Future home of the Northern Pacific and Black Hills Ry.

badlandnp Mar 17, 2013

  1. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    They both look awful purdy to me!
     
    BarstowRick and badlandnp like this.
  2. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    They are! Even that shiny Silver Bullet! It is part of the fun. Earlier, I backed my B&O Yellowstone down off the No[Lix and through Rattlesnake Canyon, which went well until the tank cars get into the yard. It seems that the backup pressure of the LOONG train kicks the rear coupler on the IM tanks 'up' which then helps the flanges to pick the points. I had to do this a couple of times to watch. Verrry interresting!


    PIC_0667.JPG PIC_0668.JPG

    This also revealed a set of pizza cutters to be changed out, I missed this one,
    PIC_0669.JPG PIC_0670.JPG PIC_0671.JPG
     
  3. DeaconKC

    DeaconKC TrainBoard Member

    232
    476
    8
    Very nicely done. Is that a Model Power or Kato 2-8-2?
     
    BarstowRick, badlandnp and BNSF FAN like this.
  4. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    I'm torn between body- and truck-mounted couplers (most of mine are truck-mounted, and I'm in no mood to change them all out.)

    The major failing of truck-mounted couplers is when backing up, when the mated coupler can apply sideways torque to the pushed truck, which with a very short wheelbase (and worse with an extended shank coupler or coupler housing), can cause the wheel flanges to ride up over the rail as the truck reacts to the torque.

    Are you sure the downward pressure on the coupler caused the wheel to climb, or was it the tapered flange climbing the rail due to the torque induced by the pushed-upon coupler, causing the coupled end to dip? Chicken or egg?

    If you consider just two coupled trucks (not on railcars), and push on the rear one, the coupling between them will want to buckle sideways, torqueing the truck(s) sideways. The angled flange of the far end of the far wheelset then wants to climb the rail, thus tilting the entire truck upwards to continue the climb over the rail. But perhaps the rear axle can't completely climb the rail until it hits a rail joint, or switch point, to give it that 'step' to finish climbing the rail.

    Besides switching to body-mount couplers (often not very simple, especially on tank cars), making sure the railcars are properly weighted (the weight helps prevent the wheelset/truck from climbing over the rail) can help. Of course if every car has more weight, then the force required to push them is increased too, so it can be a bit of a conflict as to whether it will help or not. Operationally, having the lightest (shortest) cars on the tail end of a train when backing up helps, but that may not jive with layout operations and destinations for certain cars.

    So far, the only sure-fire solution to backing long strings of railcars on level grade or uphill is to body-mount the couplers. 'Ugh' for those of us with lots of railcars to convert...
     
  5. sidney

    sidney TrainBoard Member

    656
    655
    17
    awwwwwrg train wreck derailed where is the crane at . we need the crane crew ...:D
    perhalps more weight in those tankers might help a bit...
     
  6. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    Thanks for the input. The IM tankers outweigh the MT by a bit. These are the only cars that give me the backup derail issue, well one old, old Model Power stock car does too. Different story there. I do have a long term plan to body mount most, with Z scale couplers. But that is a ways down the road.

    The 2511 is a Model Power Mike, and is my second sound conversion, loksound. It is a reliable and trouble free unit, I am most happy with it!
     
  7. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    Speaking of derailing, I went out this morning to run a few trains, and it caused me to start perusing a few redesign elements. The upper S-curve has been an issue with all of my passenger trains, but mostly with the Empire Builder. Either I need to stretch the straightaway between the curves or redo that corner with a different radii couple of curves. It is a leftover from when the layout was a small island layout.

    There are also a couple of other issues that I need to address, such as the hidden track in the back of the yard which likes to pop up off the roadbed, and a couple of other smallish issues in a few areas.

    The 're-design the layout bug' is nibbling at me brain! Aaaargh!

    Anyway, here's a video of the derailment,


    And a fun one of the Saturday Morning Daylight,
     
  8. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    S-curves can look so good, but be so troublesome. Like some other things in life!
     
  9. mtntrainman

    mtntrainman TrainBoard Supporter

    9,154
    6,867
    137
    Run Diesels with freight cars....problem solved !:p

    *duck and runs for cover* :LOL::ROFLMAO::whistle:
    .
     
  10. gjslsffan

    gjslsffan Staff Member

    2,367
    4,098
    62
    Yikes!!
     
    DeaconKC, BNSF FAN and badlandnp like this.
  11. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    Now George!! That is just a silly thing to say!! Diseasels!! Humph!! I may just have to make a trip to whatever southern tier place you are at and bring some steam therapy to T.H.E.R.R.!!! Won't that just burst yer bubble!!!!
     
  12. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    That S curve is fairly easy to 'smooth' out, but that will cost me some spur track at the refinery. Hmmm. Pondering that and a few other elements in this itch I have going on......
     
  13. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    Thus is the never-ending conflict in model railroading.
     
  14. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    Yup! And the more I ponder, the worse it gets....
     
    BarstowRick, BNSF FAN and DeaconKC like this.
  15. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    ....I may end up re arranging a bunch of stuff so as to end up with a better, more accessible track arrangement. Tearing out the blobs, more of an around the walls concept, saving scenery, switches and etc.....

    Dangerous thinking going on here!
     
  16. BoxcabE50

    BoxcabE50 HOn30 & N Scales Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    65,397
    15,271
    653
    After watching your "S" curve derailment video, I can see that something causes the truck to climb and step over the outside rail. Have you checked for such as gauge being tight in that specific spot?
     
    badlandnp and Allen H like this.
  17. badlandnp

    badlandnp TrainBoard Member

    3,636
    9,943
    78
    Gauge is good on track and truck. It has to do with the body mount coupler on the loco and the spacing of the couple pivot on that set of Kato cars. Easy fix there, just reducing the curvature of the 'S' a bit. But, there's a few other things I would like to change here n there, so,,,
     
    DeaconKC and BoxcabE50 like this.

Share This Page