DCC controlled layout planning

[young37215]

Hi

 

I am at the start of planning my new west highland line layout. Electrics are not my strong point and, despite having searched around RM Web, I cannot find the answers I seek hence this post. I have read up on DCC Concepts who appear to have an integrated suite of products that should deliver just what I need!

 

My existing layout uses a wireless Guagemaster Prodigy 2 which I will re-use on the new layout where I intend constructing a power BUS exclusively for track control. Most, if not all, pieces of track will have an individual power supply through droppers to the power BUS. The ultimate length of the layout could be as long as 34 metres; initially it will be more like 10m to keep development to manageable sized chunks.

 

Questions 

• do I need to create power districts? I think not given that there will not be many locos, 4 maximum, running at anyone time. Are there other reasons I should consider power districts?
• what size power BUS wire should I use? Prodigy outputs 3.5 A which has always been adequate for my west highland operations. DCC Concepts 11g twisted BUS wire looks impressive but expensive at 60p per metre when bought in 25m lots. Presumably any good quality wire that can handle minimum 3.5 A, something like a 32/0.2 copper wire at 37.5p per metre as sold on Ebay by CM3 Models should suffice?    

 

I require a second power BUS for DCC controlled accessories, essentially point motors and semaphore signals. This is new territory; my existing point control is through a large bank of Hornby passing contact switches plus CDU powering Peco solenoid motors. Signals are manually controlled from the MSE range. I plan to have a traditional style control panel with switches for each point and signal. I will use DCC Concepts Cobalt digital IP motors and some form of servo driven signal control. All sounds impressive but I have no knowledge or experience of a DCC accessory BUS!

 

Questions

• what sort of wire should be used, the same as for the power BUS or is a smaller (and therefore cheaper) wire viable?
• What options do I have for transposing the analogue output from the control panel to digital signals? DCC Concepts cobalt alpha appears to be one option; are there others?

 

From my research to date and as this post indicates, I am leaning towards DCC Concepts products which, despite being relatively expensive, appear to be an integrated suite designed for the inexperienced electrician. I would really appreciate feedback from anyone who has first hand experience of using these products.

 

regards Rob

  

 

 

[Nigelcliffe]

DCC Bus wire,  the Ebay wire you propose sounds fine.  It may be even cheaper from electrical/electronics sources. 

 

Power District breakers.  You fit them IF you want only part of the layout to shut down at any one time.      Given you have a Prodigy, I recommend a test now to decide: connect the Prodigy to a short test track, start a loco running slowly and deliberately short the track out.   The Prodigy should shut-down.  When it restarts, do you have control back on the handset instantly, or is the handset "stuck" and needs to be unplugged to restart ?    If the latter, then I suggest you would benefit from breakers, and should ask Gaugemaster to recommended a specific product  (because I've known a Prodigy mysteriously blow up with one brand of Power District Breaker, installed correctly ).

As Dutch_Master says,  wire the layout with the potential to fit breakers later.  If anything, the ability to split things up will help with fault-finding. 

 

 

Turnout Control.  STOP NOW and THINK.  If you are building a conventional panel, then what gain to you get from the huge expense of installing an Encoding system (eg. DCC Concepts Alpha, there are others), plus lots of turnout motors fitted with decoders ?     You make a modest under-layout wiring saving, but for most layouts this is modest.    Note that if you have live-frog turnouts, you will still need three wires from each turnout to the Cobalt turnout motor (or equivalent from other makers), plus the two for the Command Signals.  i.e. you can't use just three wires from the Cobalt digital IP (two to the signalling bus, one to the frog), otherwise you find your turnout frogs are powered by the signalling/turnout system and a loco will cross-connect the track system with the turnout/signalling, which will result in (at best) dead frogs, or (at worst) blow up one or another DCC system. 

Unless there are additional requirements, I'd fit a conventional panel, and not attempt to use DCC encoding/decoding for this. 

 

I suggest a quick look sideways at the MegaPoints turnout/signalling system, which drives servo motors.  May do what you want, from a traditional panel, considerably cheaper than a DCC encoded solution.  

 

 

 

- Nigel

[young37215]

Thanks Nigel (and Dutch-Master) for the  constructive responses which are just what I was hoping for. Rest assured I am not wedded to DCC Concepts product rage although their marketing is persuasive.

