N-Possible Coupler Announcement (Nashville 2022)

[samusi01]

How durable will these crossarms be? Lineside poles face hazards from derailments, GHA, and track cleaning by hand. Using brass rod for the pole would avoid any pole snapping, I guess.

Just mount them on magnets and place some small steel object for them to sit on. Tilt 'em over with a dimensional load, no worries, stand them back up...

[robert3985]

How durable will these crossarms be? Lineside poles face hazards from derailments, GHA, and track cleaning by hand. Using brass rod for the pole would avoid any pole snapping, I guess.

I've been using small wooden swab sticks (which are actually smaller than 1/16") and I've never had a problem snapping any of them off from track cleaning.  The crossarms on my first scratchbuilt ones were stripwood attached to the pole with a small brass wire and yellow carpenter's glue, the wire running through both the crossarm and the pole, being cut off so that it protruded a bit from either side representing a big prototype bolt that attaches the crossarm to the pole prototypically.  These were very sturdy, but met their demise when one of my cats got locked in my layout room overnight.  She chewed up the top of every scratchbuilt telegraph pole on my layout!

As far as what you want to use for poles, that will be up to you.  However the crossarms have a nub that gets inserted into a matching hole on the pole for added strength.  The arms themselves, being printed from a "durable" resin, won't snap off, but will likely bend and slowly return to their orientation if bumped.

These will, in any case, be much more durable than either injection molded Atlas-style telegraph poles or white-metal cast crossarms currently on the market and used quite universally grudgingly by a lot of N-scale model railroaders considering how out-of-proportion and unprototypical they appear.

But, this is why I'm doing several test runs...to test their strength as well as how well they retain the 3D model's details, such as square boltheads oriented in several different directions just where the prototype crossarms had them.  I want these details to be big enough to be seen after painting, but not so big as to look oversized...actually they're the correct size on my 3D model, but what will make them visible or not after painting is how thick they are.

I'll start a new thread in Product Discussion category with photos and availability when I'm done with printing and testing.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Jimbo]

I don't think I'm wrong in my assessment of the countrywide number of N scale modelers who will want to modify all of their rolling stock.

@peteski  - I think I’ve posted some skepticism as well, but on different reasons. Your points are very valid.

However, I had a thought today when I asked myself why I’m excited about these couplers.  The fact is, couplers are the last frontier with regards to realism.  We have etched roofwalks, separately applied grab irons, detailed underbodies, prototypically correct headlight positions, etc.  But the couplers we have today have barely evolved since they were introduced 50 years ago.  I model steam, and there is currently NO operating coupler that looks realistic on the pilot of a steam locomotive.  And most new steam releases come with an oversized “operating” coupler (which look WAY worse than the dummy couplers that used to come on models.). I want a better-looking coupler up front, and if it operates well, I’m in.

At SOME point, modelers will start taking the plunge, as was the case with Rapido to knuckle conversion.  Maybe it will take 20 years.  But eventually most N scalers will tire of oversized couplers.

Thank you for your thought-provoking comments!  I sincerely appreciate your insight!

Jim

[peteski]

@peteski
 - I think I’ve posted some skepticism as well, but on different reasons. Your points are very valid.
. . .
Thank you for your thought-provoking comments!  I sincerely appreciate your insight!
Jim

You're welcome Jim. I enjoy presenting a counterpoint or an alternative view. 

[Angus Shops]

They're supported and ready to test-print.  I'll be doing a test-print in grey resin within a week, then a full run when I change resin to "high-clear".  I've been delaying in order to get some etched parts for these, but I've decided to just print the cross-arms with clear insulators, and the customer can provide 1/16" wooden poles and wire supports for them...utilizing Tamiya Clear Green or Clear Blue to tint the clear insulators since prototype photos show several colors of insulators were more than likely to be on the same cross-arms.  I'll be testing them for durability and construction techniques before offering them for sale...maybe another month??...plus product shots taken on my layout.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

Yippie! I’ve been waiting for these for years. I’m in for a bunch - please let us know how how to order when you’re up and ready to go.

[OldEastRR]

Yippie! I’ve been waiting for these for years. I’m in for a bunch - please let us know how how to order when you’re up and ready to go.

Ditto!

[ednadolski]

Anyone have pics of/with the 'scale' coupler box?

Ed

[Jimbo]

Ed:

I thought the “scale” coupler box is the one pictured below, mounted in a MT gauge:

My "ScaleBox" coupler mounts right into a 1055 gauge at the right height (by design). The centerline is NMRA (MTL) spec for my design as well.

[ednadolski]

Thanks @Jimbo !

Is there (or will there be) a 'standalone' scale box?   This looks like it might be integral with the MT-compatible box.

Ed

[Jimbo]

Thanks @Jimbo !

