Date   

Re: Sergent Couplers (was coupler debate)

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

Now that is an interesting idea. Wonder why no one else thought of that or is there an engineering problem that would make it unworkable? Might be something to approach the people at Sergent's and see what they say.

Tom Olsen
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479

Jim Pickett wrote:

Hmmmm. Why couldn't you replace the ball with a polarized magnet? That way you could hold a wand polarized in the opposite direction UNDER the coupler and it would repel and lift the ball. You could also have an electromagnet under the track also polarized oppositely. The coupler might have to be modified slightly so the ball wouldn't simply turn over. Perhaps replace it with a slightly cylindrical magnet.
Jim Pickett

timboconnor@comcast.net wrote:
Yes, but the electromagnet would have to be OVER the track.

The Sergent coupler has a tiny metal ball inside that acts like
the locking pin on the prototype. It has to move upwards to
unlock the knuckle.

Jim Pickett







Yahoo! Groups Links








Re: Sergent Couplers

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

Pat,

Did not someone just recently, on this list, state that J.P. tried to
get his Reboxx coupler made in China and had run up against a stone
wall? If I see him tomorrow at Timonium, I will ask about his progress
in this area and if he is not there, I am sure that Ralph will know..

Tom Olsen
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479

Patrick Wider wrote:

Tim, I still don't know the right answer, especially if Kadee continues to sell #78's one
thimble-full at a time. I know their game - they think that's the quickest and most
profitable way to recoup their tooling costs. They sold 5&10's that way for years until the
competition started to make cheap rip-offs. Then they suddenly made bulk packs
available. Sam, correct me if I'm wrong. On the other hand, from a manufacturer's
standpoint, it's much easier to count and dump the things in a bag with little or no
instructions. Anyone want to buy RP CYC's by the 60-book box??? That's the way we get
them. We''ll give you a really special price. Caution, they weight just over 60 pounds.

I'm just trying to learn about all of my current options. You speak of Reboxx like they're
going to be available in my lifetime. I have my doubts. If InterMountain makes them, I'll be
long gone. It's taken them four tries to get an ART steel reefer correct. Ed's about to pull
out his hair and give it up.

Pat Wider

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, timboconnor@c... wrote:


Pat, in that circumstance, you wave your magic wand and open
each knuckle with that same device (which doubles as a pick), as
I said before. Is this practical? Only if the layout is designed so
that the location is accessible. I could ask a similar question about
coupling Kadees on a curve. (If you do switching inside tunnels,
I admit Kadees will usually work better in that case.)

Remember the car was spotted at the siding. When it was spotted
it had to be uncoupled. The uncoupling process opened the knuckle.
It stays open 99% of the time (on our layouts gravity is unable to
close the knuckle.) The other times you wave the wand. This doesn't
seem complicated to me. What am I missing?

I think the only functional difference between the Sergent and the
Reboxx coupler will be that the Reboxx will have a sprung knuckle
with an optional locking pin. I think the intent was to have the best
of both worlds. But since the Reboxx isn't available I'm guessing it
was harder to accomplish technically than was thought.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not converting to Sergents. But it's simply a
compatibility question. The Reboxx is intended to be compatible with
Kadee, but then I question whether it will be as prototypical looking
as the Sergent. If Sergents came in scale draft gear, I might actually
be inclined to convert.

Tim O'Connor






I can ask the same question. How did they get open? Will one or the other be
open 100% of the time? Maybe not. I have a car in a siding - it just happens to
have a closed coupler. Like the prototype. Call it fate, gremlins, bad tea leaves,
who knows?








Yahoo! Groups Links










Re: Sergent Couplers

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

Larry,

Drawbar was also the term used on the PRR/PC/CR?AMT when I was working
and as far as I know, that is the term that is still used.
Occasionally, you also heard "drawhead," but not often, although the
official rulebook term was coupler.

Tom Olsen
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479


ljack70117@adelphia.net wrote:

On Oct 7, 2005, at 2:42 PM, timboconnor@comcast.net wrote:



But Pat, this begs the question: how did they get closed? They
only close (and lock) if some action is taken. I know this sounds
like a chicken/egg problem (because it is!) but normally the
knuckle remains open until the car is coupled to another car.