 

I had not considered Nigel's glaringly obvious point on the accessory bus powering the frogs which I suppose is a giveaway that I have never used electrofrog pointwork before!. If I understand Nigel correctly then even with a separate accessory bus there is a solution but it involves more wires between point and point motor. If so then I seem to have 2 options;

• a small number of extra wires and separate accessory bus or 
• a combined track and accessory bus with less wires.

I wonder if there are compelling reasons to pursue one approach in preference to the other? 

 

In terms of point control I want a traditional control panel rather than any form of computer based control largely out of personal preference. I will use solenoids in the fiddle yard powered separately with traditional transformer and CDU. However the bigger issue for me is the amount of wiring that I think I will save by having DCC controlled point motors at the extremities of the layout. I attach 2 floor plans of my 3m by 14m modelling space where the first shows my thoughts on power buses and the 2nd shows my first draft of a layout plan. The layout plan has a number of points located up to 15 metres away from the control panel which, if motorised in the traditional analogue manner, will involve a lot of long runs of wire. Using an accessory bus it is my understanding that I only need to run additional wires from bus to point motor and, polarity switching issues to one side, from point motor to point.  If I am correct then the savings in terms of wire will be substantial which is the main reason I am looking at DCC control for accessories.

 

Further feedback gratefully received.

 

regards Rob

 

BUS plan

 

Layout draft 1 plan

[Nigelcliffe]

Your layout wiring runs might be a reason to use a bus architecture for controlling the turnouts/signals.   However, a few more questions before heading down one particular set of options.

 

First, the Prodigy controller.  Is that a "must have", or is it open to change ?   The reason being that the Prodigy isn't very expandable into Accessory control.  Yes, the handset will control accessories, but there is no option to add a conventional switch control panel.  

Several other brands of DCC system do have options for conventional control panels.   Two common examples:  NCE have their own panel input devices in the form of the "MiniPanel" and their "AUI" devices, plus some third-party devices (not just some of DCC-Concepts range, which is has a lot of "NCE data method" components),  Digitrax have several third-party panel input devices made by CML Electronics in the UK (I've used those on layouts before, to great effect. The CML devices ideally need a computer for configuration, but once configured the computer is no longer required. The most recent uses CML boards and an Uhlenbrock DCC system, rather than Digitrax, mostly because Uhlenbrock's Daisy handset is elegant and Digitrax's DCC handsets are ugly. ).  
Some other makers also have options.  

A change from the Prodigy would open up more possibilities in how the layout control integrates with the main DCC system.  

( DCC Concepts Alpha system has several possible arrangements, in this situation with a Prodigy, it would appear to be acting as a "sniffer" of the Prodigy output, then repeating that output back onto the Alpha system output, with the addition of any turnout instructions from the Alpha input devices.  That should all work, but it seems to be quite complex and a lot of hardware to make a Prodigy work with a switch panel. )

 

 

Do you need one central control desk, or is the layout better served by several more local control panels for turnouts/signals ?   That's really down to you to answer, each person has their own preferences for this question.    If it's local panels, then the wiring runs are much shorter.   However, a Data Bus might still be useful as adjacent panels can be easily connected, and display information about each other (and allow control of items from both panels if that is sensible for your layout).   

 

 

Next, the turnouts/frogs.  Yes, as indicated and you acknowledge, regardless of solution adopted (old-school analogue wires, DCC, some other data bus), the frog switching input needs to be from the Track bus, and inside the same Power District of the layout (your layout is sufficiently large that I'd split it into Power Districts from day-1, at least for wiring purposes).     For reliable working, you need the "local extra wires" solution, not a single DCC bus. 

 

 

Finally Data Bus for the turnouts/signals, assuming a Data Bus is needed.  There are several non-DCC options for the turnouts/signals,  the MegaPoints system I mentioned earlier, in the DIY-Electronics area there is both CBUS and PTP-Lite from the MERG group (PTP-Lite may well do all you need),  its also possible to run LocoNet (CML boards mentioned above) in "stand alone LocoNet" mode which doesn't then require a DCC system, and I think there will be others solutions.   
On attraction of a "not DCC" system for turnouts/signals is the ability to have feed-back from the layout to the control panel:  for example on a LocoNet panel I made recently, one switch controls a level crossing mechanism which takes nearly a minute to complete its movement (see YouTube for early videos of it, scenery now developed a lot more).  When the switch is pushed, the panel displays a flashing light (indicating the gates are in the process of moving, and the direction of movement) until the gates complete their travel and trigger a message from the gates back over LocoNet to the control panel (when the indicator light goes to constant). There is a quirk of the particular implementation I used which means a DCC system is required.   

