Currently I'm looking at doing a project with lightweight tramway-style overhead, with locos fitted with diamond pantographs or bow collectors, picking up from the overhead and returning through both rails. However, I'm unsure which chassis would be suitable for this as the key issue would seem to be the need to change the pickup and insulation arrangements on the wheels, and keeping one side of the motor isolated from everything else, connecting that side only to the pantograph. Obviously there are some ways of making an RTR chassis that are less suitable - I get the impression for instance that split chassis types would not lend themselves to such a conversion. I know Jim Owers' Lochsanda used locos with live overhead on Kato 11-103/104 chassis, but am not sure whether the replacement 109/110 would still be suitable. I also think they might be a bit lightweight, as for the other parts of the project to work the locos will need to have quite a lot of pulling power at low speeds, potentially requiring a lot of adhesive weight to be added. I'm quite flexible on what sort of chassis I can use - 4-wheel or small Bo-Bo, ideally not too long but if necessary I can work around that.
Perhaps keeping the two rail pickup and have dummy overhead wires would be an idea?
I think that would be the way I would do it.
However, the kato chassis that are split frame do have wires going to the motor.
See this link to the Tramfabriek web site, who do some very good motor replacements that has a photo one taken apart:
https://tramfabriek.co.uk/kato-take-a-part.html
There is a lot of satisfaction in getting it to run picking up from the traction wire. For 16.5mm gauge trams I have mainly used Tenshodo spud units. The motor brush on one side need to be disconnected from the pickups on that side and then connect the pickups on each side elecrically - simply by soldering a wire across.
Some of the European N scale models of OHE locos had the option to pick up from the pantograph built in. I managed to pick up a non-running (and therefore cheap) Roco BR144.5 that wasn't running because the switch for the overhead (small brass screw on the roof) was set to the overhead position and the seller was testing it on a 2 rail (no overhead) system.
That being said I'm not sure how you'd move the switch - mounted on the circuit board running along the top of the chassis - once you've fitted a taller 4mm scale body. I'm also not sure how popular such a set up was, or if the more modern locos come with the option.
Coming back to the Kato chassis I suspect (like Brian) that the newer 11-109/110 with the motors supplied by wires would be easier to convert than the older 11-103/104 type as these use the metal (phosphor bronze) pick up strips to get power from the wheels to the motor.
The Kato 'shorty' bogie chassis (11-105 type) may also be not to hard to convert, as whilst the pick up arrangement are metal strips it's probably easier to interrupt them to add a wire form the moto to the overhead.
Ultimately doing the conversions may not be worth the faff (and would a dummy overhead be easier to build, especially at pointwork?), unless you wanted to have some locos being live to one rail, and some the other so you could run 2 locos at once on the same length of line.
Hope that helps...
You mention pulling power and weighting the chassis in which case the Kato bogie chassis is probably not the best choice as it is particularly weak. I put one under an Ertl diecast body as a bit of a joke and it could barely move itself. I replaced it with the Bandai near equivalent and it was a lot better performance-wise as well as having better proportioned wheels for my loco.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49683357936_e4c9d31e2d_c_d.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49683357201_71c04f9be0_c_d.jpg)
Now why did I select that particular loco? ;)
Edit: I'm not sure how easy it would be to modify the Bandai chassis.
The Kato 103/4 chassis are easy to convert. The wheels are linked to the motor by the phosphor bronze pickup strips but the motor tags can be bent away from the strips allowing wires to be connected to the motor tags and/or the pickup strips as required.
See https://009society.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Radio-Control-Chris-Ward-loco-Handout-4.pdf?v=79cba1185463 Photo 4 shows the top of the chassis after conversion.
The 109/110 chassis are different, but are also easy to convert as shown in Tramfabriek's website that Brian linked to. It also has more weight which should help the traction.
Frank
The standard motors in the 109/110 chassis are very week.
If you add weight to improve traction and pick up they just slow down, this is not good at all!
I do not know if the replacemnt Tramfabriek motors will cure this or not as I have never tried one.
I still have some of the older 103/104 chassis for future use that I purchased when they were under £15 for two including postage from Plaza Japan, so I have not had any need to use the new versions yet.
