My ONE and ONLY project ...


Frederick,

Thank you for that, at least I have that option now. When the time comes, I might need someone to walk me through the setup, one step at a time though. Toot'ns detailed explanation of it all - together with Horseman's, was great and if I were to read it numerous times, I might even understand it enough to work it out :)

As everyone knows, this side of the hobby isn't exactly;y my strong point.
 
As everyone knows, this side of the hobby isn't exactly;y my strong point.
Click to expand...

Wasn't mine either Tony, when I bought my NCE, and I found the book to be hard to get a grip off until I set it up and tried a few things. The section on decoder settings has to be viewed as relating to NCE's line of silent decoders, but much does relate to other brands as well, so long as they use the same keys (F values) to do the same thing. e.g. Ditch lights and others on-off if available. I'm going to ask a question in the DCC/electronics forum on the possibility of consisting consists to do with helpers. Stir the accumulated gray matter.
 
Toot'n,

I agree with you that the NCE manual (power Cab Starter Kit) was a bit vague in some areas, or, was written (like a lot of manuals) wih the assumption of "assumed knowledge".

When I first got mine, I plugged it in and an a train ... that was very easy; however, I spent an hour or so on the phone with bsnf - Terry (I believe) who had to talk me through setting the thing up for individual loco numbering. Add to that, the Pro Cab is different again, and that didn't/doesn't help. The only advantage I have, as I recently discovered, NCE is only an hour from me if I need to speak to them in person.

I think your post is going to illicit some very good, informative information and I will definitely be following it. Might need some one to interpret what's being said though :)
 
wombat457 said:
I might put together some flex and "play around" with the Power Pro. If nothing else, it will reacquaint me with its operation and I can use some of my HO engines to "practice with". I am assuming here that the scale is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Yes the scale is irrelevant other than the distance a loco travels. When I do speed curve/step matching and the like at home I have an oval of Bachmann EZ-track 32" radius and 9' straights on each side that I throw out on the floor. I tried to do it on just 6' of straight on a table and kept running the loco's off the end of the track (and once even onto the floor). Hence my move to the floor. Much less distance to fall. Then I extended the straight to 9' for the longest time and then finally thought, "with a loop I don't have to even worry about stopping and constantly changing directions".
 
fcwilt said:
There are at least two types of consisting that I am aware of. Which type (or types) are available to you would depend on your command station.

One type simply involves specifying the addresses of the locos you wish to consist.

The other type involves setting all of the decoders of the locos you wish to consist with a special "consist address". When this consist address is used to control the locos the normal loco addresses are ignored.
Click to expand...
I did not know that. I was only familiar with the later, which is why I suppose I have the trouble with addresses if I forget a loco is on a consist and have it visiting a foreign layout.
 
Iron Horseman said:
I did not know that. I was only familiar with the later, which is why I suppose I have the trouble with addresses if I forget a loco is on a consist and have it visiting a foreign layout.
Click to expand...

As Frederick explained in my Consisting consists thread using NCE, where I had the terms for consisting reversed, their Advanced consisting method involves an alteration to the value of CV19 in the decoder. If you don't "Kill" the consist before removing the locos or turning off the track power, they become "locked" to that address and consquently unavailable for programming on another layout, or yours, the next time they're powered up. Fortunately the fix is simple (whether this will work on the programming track or only by programming on the main, I'm not sure, as I've got into the habit of the POM method with Tsunamis). Place them one at a time on the track and select the loco by the number you run it by as normal, then select that POM method. Go to CV programming and select CV19 and set it's value to 0 (zero). That clears the consist it's stuck in and restores it to use. With decoders that do allow programming track, programming, you may be able to do this on there.
 
The Challenge...

Hey Guys,

Okay, from experience I know there are people here who are "very good" at track planing and design who come up with ideas that I haven't/wouldn't think about. Therefore, and while I like most of what I have, I am issuing a challenge to anyone who can come up with a "Track Plan" for the space I have available which is:

ixZLSKw.jpg


The only things I will say is that I am not a big fan of having "industries" all over the place - one or two (space pending) is okay. Scenery is a big part of my layouts so that needs to be taken into account as well.

The only other thing I will add is that there is no guarantee that I will use any of the plans suggested in their entirety or in part; however, I am also certain that some people will come up with things that can be incorporated or added to what I have already.

In short - forget that there is any track plan in place and start from scratch with your own idea/s. All you are being restricted to is the area available. Also, please don't be offended if I don't use your suggestion in either part or in full - what I am trying to achieve are ideas that others have and that I haven't considered. It is quite possible that I might use parts of any plan submitted to create the end result in which case, all those who contributed will be (rightly) acknowledged.
 
Okay, well I have been dealing with a problem that I saw with the track plan; as such, yep - have made another change to resolve that problem. Here is the last, final, no more changes, this is it, finito plan!

M10pRrX.jpg


blH0XUr.jpg


5Bc1K8l.jpg


M3JLFf0.jpg


Yeah, I know - too much double track, oh well it's my party and I'll ... well you get the drift :)

By the way, the problem with the other plan was the positioning of the freight line and passenger line at the front of the layout, they were A about in my opinion.
 
Lot's of goin's and comin's there, Tony. Double tracking makes for a lot of them, without cramping the scenery if you had that amount of track, single line.
 
Toot'n,

That is what I was aiming at - being able to run trains and sit back and just watch them without too much intervention. With this plan I can run 4 trains and just let them go OR, I can "play with them" if I want to. Even though there is a lot of track, nearly 170 feet in all, I don't think it looks over crowded and I still have a ton of room for scenery and little side "shows here and there". I really do think this is going to work for me.
 
Thanks Lynn and yeah - now I am VERY keen to get things under way. As soon as I have everything sorted out in the room, I'll be sending out invites :)
 
Looking good Tony, very nice plan for watching trains roll! I am looking forward to seeing this materialize.
 
Lynn,

First up, nice to see the Alert has been resolved and ahh "when trains meet"? I would be doing something terribly wrong if that were to happen without my intervention I think.

In short though - automation??? I have problems wiring up a slow motion machine for a turnout and your talking about automation? Trust me, I'd have far FAR more problems if I tried that so nope, no automation for my trains sakes' and for my sanity's sake :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top