Similar bi-directional messages are possible in many systems. 

 

 

 

- Nigel

[jamesg]

Hi Rob,

 

These are some interesting questions.  I haven't worked on such a large layout myself, but looking at the datasheet for some typical hook-up wire, the resistance values go like this:

• 16/0.2 -40 Ohms/km
• 32/0.2 - 20 Ohms/km

Say the booster is 20m from the farthest piece of track (this gives a bit of leeway for routing the wires around the boards, etc.), the total length of cable is 40m (there and back).  The resistance of the cable is 0.04 * 40 = 1.6 Ohms for 16/0.2 and 0.04 * 20 = 0.8 Ohms for 32/0.2.  At 1 Amp, the voltage drop is 1.6V or 0.8V.  This isn't going to affect the performance of the locomotives too much.

 

The other consideration is short circuit detection.  If there's a short between the rails, the current at the short should be higher than the booster's limit.  As the booster is 3.5A, presumably at 15V, the highest resistance to trigger a short condition is 15/3.5 = 4.3 Ohms.

 

Multiple power districts won't be required because the voltage drop at the opposite end of the layout isn't too high and the total load is nowhere near the booster current.  The advantage to using multiple power districts is that the location of a short can be detected easily, so I'd wire the layout in preparation for multiple districts if desired in the future.

 

Ebay won't be the cheapest place to buy wire, after the seller has had to take into account the final value and payment processing fees.  I'd look to CPC or another electronics supplier for the wire - CPC sell it in 10m lengths.

 

Consider using 'frog juicers' for the frog polarity - they will reduce the amount of wiring required for each point and keep the wiring local.  If the point motor has an accessory switch, the wiring will be kept local as well.

[Phil S]

Given the planned length of layout, I would be looking at totally wireless control of both locos AND accessories - form experience in both my loft, the garden (in G) and portable layouts at exhibitions from 3m to 15m long.  It is the freedom to move around and control from wherever you are - no longer stuck in a single signalbox that allows you to enjoy your layout from anywhere!

 

NOT USING DCC for accessory control is very limiting of your operations - as control panels need to be made and either dispersed or duplicated.  Any changes to your layout reauire rewring the panel(s), and analogue wiring ends up with lots of wires in long runs.

 

Power Districts and Power SUB-districts:  Dividing your layout up into isolatable sections makes fault-finding much easier - and FAULTS WILL OCCUR whatever anyone tells you about their 100% reliable layout.  So it is the ease and speed of isolating faults which is important. -  and not being tied to a fixed control panel, when you are operating on your own, makes that easier too!.

SUB-Districts share the SAME DCC Amplifier/Booster - and may therefore be single or double-break isolation into convenient sections - which are NOT necessarily the same as they would be for analogue cab control - very unlikely to be the same!

 

An advantage with Circuit breakers within each power district (making the starting point of sub districts, which may be further sub divided by simple switches used only in fault-isolation) is that the CURRENT in any one section can be LIMITED  eg

5A Amplifier output split into 4 outputs, each taking whatever current they demand at the time.....

Ex 1 = Accessory BUS - used for CONTROL of Accessory Decoders (and their POWER IF not locally powered by 16Vac)

            DO NOT CONNECT VIA an 'intelligent Circuit Breaker' like a PSX - because sudden large currents IS what may be required to operate solenoid points. This BUS is unlikely to be short circuited by a derailment because it does not connect to any track.!

 

Ex 2 = Programming Track - this MAY be a separate output from the controller/Amplifier, direct to the (programming) track, but it may be the same physical output (eg Roco Amplifier without rocomotion box, Hornby Select, Bachman EZdcc etc) -  DO NOT FEED THIS via a circuit breker like a PSX because, as part of the programming process, the (track) power is turned on and off repeatedly -

and wil confuse / work against the PSX or similar.

Ex3, 4,,,,   TRACK to the left, and track to right (just as an example of geographical separation) or MAIN STATION and STORAGE

- having the ablility to switch-off the power feed to parts of each of these eg shunting yards. Up platforms, Don platforms, loco shed, etc maes finding a problem much easier -  These are then SUB districts.

