I’d like to add a humping yard to my layout but don’t have tons of room. Any thoughts on height (and how to raise the tracks!) without needing a long run downstream. I would like to be able to get about 4- 0-gauge cars on each siding. I can only fit about 3 sidings but I thought it would be fun to see the cars roll down to make up various train combinations.
Oh yeah, and what about placement of the uncoupler to release. Any problems or thoughts on that too?
If you’re only pushing one car over the hump at a time, using one of the Digital Control Systems, and a locomotive with an electro-coupler would work for uncoupling. If you want to push a string of cars over the hump, then you will need to use a track based uncoupler.
Doug
Here’s something random (I doubt that it’s useful). A while ago, I was paging through an old issue of Model Railroader (1980s or 1990s) and I stumbled upon a suggestion that pertains to this: essentially, make the rails in the hump yard slide back and forth. I’ll see if I can’t find the specific article, because, if I remember correctly, it included a mechanical plan.
“make the rails slide back and forth”. Now that’s something I would never have thought of! Interesting, thanks.
Yeah, I have my old set from the 50’s and am accustomed to those in track magnetic uncouplers. I’m not yet using fast track or Digital Controls. The new system sounds cool though. I’m still trying to rationalize $500+ for just a locomotive!
I see. I also never thought about releasing a string of cars but that would be super cool. Nevertheless, I’ll stick with my old time magnetic track uncoupler I guess. Still not sure about height of hump and ways to build the hump, and because of space limitations the sidings probably will only be about 4, 10" straights long
The uncoupling happens exactly where the prototype does uncoupling – at the crown of the hump. The problem is what the uncoupler does.
When a prototype coupler ‘pin is pulled’, the knuckle opens and the car can fall away from the cut. But if the shove kicks against the opened coupler, the pin can fall again and recouple – not what you want.
Absent some form of ‘motorization’ with magnets under the hump and bowl, you have to fire an uncoupler and keep it actuated until the car actually rolls clear – the cars will probably recouple under buff when the magnet is off. This makes me wonder if an uncoupling arrangement like NIB magnets raised and lowered will be a ‘better’ solution than electromagnets kept activated for what might be a long session…
As with a real hump, there may be concerns with how long cuts of cars behave vs. single cars. The analogue to retarders may not be something that works the way retarders do.
As soon as I find when the article came out, I should be able to send you a PDF.
I’m watching with interest to see just what this approach involved.
I quit procrastinating and found the magazine. I can’t upload PDFs, so instead here’s a screenshot. If I were building this (and I might, eventually), I’d maybe 3D print the mechanism. A problem that might come up is the mass of O as opposed to HO; maybe I’ll build a test version.
That is just fascinating. I thought it was going to be an adaptation of those “baseball” electric games of the '60s where the figures had slanted plastic ‘fingers’ underneath which turned vertical vibration into motion.
I wonder if the analogue of ‘skates’ in the bowl tracks could be made with positionable magnets a la uncouplers attracting magnets in cars at or near the end of each cut being built…
That’s entirely possible…
By the way, those “baseball” games seem to share some mechanical elements with certain Lionel accessories (like their operating stock car and corral).
seems to create motion similarly to how Lionel’s “vibrotor” operated. Thinking of the 264 Forklift Platform, 342 Culvert Loader, and the 3435 Aquarium car.
-El
Wow, and I thought this would be a simple press the uncoupler button and away the car goes. I see there’s more to it and I’d better think twice before I saw once. Appreciate the ideas, thoughts, and article.
That’s what I was thinking too.