Maybe the one down in the track was not the one that was opened when
the other car was cut off. So it remained closed. Maybe the same case
for the car you now want to couple to it. We had a lot of "Bull
Heads" on the prototype RRs. Also maybe the car down in the track was
kicked to fast into the track. When it hit the knuckle closed from
the force for the hit. There is a lot of reasons for a "Bull Head".
When We switched the E/B and W/B leads in Emporia Ks the car that
rolled away from us always had it's knuckle closed. We always pilled
the pin on the car we were hanging onto. Except when that pin would
not pull and we reached over and pulled the other one.
So on your prototype model RR you must choose. Prototype looks and
operation or Kadee drawbars.
BTW on the RRs I worked on there were no couplers. They were drawbars.
Thank you
Larry Jackman
ljack70117@adelphia.net
I wish the buck stopped here as I could use a few





Yahoo! Groups Links










Re: Sergent Couplers

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

Tim,

That only works if you are not going to double head, use as a helper, or
switch using the head end of the locomotive. If not any of those apply,
then that is a good thing to do.

Tom Olsen
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479

timboconnor@comcast.net wrote:

http://www.irritatedvowel.com/Railroad/Details/Couplers/Default.aspx

Pat, from what I understand, the magnet raises the ball and a
pick of some kind moves the knuckle. (Everyone at the club uses
a pick to uncouple Kadees, because the magnets either don't work
or they're not located in the right spot, so I don't see this as much
of a change.)

Once the knuckle is open, it stays open, until another coupler comes
along and closes it, just like the prototype. So except for the diaphragm
issue (which goes away if one only uses Sergents on FREIGHT cars)
I don't see much practical difference compared to Kadees. (And most
layouts don't have hump yards either.)

Sergents are probably what I'll put in the front coupler position of my
brass steam engines, which have no provision for Kadees or any other
working front coupler.

Tim O.





If I understand you correctly, after application of the magnetic wand held above the
coupler or a surplus super-conducting collider magnet held even higher, one still has to
get access to the Sergent coupler's knuckle with a Howard Hughes' finger nail, dentil pick,
or bent paper clip to open it? Is this how they work? Man Oh Man. What a handy workable
design! At least it would eliminate the need for a "scale clock". Thanks for the engineering
analysis!!!!! Pat Wider




Yahoo! Groups Links










Re: Sergent Couplers

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

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.

Tom Olsen
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479

Patrick Wider wrote:

Tom,

If I understand you correctly, after application of the magnetic wand held above the
coupler or a surplus super-conducting collider magnet held even higher, one still has to
get access to the Sergent coupler's knuckle with a Howard Hughes' finger nail, dentil pick,
or bent paper clip to open it? Is this how they work? Man Oh Man. What a handy workable
design! At least it would eliminate the need for a "scale clock". Thanks for the engineering
analysis!!!!!

Pat Wider


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


List,

In mid-June, I purchased a set of assembled Sargent Couplers
(#EC87A-125) along with the Magnetic Uncoupling Wand. The price for the
two items with shipping was $18.00. You get five assembled Type "E"
couplers. They work very well and are smaller in size than the Kadee
#58s. Even though I have not had the opportunity to mount them in a
piece of rolling stock, I was able to test how they work. These
couplers are all-metal and are a dark reddish-brown in color which at a
distance make the coupler look as if it were covered with rust.

In reality, they operate just like the prototype. They have a spring
located in the shank ahead of the mounting hole like the MKD-4 Kadee to
absorb the shock when the coupling is made. After uncoupling, they,
like the prototype do not return to center as the Kadee and other HO
couplers available do. They do not mate with other knuckle couplers due
to the size difference between a proto-87 coupler and the present
couplers available with the exception of the cast dummy couplers. The
manufacturer advises that with a little filling on the dummy coupler
knuckle, they will couple. To couple, they, like their prototype
cousins require the services of a brakeman to align the coupler and if
necessary to open one of the knuckles if both are closed. They will
couple if only one is open and both are properly aligned. The present
information sheet from Sergent advises that the current offerings are to
retrofit existing equipment. It is possible that they may offer draft
gear boxes in the future as they said "Stay Tuned!'

