Newbie2020

Might sound like a silly question (I'm learning a lot but still a rookie!) but when are points open or closed? I'm guessing that "thrown" and "open" are the same? Am I correct in saying that an open (or thrown) point is when the train is taking the the branch and that closed meeans that the train will travel straight through the points?

Rgds

Confused of Bedworth!

Great, that was my thoughts too! Thanks guys

Hi All,

Quick question! I am about to install 14 DCC Concepts iP Digital point motors. Question is (as I'm very new to DCC and using Digitrax DCS210+) do I programme the point motors with their DCC address before I isntall them, or once I have fitted them and connected them to the track?

Cheers

Hi,

Has anyone got any experience, good or bad, of the Digikeijs DR5000-ADJ DCC Multi-bus central Command System? 

Clive

On 04/02/2017 at 13:15, Richard Johnson said:

*** To make the onboard switch act like a toggle switch is simple.

 

You have two yellow wires.

 

Connect one to the common of the Cobalt Switch. (C or Common)

 

Connect the other to BOTH of the other terminals of the switch (Both the Left and Right terminal)

 

that way every time you change the point, the signal should change.

 

Regards Richard, DCCconcepts

Hi Richard, I note that this reply was some time ago and was wondering if the advice was still unchanged?

Cheers

Clive

Thanks Guys

Hi,

I'm modelling era 3-4 and want to have some working signals on the layout. I am using DCC and can operate the signals from the corresponding Cobalt iP Digital turnout motors. What I would like to know is does anyone know of a resource (book, web page video etc) that will show me the prototypical layout of signals? ie where they should be sited, what type and colour of semaphore?

Cheers

Clive

I'm setting up my first layout and thinking of going down the DigiTrax route with either Digitrax EVOXD Evolution Express Advanced 5A/8A Duplex Starter Set or Digitrax EVOX Evolution Express Advanced 5A/8A Starter Set. 

Am I correct in thinking that the latter is the simplex version? If so, what benefits does Duplex offer for the extra 100 pounds(ish) in cost?

Clive

I'm setting up my first layout and thinking of going down the DigiTrax route with either Digitrax EVOXD Evolution Express Advanced 5A/8A Duplex Starter Set or Digitrax EVOX Evolution Express Advanced 5A/8A Starter Set. 

Am I correct in thinking that the latter is the simplex version? If so, what benefits does Duplex offer for the extra 100 pounds(ish) in cost?

Clive

Think this ison the wrong bit so Ive re done it in the questions section!!!

9 minutes ago, Harlequin said:

Here's a suggestion using all Streamline turnouts, then:

 

• Very similar to many of the plans above. A highly compressed design and so you have to accept some compromises.
• R2 radius end curves with Streamline curved turnouts (20° and 8°!) forming the transitions to straight.
• R2 is tight but it means there's space for the terminus pointwork above and room for the passing loop below.
• 3 coach trains are just about possible if you're willing to have the loco stand foul of the points in the passing loop of the bottom station.
• The terminus headshunt is long enough to move 3 coaches between platforms and carriage siding (the 3rd one down).
• The 3 "goods yard" sidings at the top station could be anything you fancy. In reality they are probably a "scenic fiddle yard".
• The goods sidings are held 67mm away from the nearby R2 curve to prevent collisions.
• Platform widths just about within regs. Imagine they are wider and simply sliced by the edge of the world. There's just room for a very low relief station building at the top if you want it there.
• The inner platform at the bottom station isn't long enough for 3 coaches but it's OK for shorter trains to stop, for trains to pass each other and can be used to terminate local services from the big station.
• The green area is lift-off scenery covering the 2ft square access hole and forming the tunnel over the right hand end of the oval.
• I left some space at the left hand end of the oval for scenery and to give the terminus sidings more space.
• Spacial turnouts:
  • Small Y in the industrial area to divide the tracks very quickly.
  • 3-way in the terminus to maximise siding lengths.
  • Large Right giving a smooth exit from the terminus out to the main circuit.
• Dotted tracks are optional.

Have I got the size of the extension board correct? 800 by 500mm?

 

Actually the design works slightly better it if' rotated by 2 degrees. Then the space is used better, the platforms are wider in places, there's more room fro s station building and everything feels more dynamic. But it would be tricky to lay out!

 

Phil, That looks fantastic to me! Thankyou so much for that.

Yes the extension is 800 x 500 although (#Breaking news!) I've opened up negotiations that could allow  this to be increased to 800 x 800! (Still not allowing puppies into the negotiation though!)

@OhOh   No problem I got totally lost in that exchange anyway !!

Got a chance to have a play using streamline 100 so I can use electrofrog. Seemed to be going ok until I ran out of baseboard! Also struggling to get any sidings into the Warehouse/industrial area. As this is where most of the shunting will be this is arguably where elctrofrogs would be most useful!

@dungrange Thanks, that's what I thought. Glad I wasn't able to order the track yet! Think I need to slow down a bit and plan more - think that will save hassle later!

Cheers

Hope someone is still following this thread!

with going for DCC I want to go with electrofrog turnouts. Is there a direct alternative to Peco setrtack turnout that is electrofrog? The electrofrog points I see in streamline seem to have completely different geometry? Does this mean it's back to square one with the layout design?

Hi All,

Some of you may have seen the discussions in the layout section about my proposed 8x4 (with an extra bit!) layout - which will look something like the attached pic. It's my first attempt and I would like to make it DCC and have a couple of queries.

I've been looking at the Gaugemaster Prodigy Advance2, is this about the right sort of thing for the layout shown or a bit over the top? I'm also thinking about future proofing - just in case I ever get the chance of more space!

Also does anyone have any experience of the DCC Autofrogs? I'm thinkning these would be ideal for the reversing loop?

