Hello forum members, I have a question about shunting wagons and passenger coaches. Please understand I'm an American, and interested in building a British type shunting layout. Looking at pictures (I don't have any British equipment at this time, I hope to purchase some soon) I see many British wagons come with 4 wheels and rapido couplers which are body mounted. I also see that 8 wheel wagons and coaches have bogie mounted couplers. And from what I can see, all the 8 and 12 wheel diesels also have bogie mounted couplers? How reliable is shunting (especially in reverse) with a mixture of couplers which are body mounted and bogie mounted?  For instance if the diesel (or tender on large steam engine) has bogie mounted couplers and the 4 wheel wagons have body mounted couplers, would that cause problems and derailments?

I ask this question because here in North America most locomotives in N scale nowadays have body mounted couplers (often knuckle), while most modern freight cars still have truck (bogie) mounted couplers. This can cause derailments when running in reverse. Some modelers go to the added trouble of installing body mounted couplers on all their freight and passenger cars, to increase reliability.

Are there similar problems with British type trains in N scale? How forgiving are the trains and rapido couplers to this?

Howard

I use a mixture of the stock types you mention on Kato Unitrack and derailment is very rare. I've just done a test run a steam train (2-8-0 WD Austerity) and a large diesel (Class 47) in reverse with a rake of 6 BR mk1 carriages for 10 minutes with no derailment issues. I guess it's more to do with how well your track is laid and whether you have any short turnouts/sets of points! My track is unsecured and laid flat on a desk top.


With regards to your shunting layout - My layout was built for hands free shunting using Dapol easi-shunts on rolling stock with NEM pockets, it is easy and hands free, although there are other solutions (but I disregarded these due to effort required). I am currently gearing up to replace the remaining Rapido coupler pocket stock with NEM pockets, retaining the Rapidos for the couplings in the middle of the rake (I'm planning a guide on this conversion too).

I have a few videos about what I've done so far

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2mhUnjnLHL2lp0yCMJ5Wtg

Hope it helps and as always, any questions, just fire away.

Reliability or otherwise of shunting has very little to do with the type of coupling or how they are mounted.

The state of the track and the speed will have a much greater impact...

Hi Howard,

Just a couple of things to add;

Don't expect EZ-Shunts to perform as well in terms of "delayed" action (spotting cars, fly shunting) as KDs or Microtrains.  In my experience this feature doesn't work at all - at least in the manner originally advertised

Take care if/when retrofitting NEM pockets.  They need to have a free side to side movement to centre properly.  If they have a little friction it can result in wagons not coupling

The biggest variable in performance that I have found is to do with the length and stiffness of the coupler.  For example, Dapol Cargowaggons have a long floppy coupler, which can "dive" towards the magnet and jam in the track

I have observed rigidly mounted couplers (e.g. on BDA wagons) having a dramatic effect on the wagon's ability to take curves, but not on coupling/uncoupling performance.

Hope this is helpful

Cheers   Jon   

As has been discussed elsewhere, Peco 'Elsie' couplings do not have springs so can sometimes come uncoupled in 'normal' haulage. However, when reverse shunting this will not become apparent due to the forces at work.
As others have said, it is more down to trackwork such as one or more fishplates not being connected properly causing a 'step'. I have also found Peco points to be somewhat 'lumpy' if not secured strongly.

Thank you for the replies everyone. That is good to know, derailments are rare with good trackwork. When I go ahead and build my layout later this year, I'll be very careful with my trackwork. I like bulletproof trackwork and trains. Which is why I have already decided on Peco code 55 track (points and flex), because I know it's basically bulletproof track. I know I'll need to be be smooth on track joints and curves (to avoid kinks, bumps and dips), and make sure the fishplates are connected properly and secure. 

I did not know that Peco 'Elsie' couplings don't have springs. That is interesting. Well I have just done a quick Google search on those Peco elsie couplings, for more information. Looks like if you have very smooth trackwork, and add weight to the wagons, or add a small piece of foam inside the coupler box, it should reduce unwanted uncoupling.

As long as the track is layed well and droppy couplings are fettled you shouldn't have any problems.

Take a look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs57P-C2q_8&feature=player_detailpage&list=UUBvlPo8CarzfAayTIRL_ymA#t=54

It's a test run of some 3d printed wagons running forwards and backwards through some complex pointwork - the un painted ones are very light. There's a mixture of bogie and body mounted couplings.

