Adapting old LMR carriages to fine scale chain couplings

[What About The Bee]

Many will have Hornby's older Liverpool and Manchester Railway rolling stock. It came in various incarnations and sets from the early 1960s to about 1980. The carriages were individually available as R621, but appeared in sets R346, R651 and R796. It was a novelty that was quite popular.

The three coaches in those ancient sets were Times, Experience and Despatch. They always used a tension lock coupling. 

When Hornby brought Rocket back in 2020, there were two sets, R3809 and R3810. R3809 was the throwback Triang Tribute set, including Times, Experience and Despatch. R3809 remains a very expensive set, even in aftermarket sales. Buying this set just for those names seems like a poor choice, I already have those carriages.

R3810 offered other carriage names. Both of these sets used fine scale chain couplings. The fine scale chain coupling is incompatible with the tension lock coupling.

Behold, generation one of my tension lock replacement. I have gently removed the tension lock from the ancient carriage and replaced it with a 0.8mm wire bent to the shape shown in the inset image. The wire is typically used for bead work, and comes in various diameters and colors. I chose black!

I measured a large number of the fine scale pegs that are on my existing modern stock. It appears that Hornby have selected 0.92mm as the fine scale peg outer diameter and 1.1 mm as the fine scale chain hole inner diameter. The peg, after close examination of so many of them, is a separately applied part.

My peg at 0.8mm and Hornby's peg at 0.92 mm is a delta of 0.12mm (~0.005"). So while not perfect, it is fairly close. Being slightly smaller, it is slightly easier to thread the chain onto the peg. 

No issues yet with my wire peg deforming under tractive load. The fine scale chain remains coupled and is proving equal to the task.

Mixing the old and new carriages is easily explained. The LMR experimented with all types of carriages. You can see the appearance of this mix in the lower inset image. Note the absence of tension locks and the presence of the fine scale chains inter-carriage.

I'm calling this generation 1 because I am not perfectly happy with the peg vertical height on the ancient stock. I think it needs to be a pinch lower. Generation 2 is likely to appear after a true endurance test. 

More to come

Bee

[RDS]

@Bee

Please remember your Threads/Posts with Pictures require Moderator approval, so please just post them once, to save us having to delete your duplicates.

[What About The Bee]

Hello RDS

It was certainly not done on purpose. I know pictures must be approved and am comfortable with that.

With a touch screen, it is often difficult to know when the button has been touched or I missed it. On my android phone screen, I can see the buttons and that is about it. There is no state change in the buttons, no indication the button has been triggered. I see from other threads that this is a common issue. For us and specifically for the mods.

Now if I were a moderator, with access to the web team, I would ask them to have the 'post' button CHANGE to something else (like 'submitted'), locally on my phone, instead of waiting for a bounce back from the Hornby server. Even with the bounce back, there is no feedback mechanism for small screens. This means nothing happens when I think the button has been pressed. So did I press the button?

Hopefully, that mountain of words is intelligible. The issue is the use-case of the page, not in many users.

Bee

[What About The Bee]

I'd like to add, this is an issue for images. Text only responses are small and lightening quick.

The addition of one or more large pictures changes the message from a few hundred characters to possibly megabytes for detailed images. It is the extra time it takes, the inherent delay, that causes the screen to appear 'hung'.

So again, did I press the button? Or is the Hornby server still digesting the million bytes?

I dunno. I will try counting to 50 before pressing the button on a post with images, before a retry. Maybe that will help for me, but will not change the behavior for everyone else with images.

[RDS]

@Bee

I can assure you that your Moderators have had many discussions with Hornby regarding the problem of 'Double posting'.

We await our proposed solution being implemented.

Watch this space!

[Topcat2018]

Interesting photos of the chain couplings, but if we are talking about historical accuracy I don't think early rolling stock had hydraulic buffers.

[threelink]

@Topcat

The old Triang LMR carriages were modelled with correct buffer arrangements or at least a representation thereof. They certainly were not modelled with hydraulic buffers. I cannot speak for the new Hornby carriages but would be surprised if they were any different. At a distance the buffers could be mistaken for hydraulic but closer up the true position is readily visible.