Quote from: B.Meldon on May 17, 2023, 09:20
Perhaps keeping the two rail pickup and have dummy overhead wires would be an idea?
I think that would be the way I would do it.
However, the kato chassis that are split frame do have wires going to the motor.
See this link to the Tramfabriek web site, who do some very good motor replacements that has a photo one taken apart:
https://tramfabriek.co.uk/kato-take-a-part.html
I will have a look at that. This is for shunting on my transporter wagon project, which will have motorised (2-rail) standard gauge wagons running on and off transporter wagons supplied with power via the narrow gauge rails, meaning that the narrow gauge loco cannot also be 2-rail and it needs to be a working overhead wire.
Quote from: JulienW on May 17, 2023, 09:40
Some of the European N scale models of OHE locos had the option to pick up from the pantograph built in. I managed to pick up a non-running (and therefore cheap) Roco BR144.5 that wasn't running because the switch for the overhead (small brass screw on the roof) was set to the overhead position and the seller was testing it on a 2 rail (no overhead) system.
That being said I'm not sure how you'd move the switch - mounted on the circuit board running along the top of the chassis - once you've fitted a taller 4mm scale body. I'm also not sure how popular such a set up was, or if the more modern locos come with the option.
Coming back to the Kato chassis I suspect (like Brian) that the newer 11-109/110 with the motors supplied by wires would be easier to convert than the older 11-103/104 type as these use the metal (phosphor bronze) pick up strips to get power from the wheels to the motor.
The Kato 'shorty' bogie chassis (11-105 type) may also be not to hard to convert, as whilst the pick up arrangement are metal strips it's probably easier to interrupt them to add a wire form the moto to the overhead.
Ultimately doing the conversions may not be worth the faff (and would a dummy overhead be easier to build, especially at pointwork?), unless you wanted to have some locos being live to one rail, and some the other so you could run 2 locos at once on the same length of line.
Hope that helps...
I will look into this as I hadn't realised there were any N gauge locos designed for live overhead, although I knew of a few in 00/H0, so thanks for that. The issue with the pickups is not just disconnecting one side of the wheels but reconnecting them to the other side (because both rails will be at the same polarity while the overhead will be at the opposite polarity).
On the Roco idea, is there any way when looking at one of identifying whether it is one of the ones with the overhead power switch built in?
This one is interesting in that the motor problem mentioned in the description makes it sound as though it could actually be fine but is set to run off the overhead when it's being tested on 2-rail, thus appearing to not work properly: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/234977680393?chn=ps&_trkparms=ispr%3D1&amdata=enc%3A1ishqzRivTz2HfdHHJQSSqw97&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=710-134428-41853-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=101&itemid=234977680393&targetid=1647205088760&device=m&mktype=pla&googleloc=9045999&poi=&campaignid=17206177401&mkgroupid=136851690655&rlsatarget=pla-1647205088760&abcId=9300866&merchantid=7307284&gbraid=0AAAAAD_Lr1e01CsdzssrYHBLUGe5TwkBn&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIy5yusKz8_gIVB6vVCh09FAjcEAQYAyABEgKMBPD_BwE
Obviously it would be useful to have a dual-equipped loco as I could then test run it on my other layouts, but if modifying to overhead wire only made it more reliable I could always do that. Curiously I can't find any reference to it being a live overhead loco anywhere else.
With your transporter wagon system, are the SG wagons motorised?
If so perhaps the best way to do this would be using battery remote control of the SG wagons not track power at all?
This could also solve other issues, for example you could use rubber tyres on the motorised SG wagons, this would hold them in place on the transporter when moving on the NG.
We tried and failed to make an opperating system about 30 years ago now, but times have moved on and the more I think about this I think that remote control battery powered motorised standard gauge wagons would be the way to go, now that the tech is available.
Quote from: B.Meldon on May 17, 2023, 13:48
With your transporter wagon system, are the SG wagons motorised?
If so perhaps the best way to do this would be using battery remote control of the SG wagons not track power at all?
This could also solve other issues, for example you could use rubber tyres on the motorised SG wagons, this would hold them in place on the transporter when moving on the NG.
We tried and failed to make an opperating system about 30 years ago now, but times have moved on and the more I think about this I think that remote control battery powered motorised standard gauge wagons would be the way to go, now that the tech is available.