This coupler position and open/closed knuckle situation could be a
problem for anyone who has a fairly large hump, staging or flat switched
yard or any other location where the benchwork edge is more than an arms
length or the track centers are close at a distance with rolling stock
close on adjacent tracks. The distance benchwork edge to track
situation is going to be the determining factor as to whether anyone
will want to use these for operations, or just buy them for display
purposes in shows and contests. You have to be able to place the
magnetic wand over top of the coupler head to raise the steel ball out
of it's slot in the locking block in the coupler shank. This allows the
knuckle to open. When the knuckle closes, the steel ball drops back
into it's place and locks the knuckle closed. The prototype couplers
are designed the same way, except there is no steel ball to raise, just
the locking block which is actuated by the raising (or lowering,
depending on whether they are over or under-slung) of the cutting lever
on the car end. In an earlier discussion regarding the operation of
couplers, it was Larry Jackman who addressed the operation as to how
couplers lock and what has to occur to allow them to open. Many thanks
Larry, for making this clear to many who have not had the on the ground
experience in this area.

The ability to open them when they are mounted on passenger equipment
with diaphragms is a valid point. As Tim O'Connor mentioned, the
possible use of anisotropic magnets mounted on a wand designed for this
use and also mounted on an extended wand for distances would solve the
problems in both the passenger and freight situations. In regard to the
comment that the couplers have to be filed down to fit present draft
gear boxes: there was no mention of this in the paperwork that
accompanied the set that I received.

I'm sure that we all will be interested in what Jared Harper's results
as he begins to test these couplers in actual service. The big bugaboo
will be the ability to reach the cars and accurately get the wand into
position to uncouple the cars, or to be able to align couplers with the
cars buried in a yard more than two feet from the benchwork end. This
will really be a test of skill when humping cars, as you will only have
seconds to lift ball to uncouple the cars as they go over the hump or to
uncouple rear-end helpers on the fly. Most fellows that I know will not
use these couplers as they require the operator to get more involved in
the actual work of making and breaking up of trains and in switching
operations. The magnetic couplers in use today allow us to move along
quickly in an operating session, while use of the Sergent couplers will
bring us back to reality as nothing moves fast in actual railroad
switching and in train make-up and break-up operations. Just like the
Army - "Hurry Up and Wait!

But, for display and contest purposes, they cannot be beat! Hopefully,
Sergent will offer a scale draft gear box to make this superbly scaled
coupler. Do not get me wrong, the Quad 58/78 is a tremendous
improvement over the earlier #5 and I will use them until the Sargent is
proved to be good in operation and the problems are solved. Whether
they are depends on what others find when they use them. Jared, please
keep us up on what you find as it will be greatly appreciated!

Tom Olsen
7 Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@u...









Yahoo! Groups Links









Re: RP Cyc 12

jaley <jaley@...>
 

On Oct 7, 9:56pm, Patrick Wider wrote:
Subject: [STMFC] Re: RP Cyc 12
Take my word for it, mailing out hundreds of 1 pound books at one time
is the worst part
of our endeavor. And near the Christmas holiday? No way. Vol. 13 will
be out as soon as
the Post Office gets back to normal early 2006.
Pat,

Put 'em in a box and ship 'em to Cocoa Beach. I'm sure that if
you come down to Prototype Rails you'll be able to sell quite a few.

Regards,

-Jeff

--
Jeff Aley jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
DPG Chipsets Product Engineering
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


Re: Couplers, Coupler Pockets, and Trucks

Thomas M. Olsen <tmolsen@...>
 

Pat,

While we are petitioning Kadee for unsprung trucks, let us ask them to
modify their truck bolsters so that we can add the brakeshoe clip-ons
that they make for the PS-1 box cars that they make. I was able to get
about 200 of the clip-ons from them several years ago. When they
arrived we divided them up amongst three of us. Unfortunately, they no
longer sell them in bulk, but in packages with enough for two cars.

It would be nice to have them available with the trucks with the
bolsters modified for them from the beginning. At present you have
trucks with brake beams cast on, but no shoes and a big air gap between
the truck sideframe and the wheelsets.

Tom Olsen
& Boundary Road, West Branch
Newark, Delaware, 19711-7479
(302) 738-4292
tmolsen@udel.edu


Patrick Wider wrote:

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "S. Busch" <SCSBusch@W...> wrote:


Please Mr. Sam At Kadee,

Yes, I vote for the 78s in bulk, too, as well as :

A USRA STYLE ANDREWS FREIGHT CAR TRUCK

- sprung, of course. Please, please, please ---

Why sprung? The toy cars aren't heavy enough to compress the springs anyway and they
don't equalize so why bother? They also don't roll as well as they could. I hate HO
"sprung" trucks. And while I'm at it Mr. Kadee, please replace those spider-web springs
with something more substantial. I hate looking through the spring groups and seeing the
daylight (layout lighting?) coming through. It's blinding. Jack Spencer rolls his own springs
out of heavier wire and they look great! Other people use brass loco driver springs. In
days of old when knights were bold and Central Valley made trucks with concentric
wheels, their truck springs looked better as well. Phosphor bronze I think. Why can't Kadee
make a similar improvement to the appearance of their trucks? Continuous improvement -
that keeps companies in business.

