Dagworth

Other option is to put a resistor in parallel with the LEDs as well as the series current limiting resistor, this may act to shunt the power away that is causing the LED to glow when it should be off, but high enough value that it will still permit current through the LED when it should be on Andi

You can use either rail feed as return(red or black) not just the red wire. 6pin decoders for N gauge don't use a blue positive feed at all, they return to a running rail. No idea why you should be getting a voltage when the function is off though. Andi

That's N gauge Andi

Colloquially "pigeon sh*t" around here, although that tends to be more of a welding term I believe Andi

I will refer you to http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/66572-millfield-a-helix-build-in-progress/?p=906154 from that topic. Bear in mind that Bachmann 37 has 6 driven axles! I've got huge amount of experience of tight gradients and long trains, not helices specifically but steep enough to have needed to triple the weight in Lima diesels (with traction tyres) to get up the slope. And that was only climbing 70mm of vertical height. Ask any of the team who ever operated Dagworth, they will all tell you that the gradients were too steep and they were shallower than you are proposing. Andi

Please look at the link I posted regarding helix radius from the American site (who have far far more experience of helices than we do in the UK) He found that a 24" radius helix was still far too tight. Your 4th radius is still an inch and a half below this! Buy a circle of 3rd radius track and a set of Hornby inclined piers (http://www.hattons.co.uk/7264/Hornby_R658_Set_of_inclined_piers/StockDetail.aspx) and make a dummy helix - or try using books or CDs or something to act as supports. The Hornby supports only go up to 80mm, your helix will probably need to be up to 100mm so you will need a couple of bodge supports at the top end... Now try your train climbing it from a standing start.

Everything looks in perfect order, the only other thing i would try would be to break off the orange disc capacitor, it isn't needed in DCC use, and see if that makes a difference to the running. Andi

James, with all your questions about how long things take, can we turn it around? How long do you want to spend building the layout? Andi

Small helices, DO NOT DO IT Learn the lessons others have tried before. "Newcomers to model railroading often hope a helix somehow magically negates the laws of physics. Sadly, such is not the case. Besides the steepness of the grade itself in such a tight helix, the extra friction of the cars on the tight curve radii adds to the effective grade, making it nearly impossible to pull any length of cars without stringlining (pulling and derailing to the inside of the curve). See this thread for similar discussion. In it, I mention the example of Joe Fugate, who found his 24" radius helix was not sufficiently broad and did major layout surgery to tear it out and replace it with a much larger radius. http://cs.trains.com/forums/1473626/ShowPost.aspx Byron" http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/135176.aspx And that 24" radius is a full 25% larger than you are proposing, third radius Hornby curves are less than 18" radius. Andi

Can you pop the board out of its rubber mounts and photograph the underside too please? There's something odd going on here that shouldn't be happening and I've not encountered it with any of mine Andi

Looks exactly the same as they used to be, what DCC system are you using? Andi

Next to nothing here in Cheltenham. Andi

Dave, can you post a photo of the loco circuitboard please? I'm curious about the runaways Andi

Interesting to see Barber's Bridge get a mention in a thread about a layout being operable on a train, see http://www.carendt.com/small-layout-scrapbook/page-75a-july-2008/ From memory it was run from the on-train mains sockets, you can see a Roco LokMaus in Alan's hand in the photo. Andi

I've not had any running issues with any of my four so I cannot comment on that I'm afraid. It will definitely sort the light flicker issue, I'd be interested to know if it has any other effect. Andi

Well known issue caused by the two capacitors in the lighting circuit. Cut one of the legs of one of the capacitors and the lighting behaves perfectly. Edit: see http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/60966-Heljan-58-capacitors/?hl=%2Bcapacitors+%2Blights&do=findComment&comment=773378 particularly reply #5 and going back more than ten years(!) http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=14139&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Heljan+58+caps&start=50#p221588 Andi

First thing I'd do if I had your shed James would be to make the layout continuous all the way round the shed, leave enough space to open the door but then for the rest have either a lifting flap or a duck-under. See what Clive has done on his Sheffield layout http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/87205-sheffield-exchange-base-boards-are-going-great-guns/?p=2964731 Then if you still want two layers you can have the fiddle yard below the mainlines but in front, and the upper level narrower so you can always get to the stuff below. You then get rid of ALL the issues of tight curves, you can have much much longer gradients from one level to the other too. Andi

I get the impression that the OP has currently none or next to no stock at all. Andi

We need an "Ironic" button... Andi

What is the pick-up under the Marklin stock? Is it a skate or just a button? If it is skate then you can use less studs, you only need them every third sleeper or so. Stud contact is reasonably easy to do, remember that the studs can be permanently powered, it is only one rail that needs switching. You don't even need both rails as return, just use one rail and leave the other dead! I built Dagworth as stud contact for various reasons and later converted it back to two-rail. Points are the interesting part, there are two methods, both work equally well. One uses higher studs through the point that lifts the pick-up above the point rail, the other method is to switch the point rail and make it part of the stud system, that way all studs can be the same height. This comes in handy for stock with very tight clearances beneath... The easiest way to fit stud contact to an existing layout would be to add the studs from fine nails and then run a tinned copper wire down the centre of the track wrapping each pin. Solder the wire to each pin or you will get poor contact as the pins/wire corrodes. The wire can then be hidden under a little extra ballast. Andi

The Rocky Horror Picture Book

yes, 86s did too http://www.railuk.info/gallery/notes/getimage.php?id=2733 Andi

The 117 is a completely different body profile, it won't look like an AM4, you need to start with Mk1 based stock. Andi

Damn, reading this thread has left me craving not toast but crumpets! Andi

Have a look at Ravensclyffe http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/3288-ravensclyffe/ that's a very complex one man project in 8m x 4m with a 4 scale mile mainline. So far it has taken me more than ten years and there's less track than you've got. That's DCC and computer controlled too so I understand where you want to go and have been there. Also I am now 50 years of age, I've never really not been involved with building layouts, this is the second big exhibition layout I've built on my own. I spent much of my teenage years learning with some large club layouts. You say that you've not had any real involvement in modelling since you were thirteen but as far as I'm aware you haven't told us how long ago that was. If I was you, I would start with something much much simpler that you can get running in a short space of time, use it as a proving ground for your automation/interlocking etc. You will never get reliable running with long trains on set-track radius curves (or pointwork!) If you want long trains then you really need to be looking at Peco streamline pointwork at a minimum, and flexible track with MUCH gentler curves. Andi