Happy modelling.

Steven B.

Part the way through this video (1.55 minutes) is a section showing 'shunting' at a terminus station so
that a loco can be removed from the front, turned round and be at the 'front' for the return journey.


Boat Train Gala In Memory Of RMS Titanic

Roger

Thank you Steven and Roger for the videos, I enjoyed watching them both. It was nice to see how reliable both of your trains are. Thanks for sharing the videos.

Howard

Hello Howard, welcome to the site. As a fellow new member (I only joined a few days ago) I can confirm the friendliness and helpful attitude of fellow members - I have already taxed their patience to the limit with foolish (but totally genuine) questions re computers and had nothing but a lot of help in return.
As to your problem I  have shunted all kinds of trains in all kinds of scales from N up to "12" to the foot" (I am a professional railwayman - Conductor, in US parlance) and would echo what most others have said.
There are several principle factors to be taken into account, the main of these being track laying - really take your time with that, the better laid the fewer problems. To test it take a few short wheel base wagons (I used 10 16 ton mineral wagons) and GENTLY push them by hand around the layout making sure ALL rail joints are covered. Push from the last (or first depending on how you see these things!) vehicle as if your hand was the locomotive. Any faults will soon be shown up (the leading wagon will derail) and the problem joints should be attended to as soon as you find them so they are not forgotten. It only takes one misaligned rail join to ruin the perfect layout.
My other main suggestion is shunt SLOWLY, very slowly. In real life Class 08 shunters, the standard British shunting engine (switcher), are limited to a maximum of 15 MPH for a good reason. To give an idea of how slow 9 feet of track is (about) 0.25 mile in N and at 15 MPH a loco should take about a minute to cover that distance.
Less important, but will add to reliability of running, is do not be tempted to save space by using minimum radius curves or points (turnouts) unless space is really restricted. The tighter the curve the greater the problems you may encounter. Always go for at least medium radius even in yards if you can.
Finally keep your track and wheels clean as it will aid slow running.
As to the question of couplings it is rare, at least since the 1960s, to run bogie and non bogie stock together but it does happen. In model form it should not be a problem particularly if you follow my suggestions re track and speeds above.
Good luck, happy modelling.
Greg.

I was always under the impression such things were more of an issue for the American modellers because of the prototypically long trains they tend to run.

Quote from: Luke Piewalker on February 22, 2014, 11:13:49 AM
I was always under the impression such things were more of an issue for the American modellers because of the ridiculously long trains they tend to run.

Incoming!

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on February 22, 2014, 07:34:49 AM

Less important, but will add to reliability of running, is do not be tempted to save space by using minimum radius curves or points (turnouts) unless space is really restricted. The tighter the curve the greater the problems you may encounter. Always go for at least medium radius even in yards if you can.

I don't necessarily agree with that, as I have Peco small radius (12") points everywhere in my fiddle yards and everywhere on my branch line/goods yard/loco shed and have no issues at all. The only points larger than those are the large points on the main lines which was done more for cosmetics than anything else, although there is no shunting on the main lines. True - if I had more space.......................

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on February 22, 2014, 07:34:49 AM

As to the question of couplings it is rare, at least since the 1960s, to run bogie and non bogie stock together but it does happen. In model form it should not be a problem particularly if you follow my suggestions re track and speeds above.
Good luck, happy modelling.
Greg.

That may be true of freight traffic but does not apply really to parcels traffic
I have also witnessed many a train in the 60/70's composed of bogie wagons (bolsters) and 4 wheel hopper/minerals.

Sorry to be in Kryton pedantic mode

Quote from: newportnobby on February 22, 2014, 04:31:01 PM

Sorry to be in Kryton pedantic mode

I thought that was your normal self.   

Quote from: whiteswan on February 22, 2014, 04:37:59 PM

Quote from: newportnobby on February 22, 2014, 04:31:01 PM

Sorry to be in Kryton pedantic mode

I thought that was your normal self.   

Newportnobby, you say you use 12" radius points and have no issues with derailments, which, being blunt, I would expect as I would class them as "medium" radius. I was actually referring to Settrack points with a 9" radius curve or tighter - as I said "MINIMUM radius should be avoided for shunting purposes where possible.
On the subject of mixed bogie/non bogie stock I said it became increasingly rare as the 1960s rolled into the 1970s, not that it stopped happening. Indeed it even goes on today in rare cases but not as commonly as at one time.