Sorry but this a sore spot with me.

Pat Wider







Yahoo! Groups Links










Re: Scale Coupler Boxes: was Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

Patrick Wider <pwider@...>
 

Denny - you missed the point of all of the bandwidth - the material doesn't matter as long
as the couplers look good and operate well. I don't care if the final result is plastic or
depleted uranium. Did anyone say metal is a must? I guess I missed it. Check out San
Juan's plastic O-scale (#5101) A.A.R. "E" couplers - they're gorgeous! And they work like
the real thing. And I say again, they're plastic! (God, I should be in O-scale, maybe it's not
too late).

The fact of the matter is most of the HO plastic rip-offs are junk and don't look like the
real thing - thus the original reason for the "WE ACCUSE" editorial in RP CYC. I suggest you
go back and read it. I do agree that we should change the subject for obvious reasons.

Pat Wider

--- 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".

The scale Reboxx couplers designed by JP Barger have the potential to
revolutionize the coupler market, especially if developed and
engineered as a part of a true *system* with a scale box, and- if
they are ever produced. What are they made of? *Plastic* but of
course a very sophisticated engineering plastic like the better
current plastic couplers of other manufacturers (including Kadee
itself).

With these thoughts in mind, an awful lot of circumstances can exist
where a given "plastic" coupler could beat out a given "metal"
coupler hands down on multiple fronts, so within bounds, materials
should not be a deciding factor.

A lot of the plastic Kadee-type coupler clones *are* cheaply made of
cheap materials with poor engineering (if any), and because of this,
I retire these couplers while still in their bags; or if already
installed, they are replaced. If feasible, their replacement commonly
will be Accumate Protos, or any version of #40-x Kadees. I have not
used #78s as yet, but have several to try. If the thickness of the
box wall forces the coupler shank to be mounted too low, or the box
needs to be cut short- and i cannot do it, I probably (and perhaps
reluctantly) will set them aside.

I have #58s on the ends of several cabooses and observation cars,
but as Ben Hom has accurately pointed out, the scale effect loses out
to the distractingly-obvious gross oversized appearance of the
"standard" boxes from which the couplers project. All of these are
scheduled for Accumate Proto or #78 replacement (minus glad hands).

Prices (MSRP): Pr. Kadee #58
@ $1.43 .
Pr. Kadee #78 (w. boxes)
@ $2.88
Pr. Accumate Proto (w. boxes )
@ $1.49
Pr. Accumate Proto (w. boxes) bulk @12 $1.33, @50 $1.20).

I have not yet addressed the appearance of any of these "scale"
couplers as they appear with a full sized metal gland hand hanging
below, the diameter of which is some huge percentage of the overall
coupler width. One could make a persuasive argument that this
travesty alone might well negate any overall good effect that one
might otherwise be attempting to make.

Proposal:

Rather than waste further bandwidth on this dead end "materials"
issue, I would propose that we instead concentrate the strength and
moral suasion of this list to the eventual promotion of a common
scale draft gear box that can if necessary be readily adapted to the
established base of the current industry-standard boxes . The AP box
is a good place to begin (as has been proposed), not only because of
size and scale appearance, but because it is already adaptable in
some important respects.

The goal should be to radically change conventional thinking from the
endless attempts to adapt differing couplers (scale or not) to the
current industry-standard oversize boxes to instead adapting new
scale boxes that, in turn, can perhaps hold one or more types of
couplers that are *engineered to fit*.

Denny


--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento


Re: Freight car types

SUVCWORR@...
 

