Standardisation of couplings

[Dave Cooper]

Hi Folks

My current stock is a 'mish-mash' of various couplings :-

The 00 stuff is a mix of Bachmann, Mainline and Ratio tension locks type which seems to work reasonably well (most of the time).

However, the 009 stock only has 'proper' couplings on the locos - a mix of Bachmann and Kato chassis. I'm wondering if there is a preferred standard that people have evolved to, including ease of uncoupling...I only have scratch built wagons in 009 at present so, now would be a good time to standardise.

Thanks for any views /experience,
Dave

[Hugh Norwood]

Ooh! is that the sound of a can of worms being opened?

Seriously, I doubt if you'll get a majority opinion here.

Have you tried searching the forum for "coupling"? It has been debated several times...

Personally, I use the Greenwich couplings.

[Hobby]

Also depends on what you want to do... Automatic or delayed coupling/uncoupling for instance... Interchangeability with other people's stock which may inhabit your layout or you may want to run on someone elses...

In the main I've seen two types used, the most common is the "Bemo" type, which in various forms is used by all the main British and European manufacturers, and the standard N gauge coupling. The two are not compatible unless you have a special converter wagon (shades of Triang and their horsevan with a Triang coupling one end and a Peco/HD one the other!)...

There are others but they are much rarer, such as MicroTrains knuckle couplers.

The Greenwich mentioned by Hugh is a variation of the Bemo type but looks much neater and can be converted to auto coupling and uncoupling using magnets in the track and, for scratchbuilt/kit built stock is what I'd suggest you use.

[Dave Cooper]

Thanks both

The 'Greenwich' certainly looks like it'll do the job. I'll have a search on the forum, as Hugh suggests, and see what other views there are.
Dave

[cp.409067]

*

The Greenwich (which I heartily recommend on the basis of use on my three "O9" layouts) can also be adapted to include a delay facility by the addition of a (Paul Windle style) fixed pin.


CP

[Dave Cooper]

CP - I'm quite intrigued - what is the benefit /use of the delay ? Could I see a Youtube clip of it in action perhaps ?

Also, mention has been made above of 'autocoupling'. The only time I can do this is with a loco (00) pushing two tension-locks together....there must be some other mysteries at play methinks !

Just a dumb beginner I'm afraid...but, thanks for the response anyway.
Dave   

[Turin 60]

May I chip in re "delay" with regard to couplings, for the record may I just say that I use "DG" couplings which are like the "Grenwich" couplings but have a built in "delay" feature. Lets say you have a siding with an uncoupling magnet a little way in, without a "delay" feature on the coupling you uncouple your wagon at the magnet and then back away from it leaving the wagon where it is.

With a "delay" feature in the coupling you propel your wagon up to the uncoupling magnet, the coupling uncouples and goes to the "latch" position allowing you to keep propelling the wagon along the siding to leave it where ever you wish rather than as a little clump of wagons at the magnet.

If then we imagine you have a fan of sidings, you only need one uncoupling magnet at the start of the fan so you can uncouple and propel the wagons to whichever siding you wish.

I hope this helps.

John Bruce No7.

[cp.409067]

*

The use of delay action can be seen in this short film of my "O9" "Brink Valley Tramway" layout when exhibited at Utrecht in 2013. Essentially the delay action permits uncoupling over a magnet and then pushing (without recoupling) to another location. I find it works best with Greenwich loops on only one end of rolling stock, and the delay pin on the other end.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZfacsSGbzk


CP

[cp.409067]

*

Having just seen the comment above from John Bruce, I would say that there is a difference in the delay feature of the DG type couplings. These feature a second moving part (besides the coupling loop). The advantage of the pin added to a Greenwich coupling is that it is fixed and thus non-moving. Granted it is not as sophisticated as the DG (and the very similar B&B), but it has the advantage of greater simplicity and ease of installation. The delay pin is simply glued into a hole in buffer beam of locomotives or the headstock of wagons.

CP

[Stefan Krebs]

There are mainly 2 independent standards:
1. National Model Railroad Association (MMRA)
2. Norms European Model railways (NEM)

They both cooperate to some extend, but while NMRA as an American organisation has managed to push their coupler standard onto the manufacturers, NEM got bogged down in the tribalism of the manufacturers, and has a bodge job of coupler standards. This is why European rolling stock tends not to cooperate with each other, every manufacturer has his own variation on the MEM standard, making sure customers don't stray from the brand.
For example, NEM 356 is the 'Arnold' coupling, i.e. 'standard' N-gauge coupling.
Of course, NMRA doesn't cater for stock with side buffers etc..

For 009 / H0e the standard was set by Eggerbahn with a miniaturised H0 'Maerklin' coupling, and ROCO, Liliput, and Bemo followed suit. B&B, DG, Greenwich etc. are all variations of this 'drop-loop' design to NEM 360, and provided they are all fitted and adjusted in accordance with the NEM standard, they are compatible and should work well. You can pick your preference for looks and size, including versions with delayed coupling.
Sadly, the standard does not provide the dimensions for the narrow gauge version, and I use a ROCO mine tub/ truck as the reference, as these cannot be adjusted (for hook heights).

The 'Rolls Royce' of couplings is probably the Kadee (H0e)/ Micro Trains (N) knuckle coupler, very prototypical looks, top performance (including delayed uncoupling), and a price to match.

