational flexibility,
(arguably like the prototype with brakemen on the ground),
and is therefore most appropriate/easy/widely-deployable for the style of "hands-on ops" my crew and layout designs require...

 

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

 

PS Assuming such a "non hand-from-sky" Sergeants system was deployed within a structure
(IE a visual/physical obstacle which would foul a "hand-from-sky" solution),

how would the operator/"model RR engineer" spot the cars reliably to match the uncoupler location at such required accuracy?
(The same visual/physical obstacle which fouls "tool-from-sky" would surely make "visual +/- 0.25 car spotting accuracy" infuriatingly difficult/impossible too?)