Videos of WBB 10-wheeler & Lionel UP 9000

Lee, man that big engine sure comes close to the edge. Scary close. Don

Fantastic stuff Lee, thanks much for the ten wheeler videos. Mines on layaway and  now I really can,t wait to get it out! James

long wheelbase engines are particularly sensitive to track anomalies (like kinks at section joints),  articulated engines handle these fine since each driving truck (with its associated pickup rollers) is independently connected to the frame.  i would give your track work a very careful look.

Lee: You might need some extended guard rails there. Thanks for the video's.

Forrest, you are absolutely correct,  the longer the straight run of unsprung wheels the more sensitive the loco has to be to track anomalies.  This loco is the least forgivening and by far the most sensitive of all my O-72 locos for that reason and I guess that was my point to anyone looking at it.  

There are no correctable links or track laying issues I can find, and no problems I can correct without creating a problem or a running situation I won't accept elsewhere.  

I know this might seem strange but if you look carefully at the video you will see why.  The 9000 runs off the rails right over a tunnel for the Superstreets road passing under it at the very apex of this loop having climbed at a modest 1.2% for nearly 28 feet (4 inch rise).  At this point, over only four feet of run (all I have to change to heading down), the track shifts to 1.2% down so that this track can:

1. pass under the track just above and to the right as you look at it in the video, in only about seven more feet of run (that track is climbing at a slightly more aggressive 1.5% to 1.8%)
2. continue on down for another 18 feet past that point to loop back under itself: the lower/lowest track you see to the left of the loco in the beginning of this video is this same loop after it has done so.  

I built this loop piece by piece testing each section to assure myself that three locos would run on it:

1. a JLC Big Boy which tolerates these slope changes with no problems
2. a Lionel scale 2-10-4 (it was the longest driver set I had at the time) which bobbles very slightly here but continues through smoothly.  
3. an early '50's Lionel 2-4-2 that I had as a kid.  I arranged the track slope so it was gentle as possible through this loop, no more than 1.2%, so that at a constant throttle setting of this old veteran cruises well on this loop: it slows but not too much going up the 1.2% slopes and speeds but not too much going down the 1.2% slopes on this loop.  Steeper slops cause it to stall up or jackrabbit off the rails down.  

at the point the engine stops (i really wish the video had continued longer so i could see it sitting there), what is touching rails (wheels and rollers) and what isn't?

I wish I had run the video longer but I stopped the moment it derailed and i didn't want to abuse it but running it again.    

When its came to a stop this afternoon, the flange on the inside wheel of the fifth set of drivers (the rearmost flanged drivers) was on the outside of the inside rail. Despite this, I think what happened is that as it rounded this O-72 curve and the track fell away from it due to the drop in slope, the leading set of drivers tried to ride up and over, not quite making it but leading to an angle change and the rear set of flanges getting off kilter, then when the thing stopped the front set settled back down.  I really don't know but that was my impression - it stuttered once quickly just before and then stopped due to a short - one of the center pickups was making contact with the inner rail.

Its a good loco.  I won't buy the Legacy because this runs, has almost all the detail and features of the new one and I can't run it very much.  But I like it a lot and would recommend it to anyone that has loops they know will not give a sensitive loco problems. As the video showed, it surely looks impressive when its moving!

is that atlas track?

Strangely, my Lionel 4-12-2 is content to run on my 0-72 curves without "binding".

I use GG with some super-elevated curves. I like the 4-12-2 (and the gas turbines), even though I find the UP pretty near the bottom of my "like" list, always. I keep wanting

to re-letter the 4-12-2, but it's such a signature loco that it always seems silly.

Of course, aren't you the guy who repainted a blasted Southern Railway Ps-4 Pacific

and re-lettered it for the UP? 

Hmmm-how about a green-and-gold Southern Railway 4-12-2? That would push a few cars up Southern's Saluda Hill - the steepest mainline grade in the US, I think. (4+%).

Rocky Mountains? Feh! The Appalachians are STEEP!

I'm using Fastrack only.

