I want to pu***he “decoupling” button on my thrrottle and have the engine or car decouple from the rest of the consist. Information on this topic seems scarce. Anyone have info on this? Patrick Sirk, Larkspur. Ca.
There’s only one – the Digital Direct Coupler offered by Tony’s Train Exchange. Pricey, and it fits only onto a locomotive.
Look for the DDC information under Products Catalog.
Another option is an electromagnet under the track powered by a stationary decoder. That only works if you are parked over it. Somewhat limted but it would work.
It really surpises me that there aren’t many companies manufacturing DCC controlled decouplers. It would be such a handy feature to have. I suppose engineering the mechanism is really challenging.
I am sure that the problem would be the anticipated return on investment. Engineering wouldn’t be as problematic as getting enough people to purchase the device(s) in quantities early enough to stave off creditors.
I think the issue is PRICEY.
no matter how you look at it, the prototype is pretty much a manual operation.
Kadee has it right and the manual uncouplers work.
http://dccuncoupling.com
I just found this thru NMRA. Looks interesting. Uses Digitrax Transponder inside an Athearn Boxcar to engage a standard Kadee. Price 69.99 (includes the Athearn car).
The reason this intrigues me so much is that my layout is shelf mounted over my head and I want to be able to uncouple wherever I want without having to jump up the ladder or drive to a specific spot on the layout.
Let’s see - $70 for a ‘single ended’ DCC uncoupler in a box car? Double ended available on ‘special order’ - How about a ‘flat car’? I bet the orders can be counted on their fingers! But then, some folks will try anything…
Jim
IT WOULD require 2 electromagnets PER CAR, and since the cheapest trin-
coil device on the market sells @ $7.50, I don’t think many are going to invest $5, $10, or $15, for this feature on a per-car basis, when KD’s stationary Electromagnets can do the job, and the prototype UNCOUPLES by hand.
Of course, You might be the exception.
Enough of this facetious bull. I don’t give a darn about the prototype. I want to decouple ANYWHERE I want with the push of a button. What’s the matter with you people?
Well…
I would suggest you invent something that will do what you want instead of coming
on here and expecting folks to answer stupid questions. Good luck with your search
for a product that doesn’t exist. Dave
BTW… It’s “UNCOUPLE”
Go Dave [^]
Terry[8D]
But you will need one in every car on the layout to do it right. Other wise you can only uncouple just the engine or one car. You would still have to get up on the ladder to uncouple any other car.
That would get expensive real quick!
BOB H - Clarion, PA
I’m gradually installing the Kadee magnets, both fixed magnets for the yards and electromagnets for the main lines, to prevent accidental uncoupling when I just happen to stop there. My goal is to be able to do all the uncoupling I really want to do, without resorting to the “5-DCC” uncoupler, which I understand will be announced in a few days.
Like everything else I want but don’t know how to do, I regard placing my uncouplers as an “engineering challenge.” The thing that helps most is using the Kadee “delayed” uncoupling feature, which lets me uncouple at one point and then spot the car somewhere further down the track. With this, the 6 sidings in my yard can be served with only 2 uncoupler ramps. With a pair of main-line electromagnet uncouplers and a handful more fixed magnet ramps, I will be able to put my cars anywhere I want them, even though I will have fewer than a dozen “uncoupling zones” on the layout.
Careful planning and placement of a few uncouplers is all you need. Doing it this way is not only cheaper, but I think you’ll find it’s also operationally more of a challenge as well.
Thanks for the recent informative posts on uncoupling. I reacted poorly in my above post to what I perceived to be dogmatic adherance to old, albeit trusted, methods of uncoupling. For this , I apologize. However, I must say that it strikes me as nonprototypical (or is it “unprototypical”) to be limited in any way on where one decided to uncouple. That, among other things, drives me to find an alternative method. I would keep costs down by dedicating one uncoupling car per engine. This car would need only one device to uncouple (the consist side) and would always ride with that engine. A compromise, yes. Furthermore, it seems that I have three choices in this alleged “non existant device” and I’m sure I am not the only person out there interested in them. All the best… Patrick Sirk, Larkspur, Ca.
