Wright writes.....

[AndyID]

G'Day Folks

 

I have to ask, why doesn't your A1's haul a decent train ? have you added lead, are the wheels to smooth, they are (fairly) modern locos' or are most Bachmann loco's poor (I'll admit most of mine aren't very good) I have some old Tri-Ang  A3's and without added weight, haul 8 coaches, I'll have to add some weight and find out what they will pull.

 

Terry (aka manna)

 

Hi Terry,

 

My guess is it's mainly the wheels. Running on nickel-silver rails the hard plated wheels used by Hornby and Bachmann have a lower coefficient of friction than the nickel-silver treads on Romford wheels. Copper treads on copper rails would be even better, but they would probably wear out a bit too quickly.

 

Andy

 

EDIT: Come to think of it, if you have those confounded "traction tyres" you might be able to replace them with copper tyres. You'll need a lathe, or files and a lot of patience. Remove the rubber tyres and any plastic bits from the wheel. Fill the slot with many turns of thin copper wire until it's overfilled. Apply some heat and solder to make the tyre then machine/file it flush with the original wheel tread.

 

It's been a while since I actually did this, but it did work

Edited June 27, 2018 by AndyID

[Tony Wright]

G'Day Folks

 

I have to ask, why doesn't your A1's haul a decent train ? have you added lead, are the wheels to smooth, they are (fairly) modern locos' or are most Bachmann loco's poor (I'll admit most of mine aren't very good) I have some old Tri-Ang  A3's and without added weight, haul 8 coaches, I'll have to add some weight and find out what they will pull.

 

Terry (aka manna)

Good morning Terry,

 

I don't think it's a problem of Bachmann A1s (or any other RTR loco) being unable to haul a 'decent' train, it's how one defines that decent train. 

 

I've said before, nowhere (quite rightly) is it written in the 'instructions' for the use of RTR locos that they can be expected to haul '14-15 kit-built carriages (read that as brass/white metal) or over 50 kit-built wagons (again, some brass/white metal)'. The manufacturers don't need to. The one Bachmann A1 I've still got (packed with extra lead and the superfluous bogie spring removed) will happily haul the Down Flying Scotsman on LB. The 12-car train is made up almost entirely of Bachmann Mk.1/Hornby Mk.1 cars, with just the one kit-built car (the TK with Ladies' Retiring Room). Thus, an RTR loco (with added ballast and modified) will definitely haul a 'decent' train; as long as its light. Show the same loco, say, the summer Saturday 'extra', loaded to 14 kit-built cars and a van and the answer is an emphatic 'You're joking!'. Any of my (very heavy) kit-built metal locos will just stroll away with it. As has been also said many times - horses for courses. 

 

In fairness, visiting RTR locos have tackled some of LB's trains with relative ease. Westerner's (Alan) Castle took the ten-car Queen of Scots without fuss or failure, and only the other day a visiting Hornby A3 easily took that same FS set (with just a bit of slipping). 

 

I taught art, not physics, so things scientific such as coefficients of friction are a mystery to me. I'm of the 'weight and see' school with regard to haulage capacity. I pack as much ballast as I can into the locos I build, so that they'll take the heavy trains with ease. Many of the locos are heavy at source; much of them is white metal (that's one reason why I don't like resin boilers, and replace them with white metal ones where necessary. Dave Ellis' SEF A2 boiler - which he'll supply separately - fits A1s, A2s, A2/2s, A2/3s..........).

 

Most RTR locos, in my experience, being made principally of plastic (body-wise) are too light for my needs, and, in many cases have little space left inside to add extra weight. Thus, they don't pull enough, and, even when they do, they waddle from side to side too much. 

[mark axlecounter]

Lovely stuff, Mark,

 

A great improvement. Well done! 

 

Doesn't the lining look fine? As does the whole saloon. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

Thanks Tony, the lining is very good. I have never used them before but now I will be using them from now on. Thanks again for your advise.

 

Mark

[thegreenhowards]

Good morning Terry,

 

I don't think it's a problem of Bachmann A1s (or any other RTR loco) being unable to haul a 'decent' train, it's how one defines that decent train. 