Yes, I am guilty of repainting a Southern Crescent Pacific flat black and relabeling it UP.  Also of taking a bandsaw to a brand new two-truck shay to lower it by 3/8 inches.  

A Southern 4-12-2?  It would be grand.  I'd do it if I had any Southern on my layout.  The only thing I can think of better: a Southern Veranda Turbine!  The Southern Veranda . . . now there is a nostalgic name for a train. 

Lee, Always love to see your posts!

I had a similar track issue (fastrack), but it was a single 30 inch piece of straight.

I put 3 of these sections down. The train would run on the first , get to the second and stop. The tender would continue making sounds as it was on a different section. Tried  adding power feeds to that track piece, but it didn't work.

Cleaned the track... no go.

Got the DMM out... track had power, but the train still stopped.

My only thought is something happens to the coating that is applied to the track. Depending on the run, maybe the metal mix wasn't exactly spec, and the oxide is not conductive.

I don't know why I have had this problem with fastrack.I appreciate you sharing your experience as it helps us who are contemplating following in your footsteps.

It is one of the reasons I have been looking into other track systems.  I have even been thinking about making my own track. I want something that works, runs good,

easy to maintain ( ie wont rust on me), won't tear up my wheels with rough joints....

This is from the folks at train-li:

• Aluminium is a very poor choice for track power, because its oxidizes within minutes
• Brass is a very good conductor and oxidizes to a nice rust brown, however, needs to be regularly cleaned.
• Nickel plated Brass has the same excellent conductivity qualities of Brass but has a 100% corrosion free coating, that eliminates the daily grind of polishing the rials. Nickel plated Brass should not be mixed up with Nickel-Silver which has tendencies to oxidize heavily. Nickel plated Brass rivals Stainless steel which often shows pitting.
• Nickel-Silver has good conductivity but only if it is not oxidized. I personally disliked all my Nickel-Silver pieces (some specialty switches and crossings) and I am happy that they are out of the layout.
• Stainless Steel is with the exception of pitting corrosion free. But Stainless Steel has only 1/10 of the conductivity of Brass. In addition its price is of the charts in today's market so if you are looking for the effects of Stainless Steel pick Nickel plated Brass.

and this on another thread:

 I was just looking at a chart listing the relative electrical conductivity of some common metals as follows.

Silver 106
Copper (annealed) 100
Aluminum 59
Brass 28
Steel 3-15 (it must depend on which alloy of steel we're talking about)
Nickel silver (18% silver) 5.3

http://www.modelrailroadforums...dex.php/t-11067.html

There is another site authored by rayman4449. He says that stainless keeps the carbon from forming from dust and other contaminants being "arced" from the electricity, thus the better conductivity of stainless steel.

Lee, I would like to pick you mind on this as you are also an engineer.

It may be that the actions of this 4-12-2 are prototypical.   I wouldn't doubt that the prototypes had tracking problems, too. The UP can't even bring the FEF 844 into Dallas because the track curves are too tight for its 4 in-line drivers. The articulated 4-6-6-4 Challenger 3985 does just fine, however.

The UP seems to have a history of experimenting with all sorts of goofy stuff, on into the diesel era, with the Centennial and the Turbines. The Pennsy is the only other road I can think of that experimented with all different kinds of configurations on its engines. Maybe those two roads were the ones with the resources to spend on these sorts of things. 

Clearly, some of these O scale engines are just too big for all but a handful of operators to use. I'd imagine an engine like this UP 9000 probably needs at least 0-96 to be happy, and at all forgiving, let alone look good. A very impressive shelf queen, though, I imagine. A reinforced shelf, of course.

I was feeling guilt about "beating up" on the Lionel Up 9000.  So;

Here is a still photo of a BEEP sitting atop the 9000.  How interesting that the length between centers of the 1st and 6th driver set (7.75") is just the same as the length, without couplers, of the BEEP (the photo is distorted due to perspective so I've drawn red lines that are perpendicular in the real world.  Of course the BEEP, even with wheels five inchs apart, will tolerate all manner of rough track because it does not have wheels in between its axles that insist the whole be perfectly flat.  To run right and true, this 9000 needs FLAT track under all twelve of its drivers.  