You may not be find anything in Google because of what you are asking. The
correct name is AAR Mechanical designation. Try this link. They even have the
changes in meaning and the timeframe the mechanical designation was used.

http://www.nakina.net/aartype.html


Rich Orr


Re: Sergent Couplers

Patrick Wider <pwider@...>
 

Tim, I still don't know the right answer, especially if Kadee continues to sell #78's one
thimble-full at a time. I know their game - they think that's the quickest and most
profitable way to recoup their tooling costs. They sold 5&10's that way for years until the
competition started to make cheap rip-offs. Then they suddenly made bulk packs
available. Sam, correct me if I'm wrong. On the other hand, from a manufacturer's
standpoint, it's much easier to count and dump the things in a bag with little or no
instructions. Anyone want to buy RP CYC's by the 60-book box??? That's the way we get
them. We''ll give you a really special price. Caution, they weight just over 60 pounds.

I'm just trying to learn about all of my current options. You speak of Reboxx like they're
going to be available in my lifetime. I have my doubts. If InterMountain makes them, I'll be
long gone. It's taken them four tries to get an ART steel reefer correct. Ed's about to pull
out his hair and give it up.

Pat Wider

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, timboconnor@c... wrote:

Pat, in that circumstance, you wave your magic wand and open
each knuckle with that same device (which doubles as a pick), as
I said before. Is this practical? Only if the layout is designed so
that the location is accessible. I could ask a similar question about
coupling Kadees on a curve. (If you do switching inside tunnels,
I admit Kadees will usually work better in that case.)

Remember the car was spotted at the siding. When it was spotted
it had to be uncoupled. The uncoupling process opened the knuckle.
It stays open 99% of the time (on our layouts gravity is unable to
close the knuckle.) The other times you wave the wand. This doesn't
seem complicated to me. What am I missing?

I think the only functional difference between the Sergent and the
Reboxx coupler will be that the Reboxx will have a sprung knuckle
with an optional locking pin. I think the intent was to have the best
of both worlds. But since the Reboxx isn't available I'm guessing it
was harder to accomplish technically than was thought.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not converting to Sergents. But it's simply a
compatibility question. The Reboxx is intended to be compatible with
Kadee, but then I question whether it will be as prototypical looking
as the Sergent. If Sergents came in scale draft gear, I might actually
be inclined to convert.

Tim O'Connor




I can ask the same question. How did they get open? Will one or the other be
open 100% of the time? Maybe not. I have a car in a siding - it just happens to
have a closed coupler. Like the prototype. Call it fate, gremlins, bad tea leaves,
who knows?


Re: Sergent Couplers

itc_725 <emfour@...>
 

Yeah, David , uncoupling around that live 600 volt overhead can get
rather pesky at times....

Mike Fortney
Illinois Terminal circa 1953

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, Tangerine Flyer <tangerine_flyer@s...>
As for avoiding the long reach and

snagging the wires on scale telephone poles that may
mean planning ahead for a particular move to remote
locations. It's certainly a problem I can appreciate
as I will have to avoid live overhead! But, at least
"we don't need no stinkin' diaphragms"...

David Jobe
Illinois Traction System


Scale Coupler Boxes: was Couplers, Coupler Pockets, The NMRA, and Scale Size

Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

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".

The scale Reboxx couplers designed by JP Barger have the potential to revolutionize the coupler market, especially if developed and engineered as a part of a true *system* with a scale box, and- if they are ever produced. What are they made of? *Plastic* but of course a very sophisticated engineering plastic like the better current plastic couplers of other manufacturers (including Kadee itself).

With these thoughts in mind, an awful lot of circumstances can exist where a given "plastic" coupler could beat out a given "metal" coupler hands down on multiple fronts, so within bounds, materials should not be a deciding factor.

A lot of the plastic Kadee-type coupler clones *are* cheaply made of cheap materials with poor engineering (if any), and because of this, I retire these couplers while still in their bags; or if already installed, they are replaced. If feasible, their replacement commonly will be Accumate Protos, or any version of #40-x Kadees. I have not used #78s as yet, but have several to try. If the thickness of the box wall forces the coupler shank to be mounted too low, or the box needs to be cut short- and i cannot do it, I probably (and perhaps reluctantly) will set them aside.

I have #58s on the ends of several cabooses and observation cars, but as Ben Hom has accurately pointed out, the scale effect loses out to the distractingly-obvious gross oversized appearance of the "standard" boxes from which the couplers project. All of these are scheduled for Accumate Proto or #78 replacement (minus glad hands).

Prices (MSRP): Pr. Kadee #58 @ $1.43 .
Pr. Kadee #78 (w. boxes) @ $2.88
Pr. Accumate Proto (w. boxes ) @ $1.49
Pr. Accumate Proto (w. boxes) bulk @12 $1.33, @50 $1.20).