@What about the Bee

Nice work. I was contemplating the use of near scale drawbar hooks e.g.Smiths and a length of jewellery chain to replicate the original coupling arrangements of the prototype on some old Triang LMR carrriages but have not got round to it yet.

[What About The Bee]

@Topcat. The modern Hornby undercarriage is modeled with leaf springs for the buffers. Its a reasonable representation of the undercarriage depicted by both Lecount, Practical Treatise on Railways 1839 and Wood Traite Practique Chemins de Fer 1838. I've not seen the 1930s reproduction carriages at the museum other than in photos, but I assume the models match them with reasonable accuracy.

@threelink the Accurascale chaldons use actual chain, albeit with a magnets to allow coupling & uncoupling. The behavior of the chaldons is most amusing, as the slack in the chain is taken up upon acceleration, each wagon being jerked into life sequentially. Upon deceleration, each chaldron smashes into the one ahead. This behavior matches early passenger complaints vis carriages. The bashing is fairly rough on the chaldrons. I'm happy with Hornby's finescale chains as they restrict these impacts. Its a reasonable compromise to keep detail bits from launching themselves.

If not mistaken, the customer complaints about the rough ride led to the development of sprung buffers and other arrangements to soften the ride.

@RDS I understand that the moderators are on top of this issue and look forward to the resolution. We aren't repetetively smashing the button with reckless abandon, laughing maniacally about the havoc created. (Well, most of us).

I will take this moment to show appreciation. Being a moderator is a lot of work and comes with unpleasant responsibilities. Your role, in particular, comes with scrutiny and complications from a commercial enterprise, Hornby. So thank you!! You are appreciated!!

[threelink]

@ What about the Bee

The protypical behaviour of loose coupled wagons such as you desribe is precisely why I fit all freight stock with 3 link couplings. To see a train stretch out or bunch up is deeply satisfying. As I am sure you know, older stock like the LMR wagons was frequently fitted with 5 link couplings, hence the use of jewellery chain. The need to drive carefully, in prototypical manner, to avoid snatches adds another dimension to the enjoyment of this hobby

[Topcat2018]

@threelink

I guess it's tradeoff between historical accuracy/realism and functionality. My ambition at some point is to build a shunting yard where the wagons can be coupled, uncoupled and moved around with no manual intervention, which obviously can't be done with chain couplings.

[threelink]

@Topcat

Believe it or not, three-and scewlink couplings can be operated without manual intervention. After years of frustration I have come up with a device which couples and uncouples link couplings remotely and for all practical purposes invisibly, at the pull of a lever. It works in any scale although manufacture in N would involve watchmakers work and might not be practical.

[96RAF]

What we have asked for is a big notification box to flag up centre screen which then has to be accepted by the poster before they can continue. The current notification is a one liner at top of screen and may even be off screen out of user sight, nor does it require acceptance.

[Topcat2018]

@threelink

Would be interested to see photos of your couplings. For my shunting yard what I have in mind is uncouplers that can be operated electrically.

[What About The Bee]

threelink wrote: I have come up with a device which couples and uncouples link couplings remotely and for all practical purposes invisibly, at the pull of a lever.

Sir! I am all ears!! If you can find it suitable, please share this in a separate thread. I am sure many would like to see this!

For me, this is why: The Wapping Tunnel at the Liverpool end of the railway was too steep for the locomotives. A stationary engine was there to haul carriages up by an endless rope. Down hill was a rollercoaster, with the guard feverishly applying a brake. I've worked out how to do the down hill without smashing carriages and wagons into a hard stop. It is the uphill attachment of the rolling stock to the endless rope that I'm still puzzling over. The guard attached the rolling stock to the endless rope by a shorter rope but tying a thread to string is entirely too fiddly for a model railway!

Your solution, threelink, may be the thing I am after!

Bee

[What About The Bee]

What we have asked for is a big notification box to flag up centre screen which then has to be accepted by the poster before they can continue. The current notification is a one liner at top of screen and may even be off screen out of user sight, nor does it require acceptance.

 

 

Your description, 96RAF, is more concise than my description and is indeed the same solution. I am often caught out by the top of screen notifications, as they are just as you say, off screen.