Here is a short video of the 9000 proving it goes through 72" curves well -- it is on the lower (abbreviated) portion of my big loop - this is a flat, level, 16 x 10 foot all 0-72 loop I can switch out so that this and a couple of other monsters can run without going out onto the "long" part of this loop, that snakes up and over this level of the loop (to where the 9000 de-rails in the first video I posted) and then around the room and back - that portion is all O-72+ but it climbs and dips which drives the this 9000 and the MTH coal turbine crazy.  

This stutters once in this video at about 9 seconds - that is not due to the curves.  Like several other older premium Lionels I have, this has TMCC or some early DCC system that does not like to run well at low speeds in conventional: here, it is running as slow as it will and (and still a bit too fast for my comfort level, that never a cliff edge with a three foot fall to the floor), and it momentarily meets a track section that is not spotlessly clean -- and stutters due to low voltage.  Running it faster solves this stutter problem (or just switching to a Legacy loco which seems to ignore such spots)  . . . my Legacy locos run much better in conventional at low speeds but as I said I will not buy the legacy 9000 as it can only run on this one loop section and it will be no better at what my 9000 does best: sit on the shelf and look marvelous!

Still, you have to admit, watching SIX drivers in a row and the drive rods move is sort of spectacular.

Man if i spent that much

on a loco and they ran like that I would be upset.... the stuttering...

Nah . . . it's fine -- about half a dozen of my older TMCC locos do this running on conventional -- its the nature of the beasts and I accept it.  And its mostly correctable.  

This is an old loco - a first iteration of Lionel's UP 9000 bought used about two years ago, knowing it would be a shelf queen (and a great one it is, too).  In the video, its running at 10.8 to 11 volts : any less and it's electronics kick out and it stops.  I have five pre-legacy steamers of this vintage and they all suffer kick-out at right around just below 11 volts.  None runs well in conventional (all I run).

What happened is that it was running at 11 volts, as low as i could get it to keep its electronics energized, so as to be slow as possible.  It hit a dirty patch of track, the voltage it saw dropped as a result, the electronics cut out, it coasted on flywheel a few inches past that, and again got the higher voltage and picked back up.  

I can make it run smooth by increasing the voltage just a bit to 12 volts so its not quite on the edge (but it runs faster).  Or i could have cleaned the track - it had not cleaned for some time.  The legacy locos i run tolerate a bit of oil and grime but not these older locos - the track has to be absolutely pristine.  A rag with isoprophyl alcohol would have fixed that, but it does not matter.  These early Lionel DCC locos are not "run conventional friendly as modern ones anyway.    But I knew that when I bought it. Maybe it has a battery I could replace, I'm not sure -- and if I ran it a lot I would check.   But its really just a shelf queen and I bought it for that so . . .  it is back on the shelf where it belongs for mister 9000 . . . 

Lee, thank you for the videos.  I have this engine also and MTH Scale Trax on my layout; all 072 curves.  However, I have not run it since I made the switch to scale trax.

The engine has been weathered by Weaver Models and I feel they did an excellent job.  This is my only weathered lcomotive.

One thing I have noticed is that this engine has a very jerky slow speed, even with the Odessey switch turned off.  I'm aware of early odessey engines having this problem.

Can you comment on the very slow running speed of your UP9000.

This has bothered me for awhile and has kept me form running this engine.

Thank you.

Well, basically, my UP 9000 doesn't have one -- a slow running speed, that is, in conventional.  Since I've never tried a TMCC controlloer I don't know about that.  

Whether the cruise is on or off, this thing jerks upon starting - I can not ease it to a start, and will only run at around 35 mph at the slowest.  It probably would go fast, but I keep it in a narrow range - 11 volts is the lowest the electronics will operate at and about 35 mph, 15 volts measures at around 50-55 mph -- any more would be too fast for such a big loco, at least on my layout full of what for it are hazards created by changes in track slope.