I know there was a Leek & Manifold layout in 009 News a few years ago by Alan Gee that used motorised wagons on transporters, but picking up from wiper contacts on the end of the transporter rather than from the NG rails. I don't think holding them in place will be an issue, and in fact the fact that they are motorised means they won't be free-running when power is not applied, which will hold them in place. I did consider radio control but that would have been a radio-controlled NG loco and conventional 2-rail for the standard gauge wagons (slightly more cost effective as fewer vehicles need to be fitted with radio control) however for now I think I prefer the overhead wire option.
QuoteOn the Roco idea, is there any way when looking at one of identifying whether it is one of the ones with the overhead power switch built in?
I'm not sure what it would look like on other locos (or other manufacturers) but the 'switch' is a small slotted screw head, and on that EBay loco is visible towards the left hand end in the 1st photo (about ⅓ the way along from that end with the fine brown 'wires' routed around it). Unfortunately I can't recall from my own Roco BR 144.5 (I used the chassis under a railcar...).
From the description it sounds like the switch is in the 'wrong' position - loco does not work on the track but the motor works with current applied direct, but it's up to you to decide if £30 (+£4 p&p) is worth the gamble or not.
Quote from: JulienW on May 17, 2023, 18:55
QuoteOn the Roco idea, is there any way when looking at one of identifying whether it is one of the ones with the overhead power switch built in?
I'm not sure what it would look like on other locos (or other manufacturers) but the 'switch' is a small slotted screw head, and on that EBay loco is visible towards the left hand end in the 1st photo (about ⅓ the way along from that end with the fine brown 'wires' routed around it). Unfortunately I can't recall from my own Roco BR 144.5 (I used the chassis under a railcar...).
From the description it sounds like the switch is in the 'wrong' position - loco does not work on the track but the motor works with current applied direct, but it's up to you to decide if £30 (+£4 p&p) is worth the gamble or not.
Thanks. I decided to buy it and will see how I get on. Worst case scenario it will need more wires soldered on, the only major issue I suppose is if the motor runs but the drive to wheels doesn't engage. Repositioning the switch shouldn't be hugely necessary, I will probably use a new, larger pantograph anyway and then leave the switch as is; obviously this will mean the switch cannot be adjusted without taking the 4mm scale body off but I think that's OK. It appears to have a length of about 8 or 9cm so slightly shorter than my transporter wagons, which is perfect.
Did anyone ever make any proprietary live overhead to go with these? Obviously unmodified it would be completely the wrong height for 4mm scale and wrong style for the sort of light railway envisaged (most of the stuff I'm thinking of using is intended for 00 and H0 tramway modelling) but it would be interesting to see nonetheless.
What I sort of meant with my original question about identifying them is 'are there versions of this loco that are just for 2-rail and aren't equipped for overhead pick up and if so, do they look any different to those that are?' Although obviously it would be interesting to see what other working overhead wire locos there are in N as I didn't realise this was something that really existed in RTR form below H0 scale.
If you are interesed in tramway modelling may I suggest you consider joining the Tramway and Light Railway Society and also look at East Lancs Model Tramway for parts. Poles, wire, ears, frogs are availabelas well as chassis, trolley poles etc.
From the item description:
QuoteBODY IS LOOSE - I LIFTED OFF BODY AND PUT THE POWER TO THE TWO SIDE MOTOR PICKUPS AND MOTOR RUNS AND IT LIGHTS UP
and from what I recall of the chassis the motors contacts are accessible with it in the chassis, and the comment about the lights suggests the seller has just lifted the loose body and applied wires to the motor in the chassis to show it runs and as a bonus (with power to the circuit) the lights illuminate.
I don't think any of the loco manufacturers (like Roco) made live overhead parts, but I wonder if someone like Sommerfeldt or Veissmann made a 'live' system? Might be worth a google search perhaps?
QuoteWhat I sort of meant with my original question about identifying them is 'are there versions of this loco that are just for 2-rail and aren't equipped for overhead pick up and if so, do they look any different to those that are?' Although obviously it would be interesting to see what other working overhead wire locos there are in N as I didn't realise this was something that really existed in RTR form below H0 scale.
