Interesting Hans, some great ideas and thoughts. Not to mention how to's. I was at a air show and saw a fella loose his RC Bi-Plane when the batteries went dead. No fun!
I guess I must be a dinosaur, because I'm sort of devolving back to toy trains in HO scale. I kept reading magazines and seeing highly detailed layouts, but my favorite things seem to lie somewhere between toy and model; maybe it's because I was a kid in the 60's/70's. I remember wanting an Athearn Super chief as a kid. I even bought a few cars but never had the loco. Now there are these amazing models in HO scale, but jeez the prices. I keep eyeing old blue box F units and coaches on ebay and thinking I'm gonna have to finally own that train. I'm pondering the problems with old switches that everyone mentions. I am running on c100 because most of my stuff is deep flanged european stuff from way back. How will my snap switches interfere with DCC? Even though I have a DCC system, this may cause me to stay analog on my layout.
Geeky, We (a group of us friends and fellow model railroaders) are running DCC on a layout that sports the older HO Snap Track switches. The key is to cut in isolator gaps in both rails on the diverging track leaving the switches. This way you won't get a short in the frog. You can always P.M. me for more information, should you need it.
I've looked at my switch and I just don't get it. Can't see where there would be a problem of shorting on that switch since it has a plastic frog. I suppose I could search the forum and not derail this discussion. Sorry guys.
Retraction Re., Athearn Locomotive Trucks Disclaimer: Keep in mind this isn't about my layout as it belongs to a friend of mine. Referring back to about 30 years ago and then jumping forward to today. I originally wrote: "" It seems to me that SD's that came out after that had different trucks with less offset. Now we are back to the same old same old."" Or so it appeared. I'ma about to eat humble pie. Read on to see my not so humble retraction. At the request of Athearn I removed the trucks and placed them on a glass surface, presumably flat. The results. None of the wheelsets are off set as they all sit on the glass...making perfect contact. Putting us back to square one and wondering WHY? They appear to be rocking themselves off the track with one end or the other lifting up and over the rails...derailing. I've checked the track work and it isn't up to the finer standards and yet Kato and other locomotives run around the layout without any apparent problems. Back to checking the gauge, securing the track so it lays relatively flat and other such things that will improve performance. Athearn isn't the problem and the locomotives they make today are superior to the ones I played with as a teenager. True statement. I'ma off to eat my pie...alamode. Grin! As far as the switch in question. It's all about how you isolate your blocks AND that switch won't short out if it has a plastic frog.
You might follow up with some filet of sole. he he he Your issue with the diesels... three axle trucks will give you more trouble. Check how the wheels are sitting between the rails. Just use a piece of flex and turn the loco upside down and use the track as a gauge. Better yet if you have one of those switches that hasn't been attached to the layout, use that. On my N scale layout I had a lot of hassle with locos being out of gauge straight from the store. They were correct according to NMRA standards, but they wouldn't work. I have to widen my wheels on the axles to make them run through switches right. It took a lot of getting my eyes down to rail height and slowly pushing/running a loco through the track to see where things started to ride wrong. Once I spotted the error it was an easy fix. Finding the error... Oh man, i spent a week tearing my hair out over that one.
Geeky, How true, how true. You ought to see the balding spot on the top of my head. We think we have the problem solved, I said crossing my fingers for good luck. Oh that's right I don't believe in good luck... anymore. Gosh!
I'm curious as to what Athearn meant by advising you to "torque" them? I think the mystery derailing issues that pop up from time to time on some equipment and not others over the same sections of track are some of the most frustrating things I've dealt with in model railroading.
Resurrecting an old thread. Sorry, I didn't mean to leave you hanging. I have no idea what Athearn meant by torque the trucks. Seems to me that would cause it to break into pieces. Unless I can see a video of someone doing what they suggested....I have no idea. As of this date or this writing. The problem persists. Poor track work is to be blamed...nothing else. Unless the owner of the layout allows me to tear it out and use brand new track instead of the used, abused and reused stuff. The problem will persist. Sorry, my apologies for having taken your time and mine... to discuss it here. The owner of the layout is a toy train enthusiast with the mind set of take it apart and then reuse everything for a new layout. You might say of the dining room table mentality so he can take it apart and put it on the front room carpet. Who wants to be a model railroader with a permanent layout. His track is so old. You need to ask, How Old? So old Moses took it off the ark. Grin. Look it's ok for him to be who he is. However, his ideas are grand, as are mine but he has no idea how to take it up a notch. And that's ok too. If he would but only listen to the experienced voices around him. Thanks all for your input and yes we did actually solve some perceived problems and moved ahead into yesterday. Grin!
