State of the Art switching in N scale?

[amato1969]

The 905s look so much better, but are definitely not plug-and-play like the 1015/1016 on locomotives.  I need to take a second run at installing on some of my GP9s.

  Frank

[randgust]

There are times when I'll decidedly vote with my experimentation and evolution rather than conventional opinion.  But as I've been messing with this since '72, and have hands-and-picker-free operations, my own evolutionary rules.

The problem I have with this is that it's based on two really miserable assumptions about MT couplers that have gained widespread acceptance and are, at least in my opinion, patently unfair.  But, really caused by the product, very much fixable.

1)  False uncoupling on magnets.   True.  But easily solved by taking the between-the-rails magnets and making it JUST long enough to uncouple a car (score with glass cutter and break in vise, grind sharp edges off).   When that are that small, you can position them about anywhere and they become very unobtrusive.   The shorter they are the less they cause false uncoupling.   Those long magnets evolved when slow-speed operations were next to impossible in N, whole different world today.

2)  Trip pin drag.    If they are set up property, the problem is really related to the pre-RDA coupler 'fingers' that cause one to go high and one to go low under load.  If you have either all-RDA or have trimmed the fingers, it all goes away.   Seriously.   It works.   No snags.

3)  Coupler centering.   This is where I really get into trouble here.   Truck mounts are MUCH better on both reliable coupling and uncoupling if you're involving any curves at all where you are working.   Much better at preserving vertical and horizontal alignment of the coupler for operations.   

4)  Non-MT couplers.   They'll work, but no comparison on uncoupling operations, particularly on coupling and banging the car down the track.  Katos in particular take a heavy whack to work.

5)  Appearance.   Geez, use a sharpie or some grimy black paint to get rid of that awful brass.

6)  905's.   Love em, on all my logging operations with small cars and locomotives, loco pilots, etc.

7)   Slinky action.    I may, depending on situation, put the retainer springs on cuts of cars, but the 'bounce apart' on the magnets is fixed with the short magnets.   On longer trains, the caboose gets one to slow it down a bit anyway.

   Locomotive pull-aparts.  My loco consists are pretty fixed, so one end of an MU consist gets either a glued-solid knuckle or a Red Caboose, so there's no way they are pulling apart on a 4-5 unit consist.

I switched for about an hour on Sunday morning, had to graphite up a couple boxes again, but I still don't own a sticker to uncouple.

I've been on some beautiful layouts and have done untold damage to car end details with stickers, including derailing them.  Good for you but never for me, I'm good.

[jpf94]

We had the first operating session on Matt Clare's fictional Rock Island layout yesterday.  5 operators using a wide range of trucks, couplers, and wheelsets.  The best performers during the 5 hour session were the cars with MT trucks and couplers.  The worst for unwanted uncoupling was anything with an Athearn knuckle on it.    The MT trucks did best as well for not derailing, had huge issues with the metal wheelsets derailing all over the layout.  This was the first full session, so some track issues were discovered, but for the most part the MT's were stellar,  Atlas's trucks and knuckles were ok, and everything else was not.   Only further convinced me that my layout will be MT trucks/wheels and couplers only.   The layout is modern fictional and is a very large switching layout, over 50 industries to switch by 3 locals, and only 4 mainline trains on the schedule.  Jobs are 2 yard switchers, 2 full time local switch jobs, and one utility that runs a small switch job and all 4 of the mainline trains from staging to the main yard.   size is 14 x 42.   Next session will post photos.

[jhjonesarch]

One of the early posts on this topic said it pretty well: body mounted couplers, check the trip pin clearance, etc.  A few things to add:  try to standardize your rolling stock:  Use the same couplers on all rolling stock; I like the 1015s.  They are oversized but they are reliable.  If you go with 905s, use only 905s to minimize variations. Standardize on wheels.  I use all Fox Valley, metal, narrow-tread wheels.  Again, it doesn’t matter so much what you use, just be consistent.  Be consistent with your turnout choices and rail/flex track (manufacturer) as well.  Put one friction spring (at least) on one car axle of every car.  Weight your cars to NMRA standards and then add a little more.  Finally, lay your track carefully and do everything you can to minimize abrupt vertical imperfections in your track.  These steps have worked well for me so far on my n-scale shelf switching layout.

[ednadolski]

Looking ahead a bit, I'm wondering how to install them into a Kato diesel... 

With your sensibilities, I'd say that it'll revolve around a screw into the pilot and filling in the area around the draft gear box, as well as adding an air hose. With a working glad hand and angle cock.

Yes, working glad hands are the blocking factor for me at this point

WRT sensibilities, for me this is something of a branching out to learn more about parts of the hobby that I haven't much tried before.  In my new house basement with a house over it, I now have a +20-foot section of wall space (3200' in N scale!) that would be ideal for a switching shelf, and I'm intrigued by the idea of filling it with something that can realistically and reliably switch around cuts of say 6-12 (or more) cars on longer industry sidings. But the coupling has to be reliable, realistic, and not be afflicted with the infamous slinky pogo. (I'm even willing to put drag springs on axles if it would help that, since I don't see a need to pull 60+ cars up long grades with DPUs and on sharp curves .

(The next major stumbling block for me is finding a theme and a prototype, but I digress   And yes, a Protothrottle is high on the list too, but again I digress )

Ed

[peteski]

In my new house basement with a house over it, I now have a +20-foot section of wall space (3200' in N scale!) that would be ideal for a switching shelf, and I'm intrigued by the idea of filling it with something that can realistically and reliably switch around cuts of say 6-12 (or more) cars on longer industry sidings. But the coupling has to be reliable, realistic, and not be afflicted with the infamous slinky pogo. (I'm even willing to put drag springs on axles if it would help that, since I don't see a need to pull 60+ cars up long grades with DPUs and on sharp curves .