 

IF and ONLY IF you expect to be running nearer to the maximum current of your controller, then you need to consider 'Boosters; and their own power supplies - these should ideally match those in neighbouring Power Districts so that there is no voltage change and therefore speed change, as you change POWER District.     (EG this may happen because you have a MASTER UNIT on which the output TRACK voltage is selectable:  eg ZTC511, Lenz100, Z21, or Not eg RocoAmplifier (except by small adjustment of its SMPS), or ZTC's BOOSTER etc ... often the booster may not be adjustable to match !!  ZTC sold 2 different transformers to cope with this.

 

IF you are planning agding SOUND and LIGHTING (LED of course) to your layout - allow an extra amp or so for the 'quiescent current' of all those LEDs and Sound Amplfiers.

 

 

Next - with our point control - this depends on the make and tpyes of point you are using - and whether solenoid, slow motion or servo driven - since none of this should be 'assumed' nowadays.    I use Roco track and point motors which are low current, and end-off switching (as well as switching the live frogs themselves)   BUT even so, on my latest layout I had 'odd bounce' problems with my usual Lenz LS150s causing buzzing - the points not moving correctly (and instantly switcheing themselves off) .. so I changes to Train-Techs QUAD (and single) CDU DCC accessory decoders at about 32GBP each - with the advantages of NOT needing a separate 16Vac supply for the motor, being totally individually programmable Iie not fixed to 1,2,3,4 and 13,14,15,16 etc but any number on any output - which allows colour light Signals etc to be included neatly in the numbering, even though they use their own decoder. They are also much more compact.  But most importantly, they solved the point problems - and I now have the songle click as expected, 100% of the time.  There is a slight 'downside': - I don;t know WHEN it does its charging up - but I suspect it may be when you tell it to change the point, because I SENSE a short delay of a second or so before the point moves - which takes a bit of getting used to 8-)

 

Similarly flexible accessory units may be available from other makers.  Hornby do a Point CDU decoder, but it is of the fixed block of 4 type in addressing.  I can now remove an entire 16Vac bus from my layout!

[young37215]

Dear all

 

I am very grateful for the consideration you have given to my request. To answer some of the points raised:

 

• The reason for a Guagemaster Prodigy controller is that I already own one which works and with which I am familiar. It is wireless and therefore allows me to wander around watching trains from different places and angles which, as Phil S states, is part of the fun. That said I will change controllers if there are compelling reasons to do so.
• Trackwork will be a mix of Peco code 100 with insulfrog points driven by solenoids in fiddle yards (because I already own all of this) and (new stuff) code 75 with electrofrog points driven by DCC Concepts digital motors for the scenic sections
• Although the potential layout is large, the amount of track will not be because I am trying to create the impression of the remoteness of the west highlands. Single track with passing loop stations is the order of the day. There will be 2 fiddle yards, 1 small (Corpach/ north of Fort William and a larger one at the southern end of the line representing the Glasgow area.  

I shall wait with interest for any further contributions.

 

regards Rob

[shibushe]

Just a comment on DCC Concepts products, BEWARE.

[Nigelcliffe]

Dear all

 

I am very grateful for the consideration you have given to my request. To answer some of the points raised:

 

• The reason for a Guagemaster Prodigy controller is that I already own one which works and with which I am familiar. It is wireless and therefore allows me to wander around watching trains from different places and angles which, as Phil S states, is part of the fun. That said I will change controllers if there are compelling reasons to do so.
• Trackwork will be a mix of Peco code 100 with insulfrog points driven by solenoids in fiddle yards (because I already own all of this) and (new stuff) code 75 with electrofrog points driven by DCC Concepts digital motors for the scenic sections
• Although the potential layout is large, the amount of track will not be because I am trying to create the impression of the remoteness of the west highlands. Single track with passing loop stations is the order of the day. There will be 2 fiddle yards, 1 small (Corpach/ north of Fort William and a larger one at the southern end of the line representing the Glasgow area.  

I shall wait with interest for any further contributions.

 

regards Rob

 

OK, so try to stay with the Prodigy and make everything else work.  Its do-able, its just another constraint.  

 

What is the purpose of the central panel ?   Is it a control desk and the only place for control switches, or is it an indicator panel to show the state of turnouts elsewhere around the layout ?   Or, as Dutch_master says, won't you be walking around anyway, so local operation of turnouts will be required ?    All combinations are possible (central desk with switches, plus local switches), but it helps to get the requirements clear. 

[jaym481]

Just a comment on DCC Concepts products, BEWARE.

 

Could you elaborate? 

[shibushe]

Could you elaborate? 