 

I've said before, nowhere (quite rightly) is it written in the 'instructions' for the use of RTR locos that they can be expected to haul '14-15 kit-built carriages (read that as brass/white metal) or over 50 kit-built wagons (again, some brass/white metal)'. The manufacturers don't need to. The one Bachmann A1 I've still got (packed with extra lead and the superfluous bogie spring removed) will happily haul the Down Flying Scotsman on LB. The 12-car train is made up almost entirely of Bachmann Mk.1/Hornby Mk.1 cars, with just the one kit-built car (the TK with Ladies' Retiring Room). Thus, an RTR loco (with added ballast and modified) will definitely haul a 'decent' train; as long as its light. Show the same loco, say, the summer Saturday 'extra', loaded to 14 kit-built cars and a van and the answer is an emphatic 'You're joking!'. Any of my (very heavy) kit-built metal locos will just stroll away with it. As has been also said many times - horses for courses. 

 

In fairness, visiting RTR locos have tackled some of LB's trains with relative ease. Westerner's (Alan) Castle took the ten-car Queen of Scots without fuss or failure, and only the other day a visiting Hornby A3 easily took that same FS set (with just a bit of slipping). 

 

I taught art, not physics, so things scientific such as coefficients of friction are a mystery to me. I'm of the 'weight and see' school with regard to haulage capacity. I pack as much ballast as I can into the locos I build, so that they'll take the heavy trains with ease. Many of the locos are heavy at source; much of them is white metal (that's one reason why I don't like resin boilers, and replace them with white metal ones where necessary. Dave Ellis' SEF A2 boiler - which he'll supply separately - fits A1s, A2s, A2/2s, A2/3s..........).

 

Most RTR locos, in my experience, being made principally of plastic (body-wise) are too light for my needs, and, in many cases have little space left inside to add extra weight. Thus, they don't pull enough, and, even when they do, they waddle from side to side too much.

 

I agree Tony, it’s the weight that does it. My standard RTR Pacifics will haul 10-15 RTR coaches but rather less kit built as you said. However put a white metal body on a RTR mechanism and it will haul as much as a DJH Pacific. My SEF A3 which I acquired in bits with a horrible tender drive mechanism now has a Hornby A3 chassis and will haul anything I throw at it - I’ve had it running on 25 RTR coaches as a bit of fun...anymore and the coaches fell off on the corners!

 

Andy

[Lecorbusier]

 

I've said before, nowhere (quite rightly) is it written in the 'instructions' for the use of RTR locos that they can be expected to haul '14-15 kit-built carriages (read that as brass/white metal) or over 50 kit-built wagons (again, some brass/white metal)'. The manufacturers don't need to. The one Bachmann A1 I've still got (packed with extra lead and the superfluous bogie spring removed) will happily haul the Down Flying Scotsman on LB. The 12-car train is made up almost entirely of Bachmann Mk.1/Hornby Mk.1 cars, with just the one kit-built car (the TK with Ladies' Retiring Room). Thus, an RTR loco (with added ballast and modified) will definitely haul a 'decent' train; as long as its light. Show the same loco, say, the summer Saturday 'extra', loaded to 14 kit-built cars and a van and the answer is an emphatic 'You're joking!'. Any of my (very heavy) kit-built metal locos will just stroll away with it. As has been also said many times - horses for courses. 

 

In fairness, visiting RTR locos have tackled some of LB's trains with relative ease. Westerner's (Alan) Castle took the ten-car Queen of Scots without fuss or failure, and only the other day a visiting Hornby A3 easily took that same FS set (with just a bit of slipping). 

 

I taught art, not physics, so things scientific such as coefficients of friction are a mystery to me. I'm of the 'weight and see' school with regard to haulage capacity. I pack as much ballast as I can into the locos I build, so that they'll take the heavy trains with ease. Many of the locos are heavy at source; much of them is white metal (that's one reason why I don't like resin boilers, and replace them with white metal ones where necessary. Dave Ellis' SEF A2 boiler - which he'll supply separately - fits A1s, A2s, A2/2s, A2/3s..........).