There is one important thing that should be made clear to the web team. That center of the screen box should appear without interaction from the Hornby server. If you rely on the frequency response of that server, your issue will remain.

Here is why.

(This is an observation not a complaint. Treat it thusly). When we type characters here, each character appears to be sent to the server, and the server sends it back to your screen for display. This is fine for text only, there is near instantaneous response. The frequency of response is quite high. But images reduce the frequency response below 1 hertz into the fractional hertz range. The millions of bytes that represent an image must also make that bounce, for each character you type. I can prove this to you.

Load up a post with ~10 to 20 images and try typing. If your experience matches mine, you will find that pressing characters lags on the screen. This is low frequency response.

So far so good.

So here is the acid test for the web team. Load a post with a few images and text. Press the POST REPLY button. If my local web page is reliant on the server, the user will still be able to press that button before the server responds causing the center of screen box, due to the frequency response of that server.

That is, the server is still performing the task, and I am pressing that button repetitively*, because I still think it didn't work!

Bee

 

 

 

 

 

 

* whilst laughing maniacally over the havoc!!!! (A joke, obviously!)

 

 

[threelink]

@What about the Bee

I'm awaiting a provisional patent so cannot share details at present, sadly. I'm not sure how one might miniaturise the hanging on but will give it some thought. It's the endless rope that's a problem. I was poking about the LMR Edge Hill and Wapping Tunnel sites a year or two back- truly fascinating.

[threelink]

@Topcat

Apologies: I have only just spotted your post. The couplings are standard Smith's threelinks and the coupler operating device is concealed below the base board so there is nothing to see. The coupler can be operated electrically if desired but as you will see from my post replying to Bee, I am unable to provide any further worthwhile information at present. However, I can say that the thing works - surprisingly. Protracted testing has shown 100% reliability in uncoupling and 98% in coupling. The 2% failure rate arise from the fact that, occasionally, the link couplings hang askew which prevents proper functioning of the coupler. Any other failures are down to operator error.

[Deem]

So here is the acid test for the web team. Load a post with a few images and text. Press the POST REPLY button. If my local web page is reliant on the server, the user will still be able to press that button before the server responds causing the center of screen box, due to the frequency response of that server.

That is, the server is still performing the task, and I am pressing that button repetitively*, because I still think it didn't work!

Bee

Bee, this maybe irrelevant or you may find it helpful, when we upload images, depending on their size ie properties they can upload fast or slow along with speed of PC and Internet connection, time you are using the internet as well. What I have learned after experiencing the same issue as you mentioned, that I send pictures to my PC via whats app so size is significantly reduce and from there I upload to Forum and I don't get the Lag. When I was uploading full size picture lag was really really bad, at a point I wasn't sure if I am typing or just pressing keys on keyboard.

[What About The Bee]

Hi Deem

So you have observed the lag as well. That means the lag is site wide and not merely something I experience.

I think the lag is the stressor that causes the double posts that our mods are laboring under. The response from Hornby's server doesn't come, the user thinks the post not submitted and presses the key again!

If my post is to include images, I typically type the entire message, then add in the pictures just before posting it. The only lag is at the very end. I've still been caught out and admonished.🤷‍♂️

Our mods in the trenches are on top of this. I think their solution will function, but it must not rely on the Hornby server to display the pop up box. Pressing "post" on your device should be sufficient to trigger it, not an acknowledgment from the server. That lag is the stressor!

Bee

[What About The Bee]

@Threelink

As soon as I posted, I thought to myself, that sounds so novel, the man must be applying for a patent! Good on you Threelink! Best of luck!!

As to the machinery at Edge Hill, RGH Thomas The Liverpool and Manchester Railway 1980 provides mechanical details and drawings. The haulage rope: 6" in diameter, 4800 yards long, weighing 8½ tons. The main pulley, outer diameter 21 feet.

I can easily see burying tiny permanent rare earth magnets in a suitable "rope" and then using some sort of electromagnet on the carriage or wagon, energized by the rails. At the top of the incline, isolated non-powered rails permit the wagon to detach and the rope to continue alone.

