TIm O'C wrote:

Seems like a simple test could be devised, X pounds on the drawbar
with a pulley system. Each brand could be tested for its load failure
and then we'd know exactly how much strain they could take! Also,
they should be tested over 48-72 hours as well to test for durability
when subjected to smaller loads over a period of time. (A problem
especially with plastics.) It might also reveal the weakness of some
coupler boxes as well, since the boxes might fail before the couplers
do.

Tim, I don't think a destructive or "limit-load" test is the most important. I have heard tales from club usage of plastic couplers of slack running out and elastically bending the couplers so that they would uncouple. They didn't (permanently) fail or break, but did fail to perform their task. Some of this, of course, may be J.P. Barger's famous "inside face slope" problem, but some it may be coupler compliance.
I do agree that the tendency to take a "set" after being under modest load for hours, e.g. on a grade in a staging track, is important and necessary information for any plastic coupler.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

Tim, the skeptic in me says "absolutely nothing"... But I suppose one
result may be that more waybills will be showing up on layouts listing
the cargo as "bean meal" whatever that is... :-)

Is bean meal what they used to make our C rations?

Tim O'Connor

Tony, that's a great question and it seems to me like a perfect
subject for a magazine article... maybe RPCyc, because none of
the major mags would publish an article that might point out
flaws in an advertiser's products...

Seems like a simple test could be devised, X pounds on the drawbar
with a pulley system. Each brand could be tested for its load failure
and then we'd know exactly how much strain they could take! Also,
they should be tested over 48-72 hours as well to test for durability
when subjected to smaller loads over a period of time. (A problem
especially with plastics.) It might also reveal the weakness of some
coupler boxes as well, since the boxes might fail before the couplers
do.

Tim O'Connor




Tony Thompson wrote

William, only one problem: If your magnet is moved away from the
ball (upwards) then the effect of the magnetic field is diminished as
the inverse square of the distance. To work, your uncoupling lever
would have to move a magnet DOWN closer to the top of the coupler
so that the ball would rise as the magnetic field got stronger.

Just wait for the Barger coupler. (Hopefully not too many years hence.)
It will have a real pin, just like the prototype. At least, the 1/32 scale
version had one!

Tim O.

Tim Gilbert wrote:

What can be learned from these
NKP List of movements which can be used on your or anybody else's layout
of the 1945-1955 era?

That data are fun? There are plenty of folks who still need that lesson <g>.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

I think Paul said it best, and you agreed with him -- we need a scale
coupler, with a scale draft gear, that is compatible with Kadee... (This
also is what Denny has been saying all along.)

Accurail -- currently comes closest to meeting all three requirements

I agree. I have examined this coupler for both dimensions and proportions, as well as draft gear box, and it is excellent on all those counts. I guess I wish it were a metal coupler, but aside from not being literally a scale coupler, it is an excellent coupler. (How much durability and long-train or heavy-load data do we have for it?) I think I might prefer the Kadee 78 if it had a better box. For now, I'd probably only use Sergent for a contest model.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

Andy Sperandeo wrote:

Only two Santa Fe boxcars in the latest batch from Bill:

ATSF 146177, a Bx37 carrying bulk meal (with 12 grain doors!). This is
one of
the last batch of this large class, built in 1942. It's represented in
HO by a
Sunshine kit, and can also be modeled with modifications to the Red
Caboose
modified 1937 AAR standard boxcar. (I've also got one I built from a
Westrail
kit, if anyone besides Richard H remembers those.) Many of this class had
National B-1 trucks, but this particular car had ASF spring-plankless
trucks.

ATSF 270725, a Bx42 carrying bean meal. This is a 1944 graduate of the
Santa
Fe's program of rebuilding Bx9 and 10 1925 ARA standard
double-sheathed boxcars
into all-steel cars similar to the modified 1937 AAR standard. It's also
represented in HO by a Sunshine kit.

Andy,

What are the implications of the boxcar mixes of outbound traffic from
Swift's Soy Bean Processing Operation in Frankfort in 1948-1949 upon
your ATSF model (of Cajon Pass?) ? On your layout, the majority of
boxcars should not be ATSF, but foreign. What can be learned from these
NKP List of movements which can be used on your or anybody else's layout
of the 1945-1955 era?

Tim Gilbert

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Nelson" <muskoka@c...> wrote:

Brian J Carlson wrote:

why would the last one be a stumper the pennsy had a few poling cars.
I do not think they were in use in the 50's though.

Brian J Carlson
P.E.
Cheektowaga NY

So had I asked "For what car does the AAR Mechanical Designation YM
signify?" you'd have answered right away w/o looking at an ORER?

Dave Nelson

Dave,

The way my memory plays tricks on me sometimes I might not get "what
car does the AAR Mechanical Designation XM signify?" more than 75% of
the time. That pesky memory is why I have two 5" ring binders almost
filled with printed copies of many of the messages from this list (and
a big THANK YOU to all on this list).

