53' container Chassis ?

[JaxTerminal]

The JTC 53' container Chassis is nearing completion of drawings, and we'd like some input from modelers.

We have preliminarily designed the 53' Chassis to accept the 'IBC PINS' of several manufacturers, and it will have metal plates to fit the JTC Standard, so that containers with magnets (JTC & Retrofitted) will stay secure on the chassis.

The input we are asking for now is in regards to the Chassis 'wings' we have added to accept the container 'IBC PINS'. This is not prototypical for this chassis, (However there are chassis similar to this used to haul two 20' EMPTY containers, and also Multi length Chassis that have this look).

[ Guests cannot view attachments ] So the POLL is asking, which would you prefer to purchase - Which N scale version would you prefer - WITH or WithOUT the Winglets?

[JaxTerminal]

The JTC 53' container Chassis is nearing completion of drawings, and we'd like some input from modelers.

We have preliminarily designed the 53' Chassis to accept the 'IBC PINS' of several manufacturers, and it will have metal plates to fit the JTC Standard, so that containers with magnets (JTC & Retrofitted) will stay secure on the chassis.

The input we are asking for now is in regards to the Chassis 'wings' we have added to accept the container 'IBC PINS'. This is not prototypical for this chassis, (However, there are chassis similar to this used to haul two 20' EMPTY containers, and also Multi length Chassis that have this same look).

So the POLL is asking, which would you prefer to purchase - Which N scale version would you prefer - WITH or WithOUT the Winglets?

Thanks,
JTC-Steve

[cfritschle]

Steve,

I will go first.   

With the magnets and the container's tunnel fitting over the gooseneck, I am thinking the wings would not be necessary.  However, if it is determined they are wanted, perhaps they could be molded as a end-user added part.

[jagged ben]

Let me see if I got this straight.  On the real ones, there are some kind of blocks at the back corners that hold a container in place.  But on the models, the pins are at the 40ft standard IBC positions.  So how to deal. 

(Why not pick a multi-length prototype?)

I'm voting for no wings, but I think Carter's idea is a good one.

Also hoping for some red 48ft chassis to help get some of my JB Hunt container fleet onto some hot 90s Santa Fe pig trains!

[Scottl]

If the wings were integrated, that would serve the most uses.  People who wanted to could remove them.

[tehachapifan]

This is a toughie! I can definitely see it both ways. Good point about the tunnel at the front helping to keep the container aligned. That could eliminate the front wings anyway (provided there is not too much play).

[cfritschle]

Steve,

If the primary purpose for adding the "wing" is to "engage" the pins to keep the container from slipping off of the chassis, perhaps molding four small L shaped brackets at each end/corner of the chassis would accomplish the same thing, and could easily be removed by the modeler if they did not want them. 

The chassis used at ship terminals have large and multiple brackets to keep the containers from sliding off the chassis (in order to avoid installing the IBC connectors), but the N scale chassis would only require very small brackets, that could be filed off if not desired, and the "damaged" area could then be weathered.

[JaxTerminal]

The JTC container Chassis;  The Chassis (53', 48' and 45') have a Goose-neck tunnel feature, along with three metal plates in the frame - (for attraction of the container magnets), that can secure the container to the chassis. If made without the 'wing' brackets, the chassis will look correct with out a load, or stacked in a chassis rack, and still function. This may mean that other brands(of containers), other than JTC, may need to have retrofits kits, or magnets installed in their bottom to help secure them to the chassis while riding on a piggy-back train at Ntrak, as an example. I would ask everyone to consider this aspect, looking at our Long Term modeling use. - JTC-Steve
 

[tehachapifan]

I missed that initially. Yeah, with the magnets, I'm thinking the wings are not necessary now. Sure, staying perfectly aligned might not be as definite as it might with the wings, but it seems like the container should be pretty secure.

[cfritschle]

The JTC container Chassis;  The Chassis (53', 48' and 45') have a Goose-neck tunnel feature, along with three metal plates in the frame - (for attraction of the container magnets), that can secure the container to the chassis. If made without the 'wing' brackets, the chassis will look correct with out a load, or stacked in a chassis rack, and still function. This may mean that other brands(of containers), other than JTC, may need to have retrofits kits, or magnets installed in their bottom to help secure them to the chassis while riding on a piggy-back train at Ntrak, as an example. I would ask everyone to consider this aspect, looking at our Long Term modeling use. - JTC-Steve
 

Steve,

Would it be possible to mold "dimples" in the four corners of the chassis where the IBC pins would be on the prototype chassis for the 45', 48' and 53' chassis?  That way the modeler could drill out small holes (0.015 inches?) and insert styrene rod pins.  For the 45' 48' and 53' containers that can take IBC pins on the end corners, once the holes are drilled in the chassis, one could drill from the bottom side of the chassis into the corners of the container to allow the styrene rod "lock" the container onto the chassis.  In looking at the various photos I have of container chassis, the pins would generally be prototypical.