Ed, while I'm a big fan of N scale, if your main goal is realistic switching, I recommend going with H0. Or maybe  even larger.  Not only a wider range of models is available, so are the scale-size and realistically-operating couplers.  Plus, the laws of physics alone will give you more realistic operation, especially if you weight the car over the NMRA recommendations.

[jdcolombo]

With your sensibilities, I'd say that it'll revolve around a screw into the pilot and filling in the area around the draft gear box, as well as adding an air hose. With a working glad hand and angle cock.



Yes, working glad hands are the blocking factor for me at this point

WRT sensibilities, for me this is something of a branching out to learn more about parts of the hobby that I haven't much tried before.  In my new house basement with a house over it, I now have a +20-foot section of wall space (3200' in N scale!) that would be ideal for a switching shelf, and I'm intrigued by the idea of filling it with something that can realistically and reliably switch around cuts of say 6-12 (or more) cars on longer industry sidings. But the coupling has to be reliable, realistic, and not be afflicted with the infamous slinky pogo. (I'm even willing to put drag springs on axles if it would help that, since I don't see a need to pull 60+ cars up long grades with DPUs and on sharp curves .

(The next major stumbling block for me is finding a theme and a prototype, but I digress   And yes, a Protothrottle is high on the list too, but again I digress )

Ed

Drag springs on one axle of each car would completely cure any slinky-ness.  I'll do a video tonight or tomorrow using one of my Atlas RS-3's or VO-1000's as a switch engine and show you what is possible in N with some attention to detail.

John C.

[sd45elect2000]

Ed, while I'm a big fan of N scale, if your main goal is realistic switching, I recommend going with H0. Or maybe  even larger.  Not only a wider range of models is available, so are the scale-size and realistically-operating couplers.  Plus, the laws of physics alone will give you more realistic operation, especially if you weight the car over the NMRA recommendations.

Still no working air brakes.

[wazzou]

Until N Scale cars have handbrakes that can be set in order to make them immovable during coupling, there won’t be any perfect solutions.

[randgust]

Back in the 70's out here in the 'sticks' of PA (away from the glaring eyes of PC trainmasters) the local crews let me ride along when switching the yard.

End of the day always involved making up the train for Erie, PA, mostly tank cars of asphalt headed west to PC interchange.   Train was made up by flat switching the yard, but a typical westbound was still around 30 cars then, mostly loads of asphalt and wood chips.   

I never had ANY appreciation of flat-switching without air until then, I was warned to STAY IN THE CAB SEAT at all times.    Holy crap, as we were moving cuts around just using the locomotive independent, the slack run-in on the head end was epic.....BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM and back and forth.   

No working air brakes there, either, not until the train was made up and the air was pumped up.   THEN you had brakes, until then, y'all hang on.  And cars were kicked, too, which was even more fun as it stretched out the other way.....BOOM as they rolled into the standing cuts in the yard, and BAM BAM BAM again as the slack ran out.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Still no working air brakes.

You know, I have a crazy idea for them kicking around the darker recesses of the old brain pan.

But in O scale.

[Rossford Yard]

Well, it may not be perfect, but this crazy guy went and built a large, N scale, switching only layout and I am extremely happy.  Don't mind not having a roundy roundy at all. Running to the end of my branch and back is about as large a run as most layouts have anyway.  Most modern locos creep pretty slow, especially under load.

Here is my low tech car brake, often employed when I build a train on the 2% downhill "mainline" to the branch: a blue push pin. Anyway, there is always some compromise in realism, maybe a bit more in N.  The good news is, I don't notice it.

The biggest problem I have had in N scale switching is a switch lead on a 180 degree turn, as is so common in layouts.  Find a way to minimize the curves, as the loco pushes the first car off the track.  Also helps is you have a 0.5-1% grade to reduce friction when pushing long cuts.  On my last layout, the ladder to the yard was on a 90 degree curve, and worked well, but the main lead was straight.

I had cut off my trip pins on my last roundy roundy with complicated trackage for easier running.  So I use a pick.  I saw an idea for using MT ramps on the main somewhere (maybe this thread?)  Trim back all the ties so you can push them out from under the center of the track or turn them 90 degrees when done switching and they won't uncouple main line trains accidentally.  Genius, I think, although I haven' t tried it.  I never liked installing magnetic ramps, so this might be a work around for handless switching, which admittedly would be better.  I know an HO guy who has installed the electro magnet uncouplers everywhere, and you push the button to activate as a cut goes by.  Works once you get the hang of it and could work in N.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Oh, I forgot to add.

If you REALLY want to go for a realistic experience, don't forget http://traincrew.conrail1285.com/

[Cameron_Talley]

I think the only reason batteries hasn't been done is that no company has the capital to invest the R&D to do it.  My Apple Watch has a battery not much bigger than a postage stamp that lasts for 12 hours.  Now sure, that's not powering a motor, but in N scale it wouldn't need to last 12 hours, either.  I'm 100% confident that if a model railroad company had the money and desire, they could easily design a battery system for N scale that works well.  After all, there are battery operated toys with motors that small already. 

Yes!  I so want workable battery power to make it to N Scale, but I don't see the batteries getting that small any time soon, and carrying the battery around in a follower car is, ... meh.  It would be glorious to never have to rely on track pickup again.

[Chris333]

People are doing HOf with remote control and batteries. HOf is HO scale that runs on Z gauge track so it is pretty small.