Walter M. Clark
Time stopped in November 1941
Riverside, California

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas M. Olsen" <tmolsen@U...> wrote:

Hi Pat,

The wand is a piece of tool steel rod that has been magnetized and is
about four inches long. To reach any distance you would have to mount
it on a piece of dowel or other circular material, keeping size and
diameter reasonable, but remaining rigid enough not to sag while you
reach across.

I like the way they operate and how they look, but unfortunately the
inability to reach across more than a foot of benchwork makes them
impracticable if you plan to do anything other than run around without
doing anything. Now if you are into displays and/or contests at train
shows and conventions, RPM meets, etc., then there is nothing that can
beat them.

If someone can find a way to uncouple them remotely or in any other
fashion, then they will become workable in operating sessions.<snip>

Tom, et alia,

I've been thinking about trying to make real, functioning top operated
coupler release bars to use with the Sergent couplers. I looked at
the size of the pieces and think it can be done, just by someone with
better eyes and steadier hands than I have. Anyway, the idea is to
use a small piece of those super-strong rare-earth magnets at the
point above the coupler, so moving the down bent end of the coupler
release bar up would lift the magnet, thus lifting the little ball
inside the coupler. Pull the engine forward and the coupler face
opens right up (it says here in fine print).

Anyone able to get this to work will have my gratitude and (this is
what makes this so special) I won't even charge for use of my idea
(such a deal, right?).

Walter M. Clark
Time stopped in November 1941
Riverside, California

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Denny Anspach <danspach@m...> wrote:

To an extent, those turning up their noses to all plastic couplers in
some kind of blanket fashion remind me of the "standing in the
trench" pronouncements of those who in the '60s announced in print
and in word loudly that they would *never* ever buy (or sell)
anything made of plastic, and urged others to do the same. Plastics
were "the death of model railroad hobby" (this was at the time when
the then-new Athearn molded cars were de facto taking over the model
railroad market). Now, just how much egg would you like on your face?
:-[

"All metal" can mean anything from bismuth, lead, brass, aluminum,
steel, zinc, and zamac and other alloys (some pure, but many others
made of of leavings and sweepings), steel, etc. I do have some
pretty terrible couplers" that are "All Metal".

"All plastic" can mean anything from soft new styrene (or similar)
or other unstable plastics to various kinds of very tough aged
engineering plastics . I also have some pretty fine couplers that are
"All Plastic".<snip the rest of the discussion>

Denny (and everyone else),

Back in the late 1960s and 1970s several of us model railroaders,
mostly in our teens and twenties would gather at Harper's Hobby Shop
in Riverside, California on Friday evenings (thanks, Jim!) to shoot
the bull and run whatever we brought on the store layout (scenery and
26" minimum radius, great fun). Everyone was using MKD-5 & 10 (that
digs way back into the memory) and we burned out several of those
little brass springs before we figured out the problem. Two Athearn
engines, back-to-back, would run coupled into a tunnel on a curve and
come out the other end uncoupled and missing one or both coupler
springs. Yep, we were putting the (metal) couplers in the frame
coupler pockets on (metal frame) engines and the reversed polarity of
the two frames would short out the coupler springs. If we'd had
plastic couplers it wouldn't have been a problem. One guy had access
to a mill and milled off the cast on pockets, drilled the remaining
pad and used the plastic KD boxes. Problem solved. And my point is
to agree with Denny and say that plastics can be a problem or a
solution, you just have to have the right stuff at the right time and
place.

Walter M. Clark
Time stopped in November 1941
Riverside, California

What's wrong with an aftermarket product?I think they would sell well
enough to more that cover the cost of tooling.Armand Premo

Tony,

I think Paul said it best, and you agreed with him -- we need a scale
coupler, with a scale draft gear, that is compatible with Kadee... (This
also is what Denny has been saying all along.)

Accurail -- currently comes closest to meeting all three requirements

Kadee -- #78 box is not a model of a prototype draft gear

Sergent -- only meets the scale coupler requirement, but does it better
than the other two

The above explains why we were so excited about the "Barger" coupler
even though he planned to use Kadee #5 coupler boxes. I hope he will
simultaneously release a scale draft gear box, since it has no effect on
the coupler head design. IMO once these are available, it will be safe to
buy them in large quantities!!! And since the large majority of modelers
will continue to buy Kadees, I don't worry that they will cease production
during my lifetime...

Tim O'Connor


Tony Thompson wrote

Paul LaCiura wrote:

What is the "ultimate solution"? A coupler that looks like a Sergent,
operates like a Kadee and has a near scale or scale draft gear like the
Accumate.

Heckuva good summary, Paul. Few of us would argue with that.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

Charlie Vlk wrote:

I am not arguing against anything..... just trying to provide some balance here.

