Can anyone recommend a Dcc method for Decoupling?

[Anonymous]

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.

[cacole]

There's only one -- the Digital Direct Coupler offered by Tony's Train Exchange. Pricey, and it fits only onto a locomotive.

http://www.tonystrains.com

Look for the DDC information under Products Catalog.

[jbinkley60]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[selector]

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.

[dinwitty]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[jrbernier]

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

[Don Gibson]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Gambino

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.

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.

[Anonymous]

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?

[dave9999]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Gambino

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"

[scubaterry]

Go Dave [^]
Terry[8D]

[cmrproducts]

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

[MisterBeasley]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[olequa]

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

[Anonymous]

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.

[Jetrock]

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 devilishly difficult to implement on a universal basis, probably requiring some leaps in miniature actuators. There are a few workarounds, which, in their own way, have as many limitations as stationary uncoupling magnets. Do I think there will never be such a widget? No, but don't expect it soon.

[MisterBeasley]

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.

[aluesch]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tweet469

You may want to check into Loksound..... The decoder also has function outputs that might could power a small coil to work the coupler.....

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/

[Anonymous]

Wow, this stuff is becoming fascinating. Nice to see craetive juices flowing. I think I'll try out one of these methods. As for the prototypical\non prototypical debate, it's really here nor there in my opinion. For me, I view "giant hands" coming down on the railroad to uncouple a distraction from the visual presentation, kind of like a puppet show. Simply a preference, not a judgement. The bottom line is doing what you enjoy. I honestly am more interested in model railroads than the real thing. I love the intricate technology that goes with DCC and using that tech in creative ways. In fact, it was hearing about DCC that got me involved in this hobby.

[tatans]

Gambino: Your thoughts parallel mine exactly, it's 2006 and "Giant Hands" with bamboo skewers still intrude into the layout, the odd part is how many modellers accept this odd behaviour as standard and defend it, surely the technology is here to solve the problem of un(de)coupling today, maybe the magic of "DCC" will save the day.
Just wait for the first guy to invent the universal coupling system and see how many people will defend the bamboo skewer system, it's coming.

[Jetrock]

The giant hands just don't bother me. The giant hands on my layout also throw turnouts. The common factor is that it makes working the railroad a hands-on experience, rather than a remote-control one.

[docgartner]

Here it is. IMHO the slickest way to uncouple using DCC. I have used it and it works. The creator, *** Bronson, has been too busy with the USB rendition of LocoBuffer II to be able to devote enough attention to the concept. Give him time. Send an email to show interest!

http://www.rr-cirkits.com/uncoupler.html

Seth Gartner
Charlotte, NC

[rrgrassi]

It would not be so bad if the Kadees locked closed like the prototype and used a small pin that lifted like the prototype instead of the oversized "Brake Hose" used now. It would need to be unsprung like the prototype and the pin would need to fall in like the prototype when a car couples up. I think that would be a neat invention.

[Don Gibson]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Gambino

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.

There you ARE! @ only $70 per (10 car) train - providing they're still in business. You'll probably want 20 cars to start.

[Jetrock]

The chain method with muscle wire is interesting--definitely some "outside the box" thinking there, and it is done in the prototypical manner.

My eyes and fingers both hurt at the thought of soldering bits of chain and muscle wire to every car in my fleet, though, and my wallet hurts at the thought of spending $70 for each car for DCC Uncoupling Modules.

I'll stick to my stick, thanks...

[Anonymous]

You can buy a few RTR locos with DCC uncoupling installed, unfortunately they all use the European hook and loop coupler. Lenz have a rather nice 0-6-0 switcher while Roco have a couple (excuse the awful unintended pun!) of modern German locos with it. On the Lenz example, the coupler hook is rigged to drop down on command and release the car it's coupled to. The interesting part is that the Roco models are in fact prototypical - the DB (German railway) have fitted out a number of locos with folding auto-couplers that work by grabbing the coupler hook on the car - truly there is a prototype for everything!

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Gambino

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.

Dear Patrick and others

I am cleaning out my projects drawer. I have six box cars with DCC uncouplers on each end. They have all wheel electrical pickup and Digitrax TF4 function only decoders. F3 controls the uncoupler on one end and F4 controls the one on the other end. These were the protoype for the System 5-0 DCC Uncoupler.

http://dccuncoupling.com/

Please contact me if you are interested.

Regards,

Britt Harrington
Miami, Florida

BTW It is best to contact me off list. Google FBritt DCC

[Anonymous]

I just posted this topic a few months ago. I sort of got hammered for the stupidity of the idea and was told even real railroads uncouple their cars manually. I think DCC uncoupling is a great idea and you will probably see it evolve in the future into a viable uncoupling solution. Another reason to wonder if we have enough functions on our DCC system.

I'm sure when the first electric starter for automobiles came out, there were those who said they wanted 'hands-on' and so continued to crank the starter manually. See anybody starting a car like that today? LOL! I just don't buy the argument.