Mine do, but . . .

Mine do, but that's about the limit.  I planned 2.5% grades and 11 car coal trains.  Right now, it all seems to work fine, but in a couple of spots, where the grade must be just a tad more, the wheels start slipping and the engine works pretty hard to get over that spot.  I have some plans:

1. Bullfrog Snot on non-powered drivers (if there are some)
2. Pusher operations or double heading.
3. Replace all hopper wheels with free-rolling metal wheels.  Curently only one axle is metal, for block occupancy detection.
4. Last resort - shorten my trains to 9 cars.

Right now I apply sand (push down a little on the loco) to get over the rough spots.  Prototypical!!  Maybe I'll add sand along the rails in the steep parts so operators know where they have to apply some sand.  

I'll be interested to hear what your experience is and how you handle it.

Then what am I missing?

Did you have to do any modifications to them as far as adding weight? And to be clear, I'm talking about the C&O H-5 class 2-6-6-2's. I've already converted most, if not all of my freight car wheels from plastic to InterMountain 33" metal, so I'm all covered in that department.

H-4 & H-5

I routinely run a mine turn using either of an (HO) Spectrum H-4 or H-5 up a long 3.5 % grade with a max of 9 empties. Cars are a mix of manufacturer hoppers with IM wheel sets.  Speeds are kept slow (typically 10 mph). Curves are 21" min.  Above 9 cars the hill is doubled. This is close to what the prototype did in the modelled locale. I haven't tested double-heading yet for longer uphill trains, but it was a common practice on the C&O coal branches. 

I do find the H-4 seems a little less capable than the H-5 version, but that may just be my sample.  I suggest testing to find the limit for your conditions and than backing off a car or two to be safe.  Don't be surprised if you need to double a hill or run double headers under some conditions. Both were normal practice and adds to the operational experience.

Rick...

Presuming you are a C&O modeler (as your signature seems to indicate) can you share with us what you know about the capacity for the 2-6-6-2's in coal operations?  What was their max capacity (loaded tonnage and empties) were they double headed or was it strictly pusher operations for them.  Were they typical for coal train assignments?  I was thinking of using a few for delivering hoppers and picking up hoppers from the mines, or was this not usually done by the 2-6-6-2's?

Thanks

Ken L.

Powerbase - a different approach to tackling gradients

you might want to look at this product

https://www.dccconcepts.com/product-category/specialised-model-accessories/dccconcepts-powerbase/

which is designed to help solve the problem you have

look at

good luck

. . .

Just a suggestion ,.. do not add weight to the tender. It is not tractive (unless it is 'driven') at all and adding weight to it simply puts more drag on engine. Just enough weight to keep the tender electrical pick up happy.

Any weight added should be to engine only and based on this photo, good luck adding weight.

Marc

truck tuner & roll ability

i replaced my wheel sets with Intermountain sets but noticed a big difference between the roll ability.   Some cars rolled on what seemed like a flat grade.   others, not so.

so i built a test track with a screw I could turn to adjust the height  and hence grade.   starting from a flat grade, I tested each truck by counting the turns (hence grade) on the test track until the car rolled.   If the grade was more than 2%, i used the truck tuner until it did roll at 2% or less.

many trucks were ok.   Others needed quite a bit of work to get to 2%.   I settled on 2% because of the difficulty of some trucks.

the other thing to consider is how much pull do your cars need.   For small grades, you can use the percent grade to calculate it.    a 6" car should weight 4 oz requiring 0.08 oz (4 oz * 2%) to pull up a 2% grade with good (< 2%) trucks.   10 cars, 0.8 oz

this doesn't account for the drag of the truck (that won't roll freely until the grade> 2%.   So it's more

the tractive force of the locomotive is at best 20-25% of its weight.    So for a pull of> 0.8 oz, the loco needs to weight ~4 oz (0.8 oz / 20%, maybe more depending on how evenly the weight is distributed on the drivers.

No American Loco installations, tests?

Looking at these videos it seems as many of the 'powerbase' ones are 5 years old?.....and no American locos tested/demonstrated??

Look behind ...

... and power the tender with a mechanism from a small diesel.  It's been done before.

Mine Runs

Ken

Yes, I am a C&O modeler and a member of the C&O HS.  There is an excellent book from the COHS on these locos - No. 15 in their History Series.  That being said they were very versatile engines, used in mine runs and mainline pusher service too.  The short wheel base (10 ft) made them ideal for the sharp curves in the mine branches and very powerful.  They operated both singlely and as double headers depending upon the number of cars and grades involved.  Typical (and I say typical) mine runs were in the range of 15-25 cars, but varied a lot.

The 2-6-6-2 where generally the 'go-to' loco for mine runs during most of the steam era.  Some branches were limited to 2-8-0's because of short tail tracks and bridge weight limits. If you want to know more the COHS has a lot of published material on the mines, locos, cars, and so forth. Even searching their image archive (cohs.org) will yield a lot of interesting things.

Thanks Rick

I just might have to join the C&O HS.  Definitely will be looking into the materials they publish! Thanks again! 

ken L. 