Can't answer that one I'm afraid, sorry. Might be worth looking via the internet at the up to date Roco catalogue to see if the switch is standard, an option or not available on the new(er) locos.
Quote from: engerth399 on May 18, 2023, 08:52
If you are interesed in tramway modelling may I suggest you consider joining the Tramway and Light Railway Society and also look at East Lancs Model Tramway for parts. Poles, wire, ears, frogs are availabelas well as chassis, trolley poles etc.
I've looked at East Lancs but wasn't sure with the TLRS whether it would be relevant if I'm doing a freelance narrow gauge railway rather than a prototypical tramway.
The Light Railway part of the name is often forgotten but as I enjoy modelling electric street tramways (picking up from the traction wire) as well as French metre gauge it has been useful for me.
Quote from: engerth399 on May 18, 2023, 17:13
The Light Railway part of the name is often forgotten but as I enjoy modelling electric street tramways (picking up from the traction wire) as well as French metre gauge it has been useful for me.
I always assumed (partly based on the paragraph about this on their website) that the light railway part referred to things like the Burton & Ashby Light Railway (which actually was an electric tram line) or the modern sense of the term 'light rail'.
'
Note: the light railways covered by the TLRS are those which predominately run tramway type vehicles, rather than, for example narrow gauge steam railways.'
https://tlrs.info/about-us/
That is the case but there is a lot of modelling info there.
Quote from: JulienW on May 17, 2023, 18:55
QuoteOn the Roco idea, is there any way when looking at one of identifying whether it is one of the ones with the overhead power switch built in?
I'm not sure what it would look like on other locos (or other manufacturers) but the 'switch' is a small slotted screw head, and on that EBay loco is visible towards the left hand end in the 1st photo (about ⅓ the way along from that end with the fine brown 'wires' routed around it). Unfortunately I can't recall from my own Roco BR 144.5 (I used the chassis under a railcar...).
From the description it sounds like the switch is in the 'wrong' position - loco does not work on the track but the motor works with current applied direct, but it's up to you to decide if £30 (+£4 p&p) is worth the gamble or not.
So as a bit of an update the BR 144.5 has now arrived. I've managed to get it working off both the overhead (well, a bit of brass tube with the lead from the controller held against it for now anyway) and 2-rail though it seems to be a bit unreliable if the body is not pushed down. I think this is due to the loose body meaning that the switch is not in proper contact with the circuit board on top of the motor (which it needs to be to complete the circuit, regardless of whether it's running in 2-rail or overhead mode. This is perhaps something I can actually fix more easily when I make the new body, rather than trying to repair the original switch.
However, it does appear that when in overhead wire mode the loco is only returning current through one rail (which I assume is how it's designed to work, for 2-rail layouts with additional overhead wire and common return). I don't think there would be a problem trying to run this on a system that returns through both rails (as I intend to do) but obviously it means that one side of the chassis is not being used, increasing the risk of dead spots. Is it likely to be possible to alter the chassis to return through both rails? It looks as though this could be a bit complicated as the pickups on the bogies are not particularly easy to access. It would obviously be nice to retain the ability to run off either overhead or normal 2-rail as then I could run it on my other layouts as well, but it's not essential to have this.
In terms of actual running qualities (as far as I can tell so far anyway) it seems perfect - relatively slow and smooth, and crucially with the ability to actually push the transporters and heavy motorised wagons on top.
Quote from: danny on May 23, 2023, 17:42
So as a bit of an update the BR 144.5 has now arrived. I've managed to get it working off both the overhead (well, a bit of brass tube with the lead from the controller held against it for now anyway) and 2-rail though it seems to be a bit unreliable if the body is not pushed down. I think this is due to the loose body meaning that the switch is not in proper contact with the circuit board on top of the motor (which it needs to be to complete the circuit, regardless of whether it's running in 2-rail or overhead mode. This is perhaps something I can actually fix more easily when I make the new body, rather than trying to repair the original switch.
From memory the brass screw on the roof is attached to a rotating brass contact on the underside of the roof. This contact presses against tracks in the circuit board fixed to the top of the chassis, and the relationship of rotating contact and tracks dictates whether it picks up from the rails or the overhead.