 

Most RTR locos, in my experience, being made principally of plastic (body-wise) are too light for my needs, and, in many cases have little space left inside to add extra weight. Thus, they don't pull enough, and, even when they do, they waddle from side to side too much. 

From this, can I take it that the problem lies with weight and slippage rather than motor power?

 

edit ...Just too late with the question as I see it has already been answered

Edited June 27, 2018 by Lecorbusier

[manna]

G'Day Folks

 

Thank you Tony, I'll admit I forgot you used kit built coaches (brass+whitemetal) mine are mainly kit built but Ian Kirk's, some with white metal bogies so would be a bit lighter. I know my two Bec J52's will tow almost anything you hang on the back.

 

Terry (aka manna)

[APOLLO]

Locomotive weight, motor size (& power consumption), drive train, number of driven wheels are the main factors in haulage.

 

My main experience is with American O gauge. I have standard Rivarossi steam locos (0-6-0 & 0-8-0) with a small 1" dia motor, that have not much power even when weighted to just below stall. I have no other makes of steam loco for comparison though.

 

My new(ish) Atlas and Weaver twin motor diesels will pull your arm out of it's socket (and draw between 2 & 4 Amps doing it !!). Stick two of these on a long 20 odd car train and you have to watch the ammeter - just like on a real locomotive !!

 

On my OO layout, as others have often stated, it is again the diesels that out perform steam locos due to the conditions outlined above. I can though well imagine that Tony's (and others) metal kit built & weighted steam locos with decent size motors and good drive trains will out perform most, if not all RTR steam locos.

 

Brit15

[sandra]

Tony,

 

I was lucky enough to run some of my own locomotives on Roy Jackson’s Retford last weekend. One of my DJH S15s managed, without difficulty, to pull one of Roy’s heaviest trains consisting of 15 bogies. This was not due to any great merit on my part but due to the weight of the white metal body. The locomotive was a standard DJH product which I had built with Romford driving wheels and a Mashima motor. The Hornby S15 is far superior in appearance but if haulage capacity in a steam locomotive is required I do not believe you can beat a kit-built locomotive made of white metal. The S15 in question normally hauls a Salisbury-Basingstoke stopper of 5 coaches so a Hornby S15 would be more than adequate but apart from its haulage capacity I like the locomotive because I built it and feel proud of it.

 

I also tried the new Kernow Bullied diesel on the same train and it had no problem with the 15 heavy coaches but certainly I cannot think of many (any) RTR steam locomotives which could pull this train.

 

Sandra

[Clive Mortimore]

All this talk about RTR steam locos not being able to pull anything, perhaps the manufactures should start to look at what Jim from the Witham  club (Jimwal) does with his kit locos. He fills in between the frames with lead. I am sure he can describe how he does it if you were to ask him.

 

Change of subject, tension lock couplings. Now Tony and others despair at me using them. Well last night I realised why I do. As a diesel modeller if you don't have a tension lock coupling in the way then you have to add the various pipes etc that dangle off the buffer beam. I have a small depot layout, Pig Lane (Western Region) which has some dedicated blue period diesels, and the layout is due to go to a show. I have decided that they would not have tension locks but all the unnecessary gubbins instead. None of the holes in the buffer beams are the right size for the pipes, and these pipes like to go ping just looking at them. I spent ages on my hands and knees trying to find them. I think for my main layout tension locks rule.  

Edited June 27, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[gr.king]

I know that some feel strongly that tension locks are an eyesore, but the newer, smaller ones with short hooks and mounted in such a way that they only just stick out far enough from the end of each vehicle are less obtrusive. I don't particularly want one sticking out from the front of every loco or from the rear of a brake van that only ever works one way round, but within a train they WORK, they are inexpensive, they are robust, they are not critically affected by minor fitting height errors or mal-adjustments, and they totally prevent buffer lock when propelling.

[TrevorP1]

 None of the holes in the buffer beams are the right size for the pipes, and these pipes like to go ping just looking at them. I spent ages on my hands and knees trying to find them. I think for my main layout tension locks rule.  