I have not yet addressed the appearance of any of these "scale" couplers as they appear with a full sized metal gland hand hanging below, the diameter of which is some huge percentage of the overall coupler width. One could make a persuasive argument that this travesty alone might well negate any overall good effect that one might otherwise be attempting to make.

Proposal:

Rather than waste further bandwidth on this dead end "materials" issue, I would propose that we instead concentrate the strength and moral suasion of this list to the eventual promotion of a common scale draft gear box that can if necessary be readily adapted to the established base of the current industry-standard boxes . The AP box is a good place to begin (as has been proposed), not only because of size and scale appearance, but because it is already adaptable in some important respects.

The goal should be to radically change conventional thinking from the endless attempts to adapt differing couplers (scale or not) to the current industry-standard oversize boxes to instead adapting new scale boxes that, in turn, can perhaps hold one or more types of couplers that are *engineered to fit*.

Denny


--
Denny S. Anspach, MD
Sacramento


Re: RP Cyc 12

Patrick Wider <pwider@...>
 

Wrong!!!!! RP CYC Vol. 13 is virtually finished as I speak (I mean type). We'll probably
bring it out right after the holidays. We do not want to fight the crowd at the Post Office.
Take my word for it, mailing out hundreds of 1 pound books at one time is the worst part
of our endeavor. And near the Christmas holiday? No way. Vol. 13 will be out as soon as
the Post Office gets back to normal early 2006. Come to think of it, the worst part of our
endeavor is actually unloading over a ton of books from the back of a tractor trailer and
pushing them up Ed's steep driveway in the summer heat and humidity in St. Louis. Now
that I think of it, we need to charge more for the darn things. And to you guys who send
us $19.95 well after the cut-off date with back-dated checks just to save 5 bucks, I say
nuts! Go buy Mainline Modeler! (-:}

Thanks for the kind words John!!!!!!

Pat Wider

--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, John Boren <mccjbcmd@m...> wrote:

Pat et al,

Just received your latest issue in the mail, and based on a quick
glance-through it's another winner! I now have no excuse not to superdetail
my track scale operations among other treats you covered in-depth.

My only complaint is I guess I have to wait another 12 months for my next
prototype fix.

John Boren


Re: Couplers

Tim O'Connor
 

I totally agree with you Richard. If you have a layout with track more
than 24" from the aisle then you can't use Sergents. Heck at my club
they even use 48" long tongs to reach out and pick up rolling stock
rather than climb over or under to reach them by hand. Which is one
reason my stuff isn't there anymore...

Having operated shelf, and spaghetti layouts, I must say the giant
layouts may be prettier, but shelf style is far more enjoyable (to me).

Tim O.

While I understand the appeal of the Sergent coupler for many list
subscribers, it lacks one feature that is absolutely essential for many
of us, given the nature of our layouts: it can't be remotely
uncoupled. So all the discussion about how to manipulate the @#$%&*
things is pointless to me; I have to be able to couple and uncouple
cars at a distance without touching them. The only scale-size couplers
that do that reliably are Kadees.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Sergent Couplers

Tim O'Connor
 

Larry, I appreciate that prototype couplers do close from
jostling and vibration etc. But gravity acts on the mass of
the coupler and the friction of scale model knuckle scales
as the inverse square of the size -- in other words the
scale friction is 87 times more effective than it is on the
prototype. This means you have to hit the car pretty darn
hard to jostle the knuckle closed on the other end. The
Sergent knuckles will no doubt sometimes close but I
think "Bull Heads" will be less common in HO scale. And
the frequency may even be equal to the number of times
we now have to deal with missing Kadee springs or
failed McHenry's or Accumates stuck open.

Tim O.


Re: Sergent Couplers

ljack70117@...
 

On Oct 7, 2005, at 4:28 PM, Patrick Wider wrote:

Tim,

I can ask the same question. How did they get open? Will one or the other be open 100% of
the time? Maybe not.

I have a car in a siding - it just happens to have a closed coupler. Like the prototype. Call
it fate, gremlins, bad tea leaves, who knows? I built it that way (so it's an egg). I approach
it with a switcher. The switcher's facing coupler is also closed. Call it bad luck. Someone
accidentally pushed it closed. Sh-t happens. How often? Maybe not very. Who knows?