With the body lifted off the brass rotation contact isn't in the circuit, so neither system will work - as you have discovered!
As you say it may be easier to fix the situation when you've sorted out what the new 4mm scale body will look like. One thought is to (carefully) solder wires to the contacts on the circuit board and run them to a miniature slide switch attached to the body somewhere.
Quote from: danny on May 23, 2023, 17:42
However, it does appear that when in overhead wire mode the loco is only returning current through one rail (which I assume is how it's designed to work, for 2-rail layouts with additional overhead wire and common return). I don't think there would be a problem trying to run this on a system that returns through both rails (as I intend to do) but obviously it means that one side of the chassis is not being used, increasing the risk of dead spots. Is it likely to be possible to alter the chassis to return through both rails? It looks as though this could be a bit complicated as the pickups on the bogies are not particularly easy to access. It would obviously be nice to retain the ability to run off either overhead or normal 2-rail as then I could run it on my other layouts as well, but it's not essential to have this.
I suspect that's because it's easier to switch on of the feeds to the motor between one rail and the overhead, rather than (in effect) have one switch to do that whilst the other switches both rails together for a '2 rail pick up + OHW'.
It would also mean that if the loco in OHW mode was placed on track in 'normal' mode (pick up from one rail & return current though the other) it would not create a short, whereas if the wheels on both sides are wired together it will. Given the way these models may have been used - on layouts with caternery equipment but also running diesel (& steam?) locos - this is probably the better (or 'least worst') option, and would work better if the rails were wired for 'common return' (one rail common to both the other rail and the OHW).
To be honest I'd leave the system on the Roco loco alone, as with it's heavy metal chassis block and 8 wheel pick up (or 4 wheels on one side & the wire) it's going to take a lot to stop it.
Quote from: JulienW on May 24, 2023, 09:25
From memory the brass screw on the roof is attached to a rotating brass contact on the underside of the roof. This contact presses against tracks in the circuit board fixed to the top of the chassis, and the relationship of rotating contact and tracks dictates whether it picks up from the rails or the overhead.
With the body lifted off the brass rotation contact isn't in the circuit, so neither system will work - as you have discovered!
As you say it may be easier to fix the situation when you've sorted out what the new 4mm scale body will look like. One thought is to (carefully) solder wires to the contacts on the circuit board and run them to a miniature slide switch attached to the body somewhere.
I was thinking of having some kind of rotating switch still, but actually located in the hole on the chassis circuit board, rather than just pressing down on it from the body. This has the advantage that it won't be dependent on how tight or loose the body is (the contact with the pantograph will probably still be dependent on this, but the way that is done is a bit more robust and reliable anyway). The disadvantage is that I'll have to take the body off to switch between overhead wire and 2-rail mode, but I'm not really bothered about this and it seems inevitable anyway, given the increased height of the new body.
Quote from: JulienW on May 24, 2023, 09:25
I suspect that's because it's easier to switch on of the feeds to the motor between one rail and the overhead, rather than (in effect) have one switch to do that whilst the other switches both rails together for a '2 rail pick up + OHW'.
It would also mean that if the loco in OHW mode was placed on track in 'normal' mode (pick up from one rail & return current though the other) it would not create a short, whereas if the wheels on both sides are wired together it will. Given the way these models may have been used - on layouts with caternery equipment but also running diesel (& steam?) locos - this is probably the better (or 'least worst') option, and would work better if the rails were wired for 'common return' (one rail common to both the other rail and the OHW).
To be honest I'd leave the system on the Roco loco alone, as with it's heavy metal chassis block and 8 wheel pick up (or 4 wheels on one side & the wire) it's going to take a lot to stop it.
I agree and am increasingly inclined to leave it basically as it is. With the existing design of this loco it will still be able to run on a system where both rails are bonded together to form the return, it just means one side of the wheels won't form part of the circuit, but the re-wiring necessary to change to 'both-rail return' seems potentially quite complex. I'm also starting to realise how useful it would be if the loco was still 'dual-equipped' (to borrow a term from prototype railways) as at present I don't have any overhead wire layouts on which to test the loco and run it in. This would, as you point out, effectively need another switch somewhere to switch the polarity of the wheels on one side.