 

 

I have found that copper wire of various sizes, once painted, looks effective and is much stronger. 

[Mallard60022]

Tony,

 

I was lucky enough to run some of my own locomotives on Roy Jackson’s Retford last weekend. One of my DJH S15s managed, without difficulty, to pull one of Roy’s heaviest trains consisting of 15 bogies. This was not due to any great merit on my part but due to the weight of the white metal body. The locomotive was a standard DJH product which I had built with Romford driving wheels and a Mashima motor. The Hornby S15 is far superior in appearance but if haulage capacity in a steam locomotive is required I do not believe you can beat a kit-built locomotive made of white metal. The S15 in question normally hauls a Salisbury-Basingstoke stopper of 5 coaches so a Hornby S15 would be more than adequate but apart from its haulage capacity I like the locomotive because I built it and feel proud of it.

 

I also tried the new Kernow Bullied diesel on the same train and it had no problem with the 15 heavy coaches but certainly I cannot think of many (any) RTR steam locomotives which could pull this train.

 

Sandra

Another person I wish I had identified at the Jacson Ranch on Saturday; sorry to have missed you. I'd have liked to have seen the Bulleid Diesel.

My RTR S15s are lovely models but can not manage more than 32/3 RTR Vans on a flat roundy roundy (min curve 36") and yes, they look absolutely at home on 3 coach sets. I've yet to try additional weight in any of them. I have a PDK version as well but I have not added weight to that; it has a resin boiler (nicely built by the late Geoff Brewin).

Phil.

Edited June 27, 2018 by Mallard60022

[Atso]

Good evening Tony,

 

Now that the last piece of rail has been soldered, I thought I'd share my effort at a scissor crossing incorporating two double slips that I showed you a couple of weeks ago.

 

 

I reworked the slips to make it easier to move the tie bars. In the end I found that I could make the inner blades float by only attaching them to the tie bar but making sure that they were well supported. This seems to have worked well with both wagons and a stripped down Dapol B1 chassis passing through the formation without catching on anything. I've still got to work out exactly where I'm cutting through the rails to isolate it!

 

 

Sorry, I couldn't resisted posting another photograph of the track with my recently completed V1 posed on it!

Edited June 27, 2018 by Atso

[AndyID]

 

I taught art, not physics, so things scientific such as coefficients of friction are a mystery to me. I'm of the 'weight and see' school with regard to haulage capacity.

 

Hi Tony,

 

It's just a measure of how much adhesion there is between two surfaces in contact, and it can be used in relative terms.

 

Two locomotives, identical except for the metal used for the driving wheel tyres. First locomotive has a coeff. value of say 0.6 on NS rail, second one has a coeff. value of 0.3, the first one will pull twice as much as the second before it starts slipping.

 

Conversely you'd have to make the second locomotive twice as heavy as the first one to get equal amounts of traction from both locomotives.

 

Andy

[Chamby]

I know that some feel strongly that tension locks are an eyesore, but the newer, smaller ones with short hooks and mounted in such a way that they only just stick out far enough from the end of each vehicle are less obtrusive. I don't particularly want one sticking out from the front of every loco or from the rear of a brake van that only ever works one way round, but within a train they WORK, they are inexpensive, they are robust, they are not critically affected by minor fitting height errors or mal-adjustments, and they totally prevent buffer lock when propelling.

I Used to feel the same about tension locks but am now a convert to Kadee’s. I find them easier to uncouple, more robust (less prone to breakage or bits falling off) and they look so much better than tension locks, especially on modern stock.

 

I prefer the appearance of 3-link couplings on older freight stock, but they are a right fiddle to use.

[Bucoops]

I Used to feel the same about tension locks but am now a convert to Kadee’s. I find them easier to uncouple, more robust (less prone to breakage or bits falling off) and they look so much better than tension locks, especially on modern stock.

 

I prefer the appearance of 3-link couplings on older freight stock, but they are a right fiddle to use.

 

I've pretty much decided on Kadee couplings. Fortunately available in NEM pocket fitting as well as plenty of others.