I was actually mulling the question of r/c motive power, and I had a few ideas. 1. Charging the batteries: Use metal wheels the way we do now, but instead of drawing steady power, they head to the fuel rack to charge up through the track. The rest of the system can run wiring-free. A remotely operated switch cuts off the wheels during operation to avoid battery shorts and other interference. 2. That remote switch (with a manual backup in case of system failures) could also switch the power function to data, and use the "service track" to send USB programming info to the engines such as throttle assignments, direction, lead locomotive, etc..through the wheels. 3. Railflyer was on to something with the small traction motor concept. Making improvements in this area would open up the shell a bit for other control components. At the very least, each truck could carry its own motor/flywheel set, and get that drivetrain out of the shell. I know that RTR seems to be smoothing things out for the majority of people who can't swing an airbrush or spend a significant period of time making handrails or whatever, but it would be nice to get those plain-jane models in vast, undecorated quantities. I'm never one to fight the crowd for my favorite roadnames, anyway, but the lack of an undecorated SD40-2 or U30C from Athearn or anyone else is NOT an advancement. Making Alaska RR GP49s in quantity makes less sense than not having super-common locomotives like 40-2s available, but I have seen more outre power in the display case than the plain-vanilla stuff we need to build a convincing fleet. Fantasy GEVOs and 70 ACes in defunct paint schemes? Really? Thankfully, Cannon and Evergreen have provided me with the resources to build what I need from scratch as far as EMDs go, though I don't know where I'll get the chassis parts the next time Athearn deep sixes another once common model. Another thing to watch out for: 3D printing. I'll be very interested to see what can be done with this, and how quickly some geek will get from drawings to model in less than a day. Printers large enough and precise enough to produce an HO locomotive shell can be had for relatively little. Can't say that for injection molding.
Just a head's up. I've been doing radio battery for over 20 years, seen a whole lot of things tried. One of the neat things about radio battery is no track power. Another is no track cleaning. Or wheel cleaning. I have seen attempts to have "fuel racks" to charge multiple locomotives. Unless wheels and track are spotless in the charge area, and you are doing multiple locos, all the charge may go to one loco, with ensuing meltdown. We specifically use a charge jack, so we make positive connection, and can monitor the chargers if needs be. When it is charged, we KNOW it is charged. If using Lithium based, you need to leave room for protective circuitry or dedicated on-board chargers. Difficult in Half 0, impossible in Nano scale. Charging while running has a couple of scenarios. One, you run off the batteries when you encounter dirty or dead trackage. Then they charge when you reach solid connection. Running from batteries exclusively for onboard power needs....then you need to dedicate charge times, and hope you're not on a single-track main when it quits during an ops session. All of my locos have an auxiliary battery jack, so a spare battery can be plugged into the tender end beam to get you back in or finish the run. No wiring to any of my outdoor tracks whatsoever. Use of whatever wheels we have, cast, plated, turned, or plastic, makes no difference. Aluminium rails, no bonds at joints..no drivers need cleaning, no loco power pickups to clean, you just need to match the batteries MAH characteristics to the MA draw of the loco...so you know roughly how long it will operate per charge cycle. Dave
I should have clarified. My thinking is specific to HO scale, and using it as an alternative to DC or DCC, and using the rails for charging/programming seeks to address the frequent handling issue. Placing a plug anywhere but under the locomotive would be troublesome at best with diesels. Steam would be more forgiving since tenders can carry batteries or other gear and coal loads or water hatches could be removed to reveal plug locations and switches. Diesels, of course, would require programming access for multi-unit capability. Overall, the goal is the same; mainline wiring would be eliminated, and better still, axles could be set up to bridge a circuit and use that as a detection system a la the prototype.
RickH, I remember a thread in the HO forum about Athearn 6 axel trucks and 'rocking'. http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine...-Athearn-Blue-Box-U33C-and-SD9-Rocks-Too-Much Might be another animal intirely, but your discription of the problem make my lightbulb come on, so I figured I'd share. Hope the info helps. 2slim