Cheers

Clive

28 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

I would humbly suggest that gradients on a first layout might be a bit ambitious, though I've no idea how confident the OP would be with the carpentry etc.

My concern too! My carpentry skills are basic!

I think I'm sticking to just one level for the moment, think there are enough challenges all round without complicating things.

So how high would the raised section for the BLT have to be? I'm thinking with the fiddle yard underneath it would require enough room to handle rolling stock, enable track maintenance etc? Would I gain enough to balance the increase in complexity?

4 minutes ago, AndyB said:

 

I'd not be too concerned about the gradients for two reasons.  Firstly you've more space to achieve the necessary clearance. Secondly your trains are relatively short so not so much drag. And the third of my two reasons  is that you can continue the gradient onto a curve - just not quite as severely as on a straight bit of track.

I'd make the point motors on the BLT surface mounted so as not to foul anything running underneath.

And I'd use that stub extension as a low level fiddle yard to allow trains to disappear off stage completely. 

I'd also make the top level BLT removable for track maintenance.

I like that idea. but this is starting to sound complicated!

1 hour ago, Dungrange said:

 

I understand your rational, but unfortunately, it wont really work in practise with your plan as drawn.  Your top tunnel portal is shown on a section where you have standard double track centres.  That therefore means that as you move into the curve you only have a few millimetres of clearance between the end throw of whatever is on your inner circuit and the centre overhang of your longest bogie stock on the outside circuit.  There won't be enough space to fit a representation of a rock cutting.  If you really need the tunnel to be at that part of your layout, then it would be better to have a double track portal at the top of the plan and possibly two separate single track portals at the lower end.  If you want a short section of rock cutting, then it would be easier to achieve this by staggering the two tunnel portals so that in the bottom right corner of your plan, the outer track remains in tunnel until closer to the station, while the inner track emerges from the tunnel earlier and you'd then have cutting between the tunnel portal and the station at a location where your tracks are.   The issue is that you won't have a good view of the cutting from the front of the layout, but it would be possible to swap the tunnel portals, so that you have the tunnel portal for the inside track closer to the point for your return loop and the other roughly where you have shown it at the moment.  This would tend to make the right end of your through station look more like two single track lines rather than a double track section of track.

Hmmm, I see your point. May be I'm being too ambitous for a first attempt! I like the idea of a double entry (!!) with staggered exits. I'll have a think about trying to achieve that.

38 minutes ago, AndyB said:

I'm reminded of a simple 5 x 3 (?) plan of CJF's in a 1960s version of his plans book. It was on the last page if anyone has a copy.

Basically a lower level with a single track continuous circuit and return loop cutting across top centre to lower right.  

 

Off the continuous circuit at the front there was a branch line which ascended to a simple BLT which disguised the top third of the continuous circuit.

Now all that was done in a lot less space than is avaliable here. Even excluding the stub extension.

So long story short....by letting this basic scheme breathe a bit with more length and depth you could have a really interesting station and those all important tunnels etc.  

 

I did look at this one from CJF but was put off by the second level for the BLT. In the space available that would seem like a pretty steep incline? Some of the incline articles I've read seem to infer that inclines high enough to cross over a rail line are only achievable with long straight runs?

54 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

 

Streamline would benefit from these too, to suitable radius.  I suspect they would be very tricky to mass produce however and prone to derailments if the alignments were not just so.

 

To go back to the layout plan, one feature that strikes me is that train lengths are very short - a large loco and a couple of Mk1s seems the limit.

I'm ok with the train length (for now!) With only 8 ft of main board to play with it would be difficult to get longer ones in with credible scene work (I think - sits back and waits for someone to prove me wrong!)

Clive

5 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Not a problem.

 

This design uses the very clever Trix system. It's not cheap track and has a moulded roadbed, so I'm sure it's anathema to many here, but it was fun to draw, and I reckon it'd be fun to operate too.

 

 

Of course, your design is entirely achievable using the Hornby track too, if you can't wait for Peco to become available.

 

 

Quite like the idea of Peco to keep buying British, so I'm happy to wait (as long as its not too long!)

Never heard of Trix System - I'll google it.

Clive

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

 

Why does the double-track spacing vary so much?

Why does only one track pass through the tunnel? And how will you arrange the scenery to make sense?

What will the backdrop look like with the track so close to it?

Are you happy that to shunt the station you'll have to stop running on the outer circuit?

Have you noticed the horrible kink in the outer circuit?

Are you OK with trains running on the wrong road for a significant distance before they can take the reversing loop?

 

These are some of the questions that people were trying to address in their suggestions above.

 

I see what you mean, I see @Zomboid last plan addresses most of these. I'll probably revisit this all again now I've found out I can't get all the track anyway!

My idea behind only one track through the tunnel was that I intended the inner track to be going through a 'cutting' with rock faces to the tunnel side, this also gives rise to the variiation in track separation between the outer and inner circuits, and probably some of the other geometry problems I've encountered.

Clive

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

I would suggest that you decide on your intended track plan before starting to build anything.

 

So long as you've actually done that...

I think this is what I'm going for. There may be some changes made to the terminal station and goods area as it develops! I'm going with a little 'Fluidity' in the design!!

And, of course, I've started all this when there is a national shortage of Peco Track!!!!!

Thank you all for your brilliant efforts! Starting to get over my head in places! I certainly don't mind any one rehashing or redesigning it - I've learned loads from this thread and hopefully anyone reading the thread with a similar size space they're tempted to use will be just as inspired.

Only remains to start actually doing something and make some real progress! As soon as I've got anything worth showing I'll get some pics uploaded showing its progression.

Now if only I could think of a name for my little station????

Clive