|
Budd RDC
Mar 21, 2017 13:00:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by shamoo737 on Mar 21, 2017 13:00:27 GMT -5
The simple answer is yes. In fact, more swing then a MTL coupler.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 2:53:08 GMT -5
Questions to "Willy" : 1) What do You mean with "45 degrees curve" ? I think the important thing with a curve is the RADIUS ! And I would have one curve of 120 degrees (in a tunnel), but 270mm radius (this radius would be the minimum on the whole layout) ... 2) When You are speaking about S-curves which cause trouble, does it include those on 2 successive turnouts (R 490mm) ? I learnt to avoid S-curves out of stations, all the way (at least for the "look"). 3) After all, I think that there would be no problem to replace the couplers with a bar ! There are "axles" for the couplers inside of the housing. Thanks for answers.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Mar 22, 2017 10:49:42 GMT -5
Here we go again. I feel I've opened another can of worms. To answer the question of radius, I don't think in those terms, but if your take the MTL 45 degree curve track, doesn't matter which length you use, and connect them so that they form a semi circle, this is the minimum radius I have on my layout. The S curves I talk about are again 45 or 30 degree MTL curves connected to form an S. I have only one on my layout which was a big mistake to begin with, and they go left to right. When my BUDDs enter the curve to the left, they are fine, but the minute they cross over the connection and start going to the right, the front BUDD throws the trailing BUDD's front truck off the track. I have tried every combination I can think of in both directions and the result is always the same. I've been told that when making an S bend, one should always have a straight track in between as a transition from one curve to the other and it doesn't matter how short that straight is, as long as there is some kind of transition between the two opposite curves, there shouldn't be any problems. As far as replacing the couplers with draw bars, yes I've heard of that two, but then they remain permanently joined which would be fine if one were never going to unhook them or run just one instead of two. Now I have a question. What are whiskers on the couplers?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 12:34:59 GMT -5
Thank You for Your answer ... I read over 35 years ago (when I built my former N-layout) that one should not use any S-curves outside of stations ! My RDC's would stay coupled together permanently. In the past the german "Schienenbus" in N made by Minitrix was sold with such a coupling bar, and myself made such bars for all my "reversible" trains : a wire was running along the train to allow it to take the current from the front truck, so it could always stop at the right position in front of signals ; with the RDC's I would use an electronic detection to shut down the current as soon as the first truck reaches the "stop" section. About the "whiskers" : as far as I could understand, I THINK that they are the two "elastic bars" which play the role of a spring and center the coupler, see : www.zscale.org/articles/couplers.htmlPerhaps those made by AZL are too "strong" ? But would the removal of this "spring" not cause trouble when the second unit "pushes" the first one (uncoupling ? ). All the way, it's what I understood, and I prefer a coupling bar ... I took a glance to MTL, the largest curves they sell are 220mm radius (like Märklin ... ) . Because I will use Rokuhan, there are curves (30 degrees only) with 270 mm radius.
|
|
|
Post by BAZman on Mar 22, 2017 16:28:19 GMT -5
The märklin, Rokuhan and MTL turnout radius is 490mm so S curves aren't so bad. But back-to-back 195mm or 220mm (the standard/common radii) are big trouble for anything long. 40' & 50' freight with truck mounts are OK. 45 or 30 degrees means nothing. That is just how long the curve is. If one follows the other, there would be a minimum radius that that they would not be able to reliably run in a circle (360 degree or 180 degree semi-circle, like an end-of-module). Likely close to 195mm, certainly not with 145mm. I believe Rob said the new RDC's have the wide swing coupler like the new P42's
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 16:56:55 GMT -5
But I think that with 2 motorized units coupled together, a bar is better than standard couplers : the "compression" effort if the second engine runs faster than the first one (which in this case acts like a brake) is more than the "standard" effort when a locomotive pushes a series of cars (which can run freely). And, because one of the RDC's is always running faster than the other (see former topics ...), this situation will always hapen in one direction (RDC's are bidirectional ! ). Or am I wrong, and the couplers can support this without any problems ?