[AndyID]

I Used to feel the same about tension locks but am now a convert to Kadee’s. I find them easier to uncouple, more robust (less prone to breakage or bits falling off) and they look so much better than tension locks, especially on modern stock.

 

 

And the delayed coupling feature lets you park stock anywhere in a siding without manual intervention

[APOLLO]

Kadees are wonderful couplings, I've never had any problems with them, and modeling USA railroads they are prototype. I've had some problems with Weaver plastic knuckle couplers in that one or two have broken under the strain of a very heavy train going up hill or a starting "snatch" . They are easily replaced with metal Kadees.

 

For information USA O stock is not usually fitted with coupler pockets, just two mounting holes on the loco / car body. O scale couplers (I use 805 metal ones) come with there own metal pocket with mounting lugs ready to fit, though sometimes height is a problem especially with some makes of sprung bogies that ride high. Easily solved (usually) with a bit of packing under the couplers or adjusting car ride height.

 

Like Clive I leave my OO tension locks "as is" - though sometimes removing (or not fitting) loco front ones.

 

Brit15

[robertcwp]

Tony,

 

I was lucky enough to run some of my own locomotives on Roy Jackson’s Retford last weekend. One of my DJH S15s managed, without difficulty, to pull one of Roy’s heaviest trains consisting of 15 bogies. This was not due to any great merit on my part but due to the weight of the white metal body. The locomotive was a standard DJH product which I had built with Romford driving wheels and a Mashima motor. The Hornby S15 is far superior in appearance but if haulage capacity in a steam locomotive is required I do not believe you can beat a kit-built locomotive made of white metal. The S15 in question normally hauls a Salisbury-Basingstoke stopper of 5 coaches so a Hornby S15 would be more than adequate but apart from its haulage capacity I like the locomotive because I built it and feel proud of it.

 

I also tried the new Kernow Bullied diesel on the same train and it had no problem with the 15 heavy coaches but certainly I cannot think of many (any) RTR steam locomotives which could pull this train.

 

Sandra

I missed that. Must have been late in the day after I headed off home.

 

Modern RTR diesels are generally not short of pulling power. They tend to be much better than RTR steam because of 12-wheel drive and lots of weight.

[Manxcat]

I am always heartened by the positivity of the posts on these pages and by the advice to have a go at something new because that is the only way to discover your abilities and hone them.

 

The recent discussion on the hauling power of kit built locos sparked a memory in me and I thought I might share the story for those who may be interested, 

 

I started modelling in my early teens, which was around 1970, and always bought the Railway Modeller magazine. I had quickly discovered the merits of working with plasticard and felt that, over the years, my skills in its use were getting better. In those days, under the editorship of Cyril Freezer if I remember correctly, almost every edition of RM had an article with a GWR layout in it. In my case this resulted in me becoming that most unusual of people - a Scottish modeller of the GWR. 

 

Every issue also had the scale drawings for a locomotive. I had never attempted to construct a white metal or brass loco kit and so when I decided I would like a loco which was not available ready to run I resolved to try to make it in plasticard. I wanted one which would however fit a proprietary 0-6-0 chassis with either one or two bogies which I could fit. I knew even then that a heavy chassis would be required for hauling power because the body was going to be quite featherlight. I chose the loco concerned from a copy of RM with the relevant plan and bought the extras such as the chimney, dome, buffers, handrail knobs and wire, etc..

 

And then I made it, out of plasticard and balsa wood. I fitted it to the chassis, primed and painted it and added transfers and it ran as sweet as a nut. I used it for many years until a bigger boy spoke to me behind the university bike shed and asked if I'd like to try a bit of BR Blue. 

 

I knew I had some photos of that GWR loco somewhere and today I found them. I apologise straight away for the bad quality. They are three slides (remember those) which were not the best quality in the first place and digitising them has not made them any better. To my dismay I have no shot of the completed model but the three attached let you see how it progressed to the stage where it was always complete. The loco is number 3901 as can just be seen from the cab side number plate in the third image. On comparing it to a picture of the prototype I think it was a fair representation of the real thing. I even put GWR headlamps on it Tony!

