ONLINE
STORE
"ASK THE BACH MAN"
FORUM
PARTS, SERVICE,
& INFORMATION
CATALOGS AND
BROCHURES

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 16, 2017, 07:09:13 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Please read the Forum Code of Conduct   >>Click Here <<
+  Bachmann Message Board
|-+  Discussion Boards
| |-+  General Discussion
| | |-+  Gorre and Daphetid Layout
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print
Author Topic: Gorre and Daphetid Layout  (Read 10904 times)
Len

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: March 03, 2016, 10:55:24 AM »

I'd say whether to use 'transition' cars or not would depend on how many cars you have to convert to knuckles, time available to do conversions, and budget available to get conversion parts. Or putting it another way, it's a matter of personal choice. Some folks do it, some don't.

Len
Logged

If at first you don't succeed, throw it in the spare parts box.
on30gn15


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: March 03, 2016, 12:06:27 PM »

Oh, yes, truck-mounted, 'talgo', couplers versus body mounted couplers - that is an important issue - especially when talking sharp curves like used on the foundational section of the G&D.
Truck mounted couplers will more closely follow the track centerline on curves, while body mounted couplers will swing outboard of track centerline.
Below a certain curve radius, when a car of each type is coupled together, one of those cars is going to twist the other off the track.
Guaranteed.

Another thing is backing a train, the push on truck mounted couplers is prone to twisting them sideways hard enough to force the wheel flanges to ride up over the railhead.

That brings to mind the strong recommendation to acquire this book,  Track Planning for Realistic Operation, Third Edition, by John Armstrong.
It has an important section on model RR car behaviors on curves. And sections on switches, transition from curve to straight and from slope to level.
And also mentions car overhang at ends and center both on curves.
And then of course covers how real RR's operate in getting freight and passengers from here to there, and ways to replicate that smoothly on model RRs.
Logged

When all esle fials, go run trains
Screw the Rivets, I'm building for Atmosphere!
later, Forrest
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #32 on: March 03, 2016, 01:53:13 PM »

it's a matter of personal choice. Some folks do it, some don't.

Len

It certainly is.  And some folks have operational issues bc of the trucks and couