Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I have a Gaugemaster Prodigy Advance2 and it has worked well for me, although flipping between loco control and accessory control (points) on the handset is a bit clunky. However, going forward, I want computer control - and the PA2 is not so good for that. First, there is the £60 or so just for the computer connection cable. Second, the PA2 does not have a great story when it comes to occupancy detection and feedback. So I am heading down the Digikeijs route for the future - I have had very good experience with their DR4018 point control units. The Digikeijs 5000 seems
  2. Yes - neatly done to eliminate the reverse curves. The irony is that with the available Streamline points, the overall effect is to tighten the overall curvature of the tracks - but perhaps that is appropriate for a layout designed for such a small space. Mike.
  3. 1) SL-89 large radius straight points = 1524mm / 60 inches 2) SL-98 large radius Y points = 1828mm / 72 inches I've attached a file which is my gospel for Peco point geometry (not created by me as the page headers indicate...!) Mike. Peco_turnout_dimensions.pdf
  4. The Digikeijs DR5013 is a very complex piece of kit. Can you say more about how you have it connected to your layout and how you have it configured? Yours, Mike.
  5. I've not had any problems with my Prodigy Advance2, but it is less than 1 year old. Mike
  6. The WWI ROD 2-8-0s are discussed in David Maidment's "Great Western Eight Coupled Heavy Freight Locomotives" book - Chapter 6. He's a bit vague about shed allocation in BR days, excepting Carmarthen where he has specific allocations described for the period up to 1958. The numbers he lists are always in the 30xx range, even in BR days. Mike.
  7. You're now into the space of "regular" electrofrog design. To prevent shorts, you must put insulating joiners on the rails leading from the frogs - the track beyond those insulating joiners must be fed power independently. Strictly, this is all that you MUST do. But as discussed previously, a design that has both switch rails with the same polarity as the frog is prone to shorting between the stock rail and the switch rail. This leads to the idea of cutting the wires between the switch rails and the frog as in your diagram. This results in the frog needing its own power
  8. Yes, laying track well is a slow and painstaking business - even more so when you add in point motors and the mechanical & electrical aspects of those. That is one reason why I really appreciate the track layout software. You can build an accurate model of your layout quite quickly - see what works and what doesn't work in the space available. You can chop & change, try out multiple "what if?" alternatives. I like the ability to impose a minimum radius for curves, with the software giving you a warning if it gets breached by your design, allowing for some replanning. You ca
  9. Wordsmith, I use all pinning & no glueing. My approach is to use track layout software (xtrkcad in my case), print out the layout at 1:1, stick down the printouts and then lay the track, pinning it in place to match the position on the printout. For curves, I usually start at one end where there is already a piece of pinned-down track and then work my way along, pinning every 11th sleeper or so - the tighter the curve, the smaller the gap between pins. When I'm done, I trim up the rails using my Dremel, since the curve means that one side will be longer than the oth
  10. Why not treat the two lines coming out of the terminus as two single lines rather than as a double track? I am prompted to suggest this since this is in fact the organization of Aberystwyth station until the 1960s. One of the single lines ran to Carmarthen while the other went to Shrewsbury. Aberystwyth had an MPD with a triangle for reversing engines between those single lines, rather than a turntable. The triangle was however separate from the main running lines and was closely associated with the MPD. And in case you think that Aberystwyth might have been on the smal
  11. Indeed. The prototypes seem to vary a lot with respect to the distance between the dolls. In cases where the arms are at different heights, they can often be very close together. It seems fairly typical to allow a bit more space in the cases where the arms are at the same height. I assume Ratio have chosen the common case where the heights are different, but it is a pity that they don't make any provision for some variation in the doll spacing with this kit. I think that the round post version (Ratio 468) provides more space between the dolls. Yours, Mike
  12. How does your system compare with a system using a motor shield combined with an Arduino board or Raspberry Pi? Yours, Mike.
  13. How are you building the DCC Controller? Which technology are you using?
  14. I don't use solenoid motors - I use MTB MP1 motors in the main - slow action. I switch pairs of points like crossovers using a single channel on my DCC accessory decoder (Digikeijs DR4018 in my case). Works a treat, 100% reliable. The current draw of these motors is fairly low - max 150mA - so that a pair never tries to draw more than is available from the accessory decoder. Yours, Mike.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.