Seems like three options

So it seems like I've got four options, (a) use the magnets and put that on every steam engine, (b) go with diesels for the coal drags and make do with putting the articulateds on mine/branch duty, (c) go brass and just accept I'll have to have them, remotered, decoder-equipped, etc..., or (d) go with something like the Bachman Berkshires or spectrum mountains where I can load it up with weight. I'm too much of a steam fan, so I'll probably end up going with option d. 

Any other comments would be welcome.

Option E

Links requested

Ahhh...Yeah, I can see it working. I just, it seems like it would be an expert level skill to go retrofitting one into a Spectrum or P2K tender. Are there videos or blog posts out there showing step-by-step pictures. I would probably try it on something cheap like an IHC tender before I go cutting up something as nice as a Spectrum engine.

Brass???

I have some brass steamers, and they aren't much heavier, if at all, than plastic locos. The boiler shell is pretty thin stuff; I have filled lots of nooks and crannies in a couple of them with low-melting metal to get more traction. That picture from Marc of the filler inside the boiler is offputting. Not many places for added weight, unless you can drill holes in the filler where you can add something more dense.  If you go for brass, expect to add weight, but there should be room for it.

Cast metal locos are heavier than brass or plastic. BLI comes to mind, as well as the older Roundhouse and Bowser kits. Not easy to find your 2-6-6-2 this way.

DrJolS

What year?

If you can have H-8's I hear the MTH ones are supposed to be very good pullers. 

Weight, balance and

Weight, balance and traction...

These are some of my experiences.

Locomotives need traction, and often that is only associated with weight.

However, balance is equally important. I.e.  that all the driving wheels have the same weight on them. On some of my locomotives I've actually removed weight to improve balance and gotten better traction. It is also imperative to lessen the lifting forces from pilot wheels and other non driven wheels.

The cars....

I have abandoned the ancient learnings of the NMRA, and instead taken the advice from Railway engineering. There's absolutely no need to have heavy cars.

The thing that does matter is that the trucks swivel free, roll easily and that they have a correct three point suspension! That one truck can only swivel while the other move more loosely to take up unevenly laid track. I use metal wheels on all my rolling stock, and ream out the trucks when necessary.

The track then? Avoid all magic oil potions like the plague. I polish and clean my tracks, and make sure that all the joints are even, especially on the grades. Nothing can hinder a train as much as a small bump on an incline....

Inclines, when built, are triple checked to have an equal and compensated grade.

That means that if I want a 2% grade, I make it 2% on the straight track, and less on the curved.

I use 1.5% on my 24" curves on my HOn3 layout.

Hope this can be of any help.

Great Thread

This is a great thread, and highlights many of my design concerns and discoveries over the past five years.  Goose, I have an H4 and an H5, unmodified except for an added sound decoder, and performance with them seems to be about the same.  I meant to test my longest train but got "sidetracked" last night.  I think though, it's unnecessary with Rick's excellent response.  I second every thing he said, and as an aside, I strongly encourage you to join the COHS.  I did that a number of years ago, and it's one of the best things I did in the hobby.

FWIW, here are a couple shots of pusher operations on the C&O.  The first is an H4 at the rear.  Lots more photos like this at COHS.

Powered Tenders

Dear Goose,

Links are a bit thin on the ground, although I did confirm that Rich Weyland had it pretty well covered in Kalmbach's "Model Railroad Planning 2002" article on his N scale N&W layout. In N scale, Rich reported his ConCor Y6bs were barely the tractive equivalent of a pair of geeps, and he wanted one Y6b capable of hauling a coal train which would overpower a four (4) Geep lashup. Kato came to the rescue with their RSC-2 loco, sporting 3-axle trucks with disturbingly similar-to-tender-truck-axle-spacings. 

The basic process itself is not actually all that difficult. I "saved" a neighbour's Tyco Chattanooga Choo Choo which had sentimental value with a similar conversion a few years ago,
using a current-spec centre-motor B'mann 44-tonner 
(apologies for the poor pic)

Literally:
- Remove tender shell from tender frame
- Remove all handrails from the 44-tonner (not needed up inside the tender shell)
- Remove cab from 44-tonner (makes the diesel low-enough to fit within the tender shell)
- Remove the 44-tonner headlight castings from both ends of the hood
(saves a few millimetres of protrusion length, and I had plans to use them elsewhere)
- slide the resulting "44-tonner low-profile power unit" up inside the tender shell
(IE the mechanical mounting of the diesel mech is "factory stock as-designed")

...and you're basically done.

NB that there was no catastrophic surgery or modifications performed on either the tender frame or shell,
which means the conversion was/is easily reversible up until the 95% mark,
and could be tested for functionality well before any "points of no return" are tripped...
(The loco even got a "free DCC conversion/upgrade" in the bargain... ).

The diesel frame may need some minor narrowing to fit up inside the tender shell,
but that's only a minute-or-2's work with a razor saw.