 

I hope it shows how, if you try, you may just be surprised at what you can do. I'd love to know what Tony and others think of it. Thanks.

 

Archie

 

 

[Tony Wright]

The debate about couplings continues..........................

 

I'd better be careful, since some made-in-jest remarks of mine about tension-locks when I judged at a show recently apparently caused 'offence'. 'And we're not here to offend' I was told. I took solace in that most of those attending thought it was just a giggle, but there you go...............

 

Speaking specifically about 4mm, there's no doubt that a three-links or screw shackles are by far the most realistic. However, they are a fiddle, and some of the screw shackles I've used just fall apart - hopelessly. When WMRC ran Stoke Summit and Charwelton, they were just about banned because if they separated, what a fiddle to re-couple. Punters don't appreciate delays like that! 

 

I'm not denying that tension-locks and Kaydees work very well, but, apart from at the back of a corridor tender of a Gresley A1, A3 or A4 (or the W1 for a time) with regard to the latter, no standard gauge British steam loco used a buck-eye (am I right?). That said, they look fine underneath the gangways of Gresley stock, Thompson stock, Bulleid stock, BR Mk.1s and Pullmans. 

 

Rather than 'offend' anyone else, may I please present some pictures showing a variety of couplings on 4mm locos and stock? I'll let the viewer decide what he/she thinks of them. The only thing I'd qualify is that the last one (Sprat & Winkle) is the one I use (and a variation on it). For tension-locks, the wire between the buffers just needs bending down. Another advantage of the S&W system (and I mustn't influence anyone here) is that a 'proper' coupling can also be fitted, with no interference.

 

My point of view is that of a photographer, and which looks the most 'realistic'. I'll leave it up to you............

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any thoughts, please?

Edited June 27, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Barry O]

any thoughts

 

try "dg"s.... once set up work well, can be darkened and don't need to do damage to the locos and stock in fitting them. 

 

 

locos are easy too

 

coaches have the couplings fitted to their bogies

 

 

Baz

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

Those who like the action of tension loco couplings could always make their own out of thin, chemically blackened wire.

 

All the advantages but with much improved appearance.

 

I have used a home made fine wire "Spratt & Winkle" type with great success for over 10 years. When used with electromagnets to avoid unwanted uncoupling, they give me as good a "hands off" operation as I could ever want.

[Clive Mortimore]

Oh dear I seem to opened the coupling debate door again. Tension locks work for me but look really 'orrid. Chain link 3 link look the best and operate the most realistically, a geezer with a pole with a hook on the end is prototypical.

 

My post was about the very poor fit of the fiddly, easy to lose when they go ping, pipes etc that manufacturers give us in a little plastic bag which is always missing from the second hand locos which do not have the bits fitted. The best loco so far has been the Bachmann NBL Warship (class 43) I have not attempted fitting the lifting eyes yet and the foot steps need fitting but there was only two not four in the packet, otherwise the pipes and coupling (the best of the screw coupling) just slotted into place. The Heljan Western, Hymek and Brush 4 all needed their holes opening, all have one broken and one missing pipe. The Hornby Class 50 wasn't too bad but again I managed to brake a pipe. The Dapol NBL Type 2 (class 22) and the Western have the worst looking screw couplings, a flimsy etch, and pipes that don't fit and want to brake when you look at them, hopeless.  

 

I have a Limby Press Steel single car which I am going fit some old Craftsman DMU jumper cables to, some old fashioned D&E detailing.

 

I like Trevor's idea of using wire for the pipe work, but for the moment I am soldiering on with what I have been given.

[AndyID]

I missed that. Must have been late in the day after I headed off home.

 

Modern RTR diesels are generally not short of pulling power. They tend to be much better than RTR steam because of 12-wheel drive and lots of weight.

 

They are great. Putting all the weight on driven wheels is the way to go, although the number of wheels doesn't have much to do with it. Adding wheels doesn't help. It just spreads the load over a greater area. That's important for a full size locomotive but not usually important for a model.