It's
still a valid question.
Not really

Pat Wider

One more thing: I have never known a switchman/brakeman to walk by a closed knuckle and not open. On the prototype the knuckle on the engine will ALWAYS be OPEN when there is a crew member on the foot board. (woops no foot boards to day) but this list is before 1960. Big grin
Thank you
Larry Jackman
ljack70117@adelphia.net
Shin: A device for finding furniture in the dark.


Couplers

Richard Hendrickson
 

While I understand the appeal of the Sergent coupler for many list subscribers, it lacks one feature that is absolutely essential for many of us, given the nature of our layouts: it can't be remotely uncoupled. So all the discussion about how to manipulate the @#$%&* things is pointless to me; I have to be able to couple and uncouple cars at a distance without touching them. The only scale-size couplers that do that reliably are Kadees.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: interesting COSX tank car in MR

Richard Hendrickson
 

On Oct 7, 2005, at 1:46 PM, Montford Switzer wrote:

Richard:

Please help me and possibly others understand how a single compartment
tank car can be converted to multiple compartments. You refer to a
diaphragm, the wall between the compartments, which I know as a
"bulkhead" with the ends being "heads." Bulkheads could be both single
and double (air space between compartments).

Now, how did they do it? The word diaphragm throws me. Did they
assemble the bulkhead inside the barrel after putting it in through the
dome opening in pieces (doubtful)? Or did they make the conversion by
removing one of the heads (ends of the barrel) and slide the bulkhead
(partition or diaphragm) in the end? I suspect this was the method.
And were rivets were used for both the new bulkheads and the new dome?
A diaphragm was an internal bulkhead, which looked exactly like a tank end because that's what it was. They were fitted in pairs with air space in between (and drain holes at the bottom of the air spaces so that it would be apparent if any of the compartments leaked inside the tank shell). They were riveted in place just like a tank end and, as you infer, the conversion was carried out by removing and replacing one or both tank ends. For a shop equipped to work on tanks, such a conversion was a relatively simple operation.

Richard Hendrickson


Re: Sergent Couplers

ljack70117@...
 

On Oct 7, 2005, at 3:42 PM, Gregg Mahlkov wrote:

Tim and list,

On the prototype, the knuckle will tend to close if the car is moved. The
force of gravity pulls on the pin and the vibration of movement will cause
it to drop, closing the knuckle. The conductor or trainman then has to pull
the cut lever and yank the knuckle open.

Since I model in N scale and use Micro-Trains and Accumate couplers, I don't
know if this would happen to the Sergent coupler or not. ;<D

Gregg Mahlkov
I have NEVER seen one close this way in all my time on the RRs. The lock block is not heavy enough to pull a knuckle closed. The force of gravity can not pull the lock down until the knuckle is fully closed. There is a tail on the knuckle that holds the block up and prevents it falling.
Thank you
Larry Jackman
ljack70117@adelphia.net
You can't have everything. Where would you put it?


Re: Sergent Couplers

Tim O'Connor
 

Pat, in that circumstance, you wave your magic wand and open
each knuckle with that same device (which doubles as a pick), as
I said before. Is this practical? Only if the layout is designed so
that the location is accessible. I could ask a similar question about
coupling Kadees on a curve. (If you do switching inside tunnels,
I admit Kadees will usually work better in that case.)

Remember the car was spotted at the siding. When it was spotted
it had to be uncoupled. The uncoupling process opened the knuckle.
It stays open 99% of the time (on our layouts gravity is unable to
close the knuckle.) The other times you wave the wand. This doesn't
seem complicated to me. What am I missing?

I think the only functional difference between the Sergent and the
Reboxx coupler will be that the Reboxx will have a sprung knuckle
with an optional locking pin. I think the intent was to have the best
of both worlds. But since the Reboxx isn't available I'm guessing it
was harder to accomplish technically than was thought.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not converting to Sergents. But it's simply a
compatibility question. The Reboxx is intended to be compatible with
Kadee, but then I question whether it will be as prototypical looking
as the Sergent. If Sergents came in scale draft gear, I might actually
be inclined to convert.

Tim O'Connor

I can ask the same question. How did they get open? Will one or the other be
open 100% of the time? Maybe not. I have a car in a siding - it just happens to
have a closed coupler. Like the prototype. Call it fate, gremlins, bad tea leaves,
who knows?

134921 - 134940 of 181203