Interestingly, in real life, the rope started and stopped to permit attaching and detaching of the carriages. Further, the carriages were hauled up hill at the incredible (for the time) speed of 15 mph!

Bee

[threelink]

@Bee

Yes, I can see the small magnet arrangement working. The best I had come up with was a mechanical arrangement involving some sort of stop blocks on the rope that could be picked up by the carriage or alternatively powering the carriages and leaving the rope as a dummy. Yours is a much more refined and workable approach. I woud give my eye teeth for a time machine enabling me to see some of the early railways in action, especially the LMR. Thanks for your comments about the patent. I look forward to revealing more detail at a later date

[What About The Bee]

TIME TO REPORT BACK ON MY FINDINGS

As you may recall from my first post in this thread, I replaced the tension lock couplings on my old Hornby LMR carriages with wire pegs. The wire pegs were suitably made to approximate the pegs on modern Hornby LMR stock.

Finding #1: The drag chain (fine scale coupling chain) kept sliding down the post, making the coupling of carriages more difficult. I will need a detent of some sort.

Finding #2: The pegs are too high. Next generation must be lower

Experience was set as lead carriage, with 15 modern carriages behind it. I attached all the drag chains and let the double head of Rocket and Lion drag the rake around. The intent is to put all the motive power on one side of Experience and all the drag on the trailing side of Experience. Will the wire pegs deform under load?

The video:

Finding #3: After 10 minutes of high and low speed, I was ready for inspection. NO DEFORMATION NOTED.

The wire is plenty strong enough. I simply have to reshape it and try again!

Bee

[What About The Bee]

Here is generation 2 of the tension lock replacements. The intent is to have a fine scale Hornby peg on old Hornby stock for the "drag chains"

Steps 1 through 3 should be self evident. In step 4, a loop is formed for the screw to go through. It isn't important to worry about perfect squareness as you get to step 5, just form the basic shape.

In between steps 4 and 5, I like to touch up the black coloured wire with a permanent black marker.

Install onto carriage, step 5, and now take the time to straighten everything out.

The drag chain now hangs off of my peg in a similar fashion to the modern peg. This is how I couple the carriages, with the chain extended from one, attaching to the other.

Here is the old tender attached to the modern 3rd class carriage, attached to the old 1st class carriage. All with drag chains.

I previously did a deformation test, which passed. These are shorter, and thus should be more robust. Nevertheless, the deformation test will be repeated.

Bee

[threelink]

@Bee

What a neat arrangement. Have you considered using commercial drawhooks e.g.Smith's (slightly overscale but very acceptable) and fine chain? I appreciate that such loose coupling will raise all sorts of potential problems with buffer locking and the like but there is an undeniable satisfaction in seeing trains bunch up and draw out as they progress. I hasten to say that I have no experience of the recent Hornby LMR stock - my experience is limited to 20th century freight rolling stock using three and "Instanter" links. Coupling and uncoupling might be an issue - I have an unfair advantage in having developed an contraption that enables me to couple and uncouple three links at the pull of a lever (patent applying for) so I do not need to resort to crochet hooks and similar to achieve manual coupling/uncoupling.

[What About The Bee]

Hi 3Link 👋

I may go to actual drag chains, but for now, the Hornby drag chain is sufficient. The Hornby drag chain has received mixed reviews, primarily for difficulty, but I find it simple to manipulate. Use each carriage in turn as a tool. The carriage holds the chain at an angle (as shown above) and then thread the drag chain onto the peg of the next carriage. While it may not be as fast as tension lock couplings, the drag chains do couple quite reasonably, perhaps 10 seconds each. Actual chains would require a new technique of course.

I simply do not like the appearance of tension locks, I think they spoil the illusion. Further, since they are not something I've grown accustomed to, I possess no affection for them. I do recognize that this is just my opinion and others may see it differently. It is apparent that there is some growing mood for change, as even Hornby are displaying magnetic couplings into NEM pockets.

I simply haven't developed a fine hand on the controls yet for actual chains. The Accurascale chaldrons use actual chains and they are taking a terrible beating, given my inadequate technique. Hopefully, with more time on the throttle, it won't be so rough.

Bee