All I can say is. I have tried there point motors could not get them to work on DCC. Tried one of there decoders it would not perform as expected, bearing in mind I am a fan of Zimo.

I am not a newbie and do understand DCC, so can only speak as I find.

I know others get on fine with concepts motors and maybe there decoders, for me its a No.

Its like buying a car that catches fire, would you buy the same make.

[Richard Johnson]

*** Shibushe, if you couldn't get them to work on DCC then I'd respectfully suggest it wasn't the motors or accessory decoders or decoders.... because they are tested and work well with all DCC brands and of course meet the standards.

 

(There are also of course many tens of thousands of Digital Cobalt, DCC Accessory decoders and Loco decoders out there operating just fine on DCC.... with the numbers increasing very healthily all the time)

 

If you had or have a problem then we DO offer exceptionally good customer service and user help / support, so if you have problems understanding the use of them why not just email us and ask for help. If you are within easy enough distance of our UK offices, we may even offer to pop in and give you help at your layouts location.

 

Richard Johnson

[young37215]

Another option not mentioned (yet) is a local control panel for the remote points. You're wandering over there anyway, so it'll save you going back and forth when conducting operations there. If a central control panel is a must-have requirement, there are other systems then DCC for multiplexing commands between the panel and the points.

 

Multiple localised panels are an interesting question that has occupied my mind for most of today. My starting point is I have not utilised a control panel before and therefore have no experience to draw upon. I am open to the notion of having several, localised panels; indeed I am close to having one of these on my existing layout. For reasons I cannot explain, I continue to want DCC controlled accessories whether through one or several panels. I am not sure why I feel this way, my best guess is that it is a combination of wanting to reduce wiring and it feeling like a more professional solution.  

 

My vision for the control panel is a visual map of the layout with switches at the various locations of points and semaphores. However given that I intend developing the layout incrementally one station at a time, it does seem that local panels might be the way to go. My questions arising are:

• Which of DCC/analogue would require the least amount of wiring?
• Can I have a combination of central and local panels without significantly increasing complexity?. Does it make any difference on this point if analogue or DCC 
• The thought of an indicator panel showing the set route of points is of interest so long as it does not require significant amounts of wiring. Is this achievable?

 

As ever, counsel gratefully received.

 

Rob

[Nigelcliffe]

Multiple localised panels are an interesting question that has occupied my mind for most of today. My starting point is I have not utilised a control panel before and therefore have no experience to draw upon. I am open to the notion of having several, localised panels; indeed I am close to having one of these on my existing layout. For reasons I cannot explain, I continue to want DCC controlled accessories whether through one or several panels. I am not sure why I feel this way, my best guess is that it is a combination of wanting to reduce wiring and it feeling like a more professional solution.  

 

My vision for the control panel is a visual map of the layout with switches at the various locations of points and semaphores. However given that I intend developing the layout incrementally one station at a time, it does seem that local panels might be the way to go. My questions arising are:

• Which of DCC/analogue would require the least amount of wiring?
• Can I have a combination of central and local panels without significantly increasing complexity?. Does it make any difference on this point if analogue or DCC 
• The thought of an indicator panel showing the set route of points is of interest so long as it does not require significant amounts of wiring. Is this achievable?

 

If you have a central panel, plus some local panels, then an issue arises:  how does one panel update its information from changes at the other panel ?     So, you push a button on one panel, and it would be desirable for a light to show the new status of the turnout (etc) to appear on another panel.     With multiple panels you need to use push buttons rather than toggle switches (or levers) because the toggle switches can't be remotely moved by the other panel. 

 

This panel interconnection could be done with DCC, but it gets messy as DCC is single direction, from the command station outwards.  I think its better done with a bi-directional communications method, so all panels communicate and keep each other up-to-date on any changes in one place. 

 

I've not spent long enough around the DCC Concepts Alpha stuff to know if it can do multiple panels with bi-directional communication between them.  It ought to be able to do this, given that it appears to be using the NCE Cab-Bus protocol between elements.   So, if this is possible, the panels would interlink on Cab-Bus cables.   Separately, from the middle, would be a DCC Command Station (in Alpha form) and bus wire emerging to all the accessory devices, which are conventional DCC Accessory Decoders attached to the signal/turnout DCC bus.   

 

 

Other bi-directional bus structures would achieve the same behaviour, though may not actually need the DCC bus wires for the signal/turnout system.   For example, a Stand Alone LocoNet would be just one loconet cable around the layout, plus power to any subsidiary devices.   All devices would attach to the LocoNet, be they panel control inputs, or turnout/signal outputs.       MERG's CBUS would be conceptually similar, though different hardware. 