|
|
|
Budd RDC
Mar 22, 2017 19:02:07 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by shamoo737 on Mar 22, 2017 19:02:07 GMT -5
Whiskers are the two mustach shaped guts of the coupler. They keep the couplers centered. If you trim them, they will not center, but swing better.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Mar 23, 2017 11:22:33 GMT -5
Just as an aside to all of this, my Budd's are the only pieces in my inventory who can't navigate this S bend. I have no trouble with any of my other engines or cars, long and short. Very strange that the Budd's give me this much grief. Everywhere else on my layout and they run just peachy together, provided I have them in the right order and facing the right direction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 14:38:24 GMT -5
An additional question : what are the grids, the railings on the "hump" in the middle of the cars : are they air-conditionner intakes, or rather exhausts from the (diesel) engine ? A friend who saw the pictures was thinking that, in cas of exhausts, we should put a little amount of "dirt" on them ! (Beside trains, I practice RC-tanks too : that's the explanation, because our tanks are "weathered").
|
|
|
Post by markm on Mar 30, 2017 14:51:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BAZman on Mar 30, 2017 18:37:30 GMT -5
Oooo thanks Mark. Mine are too shiny too.
|
|
|
Post by markm on Mar 31, 2017 11:25:53 GMT -5
Oooo thanks Mark. Mine are too shiny too. Happy to oblige. As long as you're detailing don't forget the safety chains across the nose and tail doors. One detail I haven't been able to figure out how to model is the operational nose shape on the units: abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?june99/06-06-99/wp-rdc-zephyretteatwendoverut-july60.jpgBTW do you recognize the location of the image in my previous post? It's odd for an RDC to be in San Jose (the photographer's claimed location). I can't think of a location where the WP would be so close to an SP station. Willow Glenn? Mark
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2017 14:10:13 GMT -5
The end of the story : I decided to build a 50's layout (modern Amtrak 2-level cars look too "massive"), Massachusetts, (Boston, home of MIT ! ), I looked for all companies which operated there in the 50's ; I will use a 2-units NH RDC-train, a NYC GP7 and a NYC GP9 "long range" for freight, I saw them together on a picture of 1957 or 1958. I ordered my freight cars in Germany (Marsilius) : 40' Box cars "Single Superior Door" by MTL (Susie Q and C&O, brown) and 33' Rib side 2 bay hoppers (Full Throttle), NYC and Boston & Maine, I think they will fit ; 2 MTL cabooses, NYC and Reading (last one no more available at MTL, but one still in stock in Germany ! ). And my smallest curve will be 270mm radius (Rokuhan), and no S-curves outside of stations (and the "passenger platform track" will be the straight one from the turnouts), maximum slope 1.5% ; it seems logical that, if one RDC "solo" can "climb" 2%, 2 connected together should too, because there is no additional "passive" load. In worst case I will cut the "whiskers" off, I hope they will then stay coupled together, despite of this modification. Now I will order the engines at "Jörg Erkel" and ... please wish me good luck !
|
|
|
Post by emaley on Apr 11, 2017 11:41:16 GMT -5
I got one of the new release TRE RDC's a couple of weeks ago. I tested it on a 195mm loop with a heavyweight car in tow and it did fine. No mod to the coupler. You should have no problem with you setup. I have one from the first run that will run on a layout with 170mm curves, but I have not tested it with anything coupled to it.
The first run is near silent running. The second is a little less silent, but I am pleased.
Trey
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2017 15:17:24 GMT -5
I preferred not to wait for a new version of the RDC's ; it's the same thing with (real, not model ! ) cars : everytime a new car appears on the market, it takes some amount of time until it's "debugged" ; the RDC's are at least 6 years old, but the modifications made to them are "young". My layout will not be critical with it's large curves (I took the largest available for my planning) ; and no other cars will be connected to the RDC's ; so I hope the worst think that could happen would be that I have to cut the "whiskers", or build a coupling bar. Or am I wrong ?
|
|