Didn't say you were "arguing against" and I certainly agree with you that there are folks on this (and other) lists who have zero sense of proportion. But even Branchline isn't really attempting to outsell Athearn (much as they might like to), never mind resin and other basement operators with many innovative products. I feel for products like the Sergent coupler: the arguments are sound that one hesitates to convert one's entire fleet if Sergent is going out of business next year; but if insufficient couplers are sold, he IS going out of business. It's a tough call for us all.
Meanwhile, reminding us of who sells the most car kits doesn't seem like a solution to the problem.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

I think that the best compromise for new builds until the ultimate solution
becomes available is the Accumate proto coupler. I have installed them on
several P2K/RC cars and the combination of the near scale size with the near
scale draft gear looks great. I leave the metal uncoupling "hooks" off, but
if Richard needs remote uncoupling they are easy to install. Since I have
not installed them on enough cars to see how they would operate in a long
train I cannot comment on their strength under slack action, etc., but they
work great in a small local train. I don’t know how they stand up to large
club conditions, maybe someone else can comment further.

For retrofits where I really don’t have the constitution to carve out the
cast-in draft gear (yet..) and on the pulling side of locomotives I use the
Kadee 58's after cutting the trip pin off. These will be the first to be
retrofitted to Sergent when I get the gumption to do so.

The Sergent couplers I have purchased will go on the front of my steam
locomotives and on the rear of my boattail observation cars.

What is the "ultimate solution"? A coupler that looks like a Sergent,
operates like a Kadee and has a near scale or scale draft gear like the
Accumate.

Just my 23 cents worth (considering the Bay Area cost of living),

Paul

Paul LaCiura
San Francisco, CA
spdaylight.com

Tony-
I am not arguing against anything..... just trying to provide some balance
here.
Some of you think that anything that isn't a resin kit-level model is a
crime to
produce. ..... forgetting that the investments in mass-production models
have to
be recouped in a marketplace much larger than that which the STMFC supports.
If it was just a matter of prototype accuracy InterMountain (heck,
Westerfield!!!)
cars should outsell Athearn.... but I'm guessing that they don't and that
Bachmann
cranks out more trainset cars than the rest of the market combined sells.
Pushing the envelope is a balancing act..... even guys like Branchline have
to think carefully
about advancing fine scale standards on their products....even though their
narrow audience is
much more receptive to such innovations....there are still limits to how far
and how
fast to move.
I recall that MDC brought out a RS3 with special scale Ernst gearing that
was a
total bomb, mostly because the units wouldn't MU with anything else.
The installed base matters if you aren't just making display models.
Charlie Vlk

If moving the hatches on the Athearn car is anything like moving the
hatches on the MDC car, then it isn't hard to do. A 1/4 inch hole
with a short piece of 1/4" styrene tube provided the new location
and 'flange.' A 1/4" circle of styrene punched out with a paper
punch plugged the old hole. Squadron putty and a little sanding
finished the job.
Gene Green

They are 2893 cubic feet. As is the Walthers model (albeit the later
version with hat section corner posts). No one has announced either
of the larger cars (3215 or 3500).

Gene, just a reminder: replacement PS2 hatch assemblies (includes
the round opening) are available from Kadee, or so I have heard.
The Athearn parts don't look that great (or the photos show them
slathered with paint) so Kadee hatches will dress 'em up. Personally
I have enough junk to be built so I'll just wait for the real deal
from Kadee...

Tim O'Connor

Charlie Vlk wrote:

Understand that I am all for thinking "outside of the box:" and promoting
improved standards.
But manufacturers have to field product that meets the greater marketplace.
STMFC is an important, significant viewpoint and a factor to be considered,
but Kadee cars are
outsold by Athearn MDC by a signficant order or magnitude or more.... so
scale draft gear and
couplers have a lot of installed base . . .

The trouble with Charlie's argument is that accepting it means there would never be any significant new products, couplers or anything else. Of course there are commercial viability issues for new products, but let's not simply conclude that nothing new can work because of Athearn/MDC. If that were true in the larger world, there would be nothing to drink but Budweiser.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 19:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Pickett <jimpick2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: 1949 NKP Car Movements

This is exactly the sort of data I would like to find on industries local to this area (C&O/West Virginia). Where could it be obtained? Where did you get your info? I haven't followed this thread as I don't model the NKP. I should have done so.

Jim Pickett

Jim,

Bill Darnaby was fortunate enough to find the for the outbound cars at
the Swift Plant in Frankfort IN, and we are very fortunate in that Bill
has chosen to share this information with the STMFC. You will be very
lucky indeed if you would ever find similar such data for an industry on
your C&O. You may find some aspects of the utilization of freight cars
of Swift's Frankfort operation which may be similar to your West
Virginian operations, but these would be related to box cars and tank
cars only because the NKP movements include only those car types.

Tim Gilbert

Ed Mines wrote:

I would think that everyone who really wants prototype cabooses
already has them in brass, or from Q'Craft or AMB and this would
limit sales. Apparently Walthers is making money.

For "caboose" substitute any other car or locomotive in this statement and there would never be any styrene or even resin. The existence of brass (by no means necessarily better, certainly not most brass diesels) should not and luckily does not preclude other media.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history