Given the options you're considering,
this one is cheaper than most any of the "replace the mallet with other locos" options,
and stands the best chance of you ending-up with a working mallet (which you already own)...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr
 

Simply adding weight

Or friction coefficient( ie, bull frog snot) does not buy you much margin.  The tractive effort-weight function can be shallow.  The motor will be running at or near stall which is the highest current and highest motor temperature.  At stall the speed is zero.  With the second motor in play, both will operate away from stall, reducing unit current and temperature.  It will give you more speed/ load capacity for those variations that always occur. 

How you add the second motor is dependent on your situation.  Prof’s idea is excellent as usual.  It raises the cost per unit, But you always have the extra power.  With a helper, you have to add it as needed.  Which may be part of you modeling intent.  

It’s a fun problem to have.

Bingo!

Larry, I agree!  As I expanded my branch line to the coal mines and small towns, I discovered I had inadvertently designed in a larger grade than I intended.  My coal mine trains still make the grade (with some difficulty as described earlier).  But along the way I became enamored of, and purchased, several small steam freight locomotives.  I envisioned 10 or 11 car local freights to service the towns, but lo-and-behold, a couple of those beautiful engines will only pull 3 or 4 cars up the grades.  This threw me into a tizzy, and I started questioning everything!

I had weighted the cars to NMRA standard, so I thought about removing weight.  But I like the way they roll and feel with the added weight.  I thought about adding more metal wheels, but the plastic wheels are quieter, which I like.  I thought about modifying the benchwork.  (big job!)

Then it occurred to me, what a cool problem.  I can run a couple smaller local freights and have another job on the roster.  I can run double heading.  I can double the train, adding operating interest.  And, way cool, I'm adding load capacity to my engine cards.  Now the yardmaster will have to consider the size of the train before assigning an engine, to make sure it can handle the load.  That's cool!  

So now I'm glad I made the error!

Coach Yard power trucks?

Wow, lots of awesome advice. I think I'll do a combination of things then. As for the Spectrum engines, just leave them the way they are and put them on local and helper duty. And as far as mainline power, pick up two or three of the latest 2-10-2's from IHC, pack the shells with extra weight, put a Tsunami 2 in, and have those get me by until I have a layout where I can knock the grade down to 1% or 1.5%. Actually, I wouldn't mind adding mechanisms to the spectrum tenders except for the fact that your eye would be drawn to the tender trucks instead of the locomotive weathering. At least with the IHC, the 3-axle power trucks would blend in. 

Anyways, thanks for the advice and direction, appreciate it.

And FYI, I'll try to have a layout update out in a couple of weeks, along with footage of the Big Boy and railroad museum in Boone.

In N scale

My Maclau River RR is modeled in N scale.

My hoppers are loaded in the mine with real N scale coal, because I need really loaded hoppers for my two car dumper in port Allen.

When Bachmann offered the H4 and H5 I buy severals of them, to make a fleet of eight mallet for the small mine run.

Like the HO models these locomotives are poor puller for a mallet, and are insignifiant on grade with really loaded 33'hoppers.

My standard grade is 2% but curves are broad but in anyway add lost of power for the mallet, with loaded hoppers a train of 5 cars was a great maximum, very bad, very sad.

So it was necessary to find a way   to run a 15 car trains with these machines

Dismantle these locomotive in N scale  is quiet difficult but after some gray hairs which poped up quickly, I was able to have the locomotives in parts.

I have replaced all the wheights wich are not part of the frame with lead, part of the frame where filed and the left over space replaced also with lead, small holes where also drilled in the frame and filled with lead

Piece of lead where glued Under the two Wheel engines but also in the cab, even the plastic bottom of the cab is actualy a piece of lead.

The result is a locomotive which has nearly the double weight as the original and a much better puller, the 15 cars goal is reached.

Unfortunately, three Bachmann motors burned quiet quickly probably because of the added weight, they where replaced by Mashima motors which are nearly a drop in, but these motors are quieter and have better torque.

These three machines are very powerful now and probably in the future I shall change the 5 other motors with Mashima one

I have add weight on all my steam roster, often with good results, but sometimes not; locomotives need to be somewhere well balanced on the track; really not an easy task in N scale.

Adding wheight is an old trick and work quiet well, but it need often imagination to put wheight in tiny place.

The drilling method work quiet well; it's also possible to make a new weight, when it's not the frame itself,  in lead by molding it in special silicone and pour it in in liquid, knowing lead has a quiet low melting temperature, some friends have done it in HO with excellent result.

Late John Allen, used intensively weight to add power to his locomotive and reached the goal to have good looking train on his 4% grade.

Course I have checked if all the wheels are in level and balanced with the track.

I don't know about making a powered tender, I know the the trick but never try or use it, find is a great idea, but if someone can explain how to deal with DCC to have the locomotive and the powered tender running toghether at the same speed, knowing we have "two really different locomotives" together.

Weight

One thing I've found with weight:  If the cars are of similar length and weight, you can get by with lighter cars.  I have a string of the Tichy ore cars, which, when empty, have no room for hidden weight.  One thing I did was put weight as low as possible--Kadee metal trucks--and that seemed to make the weight count for a little more.

(The Bachmann 44 tonner--a WONDERFUL piece of equipment for all sort of projects.)