Actually, I think I have a cost-effective solution to “uncoupling anywhere”…at least the electronics part. The hard part is in the coupler itself. How to trip the coupler in some way with a very small actuator, be it a solenoid, or more likely, a muscle wire gizmo.
If anybody has some ideas about that, contact me.
george
You may want to check into Loksound. I don’t remember the web address. While they do not currently have an uncoupler developed for rolling stock, I think they are pointed in the right direction. They are developing a system with “Plug & Play” technology where each car is equipped with a small decoder for transponding. The decoder also has function outputs that might could power a small coil to work the coupler. It would require some brainwork and enginuity on your part. Who knows you might develop something that every MRRer wants. In the meantime, I’ll have to stick with my Kadees, magnets, and delayed action on the coupler to be able to spot cars beyond the magnetic uncouper.
Current non-powered Kadee couplers are as prototypical as one can get–on prototype railroads, in order to uncouple, a guy walks over to the car and uncouples them, wherever the car may be, by hand. It isn’t a matter of a guy pressing a button in the cab to uncouple cars. On the model, if you don’t want to use magnets, you can just go over with a skewer or small screwdriver and uncouple by hand. Uncoupling this way really puts you in the scene.
The current DCC method of uncoupling, on the other hand, is technically unrealistic: instead of opening the coupler, as the prototype does, it lifts the coupler above the other car’s coupler–not realistic at all.
Your plan of an “uncoupler car” has its own limitations–it means that you can only uncouple from that point, not exactly realistic if you want to simulate switching operations. There will also be other problems–switching on a model railroad usually involves getting close to the action so you can make sure that cars are coupled together properly.
A realistic remote-actuated coupler would definitely be a difficult critter to manufacture. As mentioned above, it would require some sort of tiny solenoid or muscle wire within the coupler. Take a close look at a Kadee coupler sometime and try to imagine the tiny widget you’d need to fit inside the coupler–which is itself less than 1/4" wide–and then manage a linkage from the coupler assembly to the inside of the car body, where wiring and power and a DCC decoder would reside. Plenty of room in a boxcar, but on an unloaded flatcar, or a passenger car with interior detail, a bit more of a challenge. Then keep in mind that the coupler must still turn reliably enough, without activating the linkage, on sharp curves! Considering that the prototype railroads haven’t figured out how to do it in the past 100 years, it is no surprise that model railroaders balk at the challenge.
You are asking for a relatively simple thing–but this relatively simple thing would be devilis
Just for fun, though, I started thinking about how we could do this. My solution would be an Atlas switch machine, with the wire actuator that sticks out the end. Try this first on a flat car, but then plan to disguise it inside a box car if it works. First, bend the end of the wire down at a right angle so that when the machine sits on the flatcar, the bent end fits into the knuckle of the coupler. Try flipping the machine to see what effect it has on the coupler. You should be able to align things, maybe with a bit of bending of the wire, so that the switch machine will open the coupler.
Next, of course, you will need a decoder to throw the machine, and some pickups on the trucks to pull power off the rails.
Another option would be a Peco turnout motor. For that one, you would need to build some kind of linkage, because the motor is too wide to mount the way you want it to throw. However, the Peco machine does not “latch” to the side like the Atlas ones do, so the coupler would be free to swing back and forth more easily once you release the button and stop applying current to drive the Peco to the “open” position.
ZIMO decoders have a decoupler function included for many years. You can program the decoder with the pull-in and hold voltage required for the coil so it doesn’t go up in smoke. At the moment their are only a few coupler manufacturers that make such couplers, namely Krois and Roco. We have been using this function on many Lionel locos with their original couplers as well.
Regards,
Art
Zimo Agency of North America
http://www.mrsonline.net/