My personal top choice for 00 is the Alex Jackson coupling, discrete, top class performance (including delayed uncoupling), and unbeatably cheap. However, it requires working buffers.
Most common in Europe is the NEM360 coupling, while the 'Baker' coupling (drop hook) is dominant with British manufacturers (and Fleischmann). As I started of with Fleischmann I can confirm the coupling is inferior to the NEM 360 coupler, which I have converted to (before finding out about Alex Jackson; another rework on order!  ::)).
As others here confirm, the British manufacturers are no better than the continentals, maximising incompatibility.   :'(


As far as I have been able to work out, 'autocoupler' means nothing more than couplers will couple up if rolling stock are pushed together; as opposed to couplers that have to be manually engaged. However, most struggle to engage on curved track nevertheless.
'Delayed coupler' are couplers that stay disengaged when pushed over a de-coupler track, i.e. rolling stock has to be separated to reset the couplers and allow to couple up again (by pushing together).
Advantage: only 1 de-coupler in the station throat required, as opposed to one for each drop-off point; flexible dropping off of wagons, i.e. not limited to the de-coupler position.
Disadvantage: about twice as much force required to engage couplings, as the pushing action does not only has to engage the coupler, but also pre-set the retainer that holds the couplings open (except maybe Greenwich). With light-weight 009 stock this is an issue not to be despised.

There are others, some more (e.g. Veit Scharfenberg/ narrow gauge), some less prototypical, some providing electric coupling as well, which shows that there is no 'preferred standard', and various designs cater for various preferences. In 009 the 'drop-loop' design is certainly the most wide-spread.


Hope this helps
Waldschrat

[Dave Cooper]

Thanks all - I think the 'fog' is beginning to clear !

Managed to watch a few Youtube clips /movies of various systems in action. It seems that a little to-and-fro 'shuffle' over the magnets is the norm.

Re: the Greenwich - the clip showed one being made up from a sort of fretted 'flat-pack'. It took the modeller some 10 minutes to make just one coupling up. Can these be obtained ready assembled as it looked very fiddly to me ?

The Dapols and Kadees also looked nice. Pricey, but, if restricted to end-of-rakes, perhaps not too bad. 

As an aside, are there any workable "3-link" systems that are a practical proposition (009) ? I think I saw one in operation at a show recently but that was 0 gauge. The operators were using magnets (rare-earth ?) on the end of long rods.

[cp.409067]

Thanks all - I think the 'fog' is beginning to clear !
.....

As an aside, are there any workable "3-link" systems that are a practical proposition (009) ? I think I saw one in operation at a show recently but that was 0 gauge. The operators were using magnets (rare-earth ?) on the end of long rods.

*

The question now arises as to what you want to achieve with a coupling system.

The mention of 3 link couplings (usually found on standard rather than narrow gauge railways) and miniature shunting poles is significant. Any sort of system that is manually manipulated in this manner is going to be difficult with the small size of "OO9" locomotives and rolling stock.

The most common method used for "OO9" in the UK is one of the variants of the Bemo type - including the Greenwich. I would suggest that the thing to do now is to visit exhibitions where "OO9" layouts are being operated in order to see what others do and have the opportunity to ask questions face to face.

CP

[Hobby]

The 'Rolls Royce' of couplings is probably the Kadee (H0e)/ Micro Trains (N) knuckle coupler, very prototypical looks, top performance (including delayed uncoupling), and a price to match.

It is a very neat "impression" of widely used couplings in America, but bears no resemblance to most prototype narrow gauge couplers used in the UK or Mainland Europe. I've been using it on my TTe stuff and agree it looks nice but, like the Greenwich coupling it's still a compromise for use this side of the Atlantic. Someone in Europe actually does a miniature version of the coupler widely seen on German and Austrian NG lines, which itself is a variation of a SG coupling but from what I remember they are not cheap and I don't know how good they are in action.

[JulienW]

Thanks all - I think the 'fog' is beginning to clear !

I'm sure that you'll be able see your way through even if some of the smog seems a bit thick!

Managed to watch a few Youtube clips /movies of various systems in action. It seems that a little to-and-fro 'shuffle' over the magnets is the norm.

It can be, but some of that is the driver not knowing exactly where the magnetic field is, and some may be down to 'sticky' couplings. On my own layout (where I use DG couplings but like the Greenwich they have a lifting loop somwork on the same principle) I've marked the position of the electromagnets by painting the sides of the rail facing the operator to get around the first problem, and practice helps! As to 'sticky' loops it helps to build the couplings carefully and test them before final fitting so that the loops are able to flop about via gravity.

Re: the Greenwich - the clip showed one being made up from a sort of fretted 'flat-pack'. It took the modeller some 10 minutes to make just one coupling up. Can these be obtained ready assembled as it looked very fiddly to me ?

You may be able to get someone to make them up but I'm not aware of anyone who supplies them ready made. 10 minutes does seem a bit long to me, though if one were trying to film the process, build the coupling in such a way that the process can be clearly seen and give a commentary then it could take a while!

That being said they don't 'fall together', and careful building will result in a better coupling, but at less than

[Hobby]

Can i just add one thing, Peco have done a pack of 4 couplings that you have to assemble (GR-101) that's been around since the year dot and was widely used for scratchbuilt and kit built stock in the past. My advice is NOT to use them despite their cheap price, they are crude and not all that reliable. They now have a decent set of ready assembled ones (GR-102) that are much better. But as Julien says, Greenwich are the pick of that type of coupler and you'd be much better advised to use them.