Is there (or will there be) a 'standalone' scale box?   This looks like it might be integral with the MT-compatible box.

Ed

I guess we’ll have to wait and see!

(And I’m eager to see!!)

Jim

[turbowhiz]

The "scalebox". All the parts, and a complete assembly with a 00-90 screw shown.



The airline pictured is subtly changed for production, with some minor improvements. Its the same general size/configuration however. I don't have time to re-shoot quite at the moment, needless to say I'm super busy with getting all the production rolling.

It was designed to be highly universal long before I determined to 3D print production parts. But it turned out be a major catalyst for the strategy change too. The spring splitter is pretty much impossible to injection mold. And now, I can do trick things again like having the yoke pin slot actually open (Shows better when painted).

The "Hat" component that fits on the top of the box assembly. The hat is designed to shim to height, as well as width, of a 1015/1016 type box. This means it fits into MTL/clone equipment with a separate box directly. It also fits newer MTL boxcar underframes without being outwardly visible, and it holds the box square. It also holds it the box square in a 1055 gauge.

[MTL 40ft boxcar, recent production w/updated underframe and body mount 1016's]




In many body mount circumstances you might not want the hat... It might shim the box too low, it might not serve any useful purpose. So you can just use the box without the hat, and it accordingly has a narrower profile. You can also cut the sides off the hat too, if you need a shim but don't want the width.

[Bowser GLA Hopper, no hat installed, top lip of box filed off]



End profiles of both the boxcar and the hopper....




The "Scalebox" is limiting the lateral travel of the coupler on account of its "scale" width. I'm putting "scale" in quotes, since really, all sorts of different widths exist in the prototype. So in some cases its overscale width, and in some cases its pretty much dead on, and other cases its actually narrow. It was designed with injection moulding a single part in mind, and thus, is a general compromise. I expect that I will product more model specific boxes as it makese sense for popular models with seperate boxes that might look better with a different style of box.

The rolling stock pictured here will go around 6" unitrack corners no problem, coupled to an Atlas S2 with my universal retrotfit couplers installed in the stock box or to each other. So needless to say, you don't need massively wide box width in many circumstances. 6" is pretty crazy tight.

All parts pictured are as you get them... No painting/weathering going on here. They really pop, both box and coupler, if you make that extra effort, but it might not be an "every car" thing depending.

[peteski]

Do these couplers center themselves, or they are free to swing and not return to the center. I'm asking because  in the disassembled coupler I don't see any means for the shank to spring back to the center.  Seems the spring is only to allow the coupler to open for coupling/uncoupling  Maybe I'm just not understanding how it works.

[turbowhiz]

Do these couplers center themselves, or they are free to swing and not return to the center. I'm asking because  in the disassembled coupler I don't see any means for the shank to spring back to the center.  Seems the spring is only to allow the coupler to open for coupling/uncoupling  Maybe I'm just not understanding how it works.

They self center. You're probably not picking up on the major principle of the patent N-Possible spring mechanism from the pictures, and that is the spring splitter.

The spring splitter is SUPER thin. But its visible in the pictures. It sits in the middle of the spring, and effectively turns one spring into two separate springs.

There is another trick though, and that is the fact that the spring is retained to the shanks. When you mount the spring, it stays stuck to the shanks. That first of all makes it WAY easier to work with, especially when installing it into existing boxes mounted to the model... You're not fighting trying to keep the spring from getting away from you. But its more important mechanically, as its interacting with the spring splitter as well.

When the coupler is moved to one side or another, one half of the spring is compressed against the splitter while the other half of the spring is being tensioned... That is why the spring needs to be actively held on the shanks beyond just convenient assembly. It also lets the spring be double acting... So the required spring force is super low, enabling you have have very low force automatic coupling with a sub optimal head shape for automatic coupling (because of staying true to a scale design).

Maybe it will be clearer from these pictures of the universal retrofit... Note the little tab at the back of the adapter shim; That is the spring splitter, and the purpose of the adapter shim for box retrofits.





Its super simple, but works so well.

[peteski]

Ah, a brass splitter (not show in the parts breakdown in your previous post). I understand now.  A very simple and clever design. I agree

[turbowhiz]

Ah, a brass splitter (not show in the parts breakdown in your previous post). I understand now.  A very simple and clever design. I agree

The "scalebox" parts don't use the brass splitter; The splitter is formed in the box bottom part. The little "jog" out is where it lives. Its very challenging to form using injection molding however being both very thin and very tall. That was part of the journey of using 3D printing for the whole thing.

When this mechanism makes it to mass produced models, one can use a pin instead of the splitter shim or forming the splitter in the box. Its how the original prototypes worked, and is super simple for mass production and assembly using injection molded box parts. However its rather difficult to retrofit, requiring some precise drilling placement, hence the brass shim part for box retrofits.