[young37215]

If you have a central panel, plus some local panels, then an issue arises:  how does one panel update its information from changes at the other panel ?     So, you push a button on one panel, and it would be desirable for a light to show the new status of the turnout (etc) to appear on another panel.     With multiple panels you need to use push buttons rather than toggle switches (or levers) because the toggle switches can't be remotely moved by the other panel. 

 

This panel interconnection could be done with DCC, but it gets messy as DCC is single direction, from the command station outwards.  I think its better done with a bi-directional communications method, so all panels communicate and keep each other up-to-date on any changes in one place. 

 

I've not spent long enough around the DCC Concepts Alpha stuff to know if it can do multiple panels with bi-directional communication between them.  It ought to be able to do this, given that it appears to be using the NCE Cab-Bus protocol between elements.   So, if this is possible, the panels would interlink on Cab-Bus cables.   Separately, from the middle, would be a DCC Command Station (in Alpha form) and bus wire emerging to all the accessory devices, which are conventional DCC Accessory Decoders attached to the signal/turnout DCC bus.   

 

 

Other bi-directional bus structures would achieve the same behaviour, though may not actually need the DCC bus wires for the signal/turnout system.   For example, a Stand Alone LocoNet would be just one loconet cable around the layout, plus power to any subsidiary devices.   All devices would attach to the LocoNet, be they panel control inputs, or turnout/signal outputs.       MERG's CBUS would be conceptually similar, though different hardware. 

 

Thanks again Nigel

 

Plenty of food for me to digest, I shall do so in the coming days. As it happens I had a running session earlier today and amongst the pictures I took the following. They say a picture paints a thousand words; you can now see why I want minimum wiring possible

 

regards Rob

 

[shibushe]

*** Shibushe, if you couldn't get them to work on DCC then I'd respectfully suggest it wasn't the motors or accessory decoders or decoders.... because they are tested and work well with all DCC brands and of course meet the standards.

 

(There are also of course many tens of thousands of Digital Cobalt, DCC Accessory decoders and Loco decoders out there operating just fine on DCC.... with the numbers increasing very healthily all the time)

 

If you had or have a problem then we DO offer exceptionally good customer service and user help / support, so if you have problems understanding the use of them why not just email us and ask for help. If you are within easy enough distance of our UK offices, we may even offer to pop in and give you help at your layouts location.

 

Richard Johnson

Dear Mr Johnson. Many thanks for your reply. My modelling season wont be starting again till New Year. Once I get started, I will be in touch, I am confident you have answer.

ll

[Pete the Elaner]

I had local panels on a previous layout to save on cross-board connectors. I would not do it for this reason again.

The trouble was that the board join was in the middle of a collection of pointwork so to set a route, I had to set half of it on one panel then complete it on the other one. This sounds easy & even though my panels were clearly laid out, in practice it proved to be a bit of a pain.

 

I am building separate panels for my current layout, but this is 1 for each end of a fiddle yard so any route setting is done completely on 1 panel.

[young37215]

Having spent the last few days reading up as best I can on options for point and accessory control, I am thoroughly uncertain as to what to do.

 

As a result I am more open to analogue than I was because I think it can deliver what I want. I like what I see of Megapoints and using servos for both points and accessories but I am less certain about how I create a control panel (singular or plural) to drive the Megapoints. The videos on Youtube are helpful but, as you would expect from what is essentially advertising, they show everything working perfectly! I doubt that reality is quite the same and am concerned that my lack knowledge will cause issues. However Mr Megapoints is scheduled to be at the Bristol O Guage show in mid January so I will take the opportunity to see things in the flesh.

 

 

[Midland]

Very interesting thread for a newbie. I called Peco to ask some DCC track questions and the chap who runs the shop was very helpful. His advice was to keep it very simple. He told me that by the time you find what DCC command you need for a switch, the train is out of sight. And the prove the point, over xmas I had three trains running for the grandchildren and a coach derailed. Which loco was it? just before the whole fell on the floor, I pulled the plug and it all stopped and we sorted out the problem.  So the points signals etc are all a simple stud and pointer and the trains are run on an NCE controller but if you like yours, then use it and good luck!

Cheers David

 

PS and the other cardinal rule is to keep your frogs isolated from the rest of the track,  let your point motor switch the polarity!!!