A new take on the AJ

[steve howe]

I stumbled across this the other day, it all looks far too simple to be true....! but I'd be interested to know if anyone's trialled it. The shunting sequence at the beginning goes on a bit, but the technical explanation starts about 11.15. I'm not sure why he uses tiny magnets as droppers, but there seems to be no reason why steel droppers would not work just as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6BODTaQisE

Steve

[Tony W]

Hi Steve

I have to ask the question, WHY? Looking at the video there seems to be inconsistency in the construction of the hook which must surely lead to inconsistency of operation. I'm therefore not convinced that the video was filmed in one take. Also, the coupling seems to lack the 'solid' feel of an AJ and may therefore be more prone to damage.

Sorry for being negative but I just don't see the need to reinvent the wheel, a wheel that has been turning for nearly 75years, and keeps turning, despite all its critics. All I would say is, if it works for its creator, that's all that matters but I don't think I'll be rushing to change my stock just yet!!

Regards

Tony

[davebradwell]

I agree completely, Tony.

He uses thinner wire than the A/J - about 7 thou', wasn't it - but has perhaps made the shanks a bit too short, hence the assisting magnets. Somewhere back in MRJ (perhaps?) someone discussed making A/J hooks of this form with the double bend on the hook rather than the tail, as it is stronger and would permit use of thinner wire. There's so much subtlety about the Jackson coupler that makes me reluctant to make changes and I struggle to believe that it's as simple as this video makes out. I accidentally played the next vid which is of the real A/Js but his hook shape is very variable - one is like a lance, as used for jousting.

DaveB

[Crepello]

I think the magnet is a substitute for the usual dropper. He mounts the couplings much lower than
the usual convention, so the magnet would interact more reliably with the uncoupling electromagnet.

[steve howe]

Interesting responses! my view was if the thing only needs a 45* bend in two planes and still works, albeit using 'proper' AJ wire, positioning and actuation methods, does it not merit some investigation?

Steve
(with 12 pairs of 'proper' AJs on the bench awaiting installation!)

[Tony W]

Steve Howe wrote:
does it not merit some investigation?

Absolutely Steve - can you post your findings on here when you've completed them?

Tony

[jon price]

Interesting responses! my view was if the thing only needs a 45* bend in two planes and still works, albeit using 'proper' AJ wire, positioning and actuation methods, does it not merit some investigation?

I agree. I would be interested in a proper evaluation of the differences and their impact. I don't see particular value in mounting the wire closer up to the coupling hook location as the point about the design is that it is nearly invisible. The use of a tiny magnet (I suspect it could be even smaller) seems simpler than bending and mounting droppers, and reasonable in this context. That only leaves the question of the complexity of the bends in the wire.

[steve howe]

Steve Howe wrote:
does it not merit some investigation?

Absolutely Steve - can you post your findings on here when you've completed them?

Tony

I am, of course, acting in a purely advisory role...

Steve

[davebradwell]

Don't the 2mm people use a simplified hook with a single bend - I've seen it before somewhere. A downside to this large hook at 45 deg is that there's a lot of slack in it as the hooks have to overlap a long way before they couple. Essentially, though, it fails because it isn't a Jackson, nor is it compatible with one. No good if you liked going visiting - remember that! Doesn't matter how good it is, really.

DaveB

[jon price]

Essentially, though, it fails because it isn't a Jackson, nor is it compatible with one. No good if you liked going visiting - remember that! Doesn't matter how good it is, really. DaveB

Of course this applies to the absolute acme of accuracy: scale three links, or to Sprat and Winkle or any of the other more or less automatic couplings that are in use. My stock is never likely to run with anyone else's, or if I want to run on a test track it will be as a whole train. I have considered, (and still am) three links, Sprat and Winkle seem too obtrusive, but a simpler version of AJ might well be useful.

[nigelcliffe]

Don't the 2mm people use a simplified hook with a single bend - I've seen it before somewhere. A downside to this large hook at 45 deg is that there's a lot of slack in it as the hooks have to overlap a long way before they couple.

You may be thinking of the "Electra" coupling. Which has its own set of pros and cons. Its not a Jackson, or modified Jackson in how it works (unless one has a criteria of "made of bits of bent wire" for similarity). It has quite a few users in the NE of England.

The earlier upside-down bend Jackson was, I think, by Vincent de Bode. That used finer wire, so could work with shorter springy arm length. It does interwork with a standard Jackson, as the head is the same shape, so the cross-over of wires works in the same way (I tried a couple of wagons). There's an argument that with a long and heavy train, the VdB bend arrangement is less likely to open up a little, I don't have enough wagons to find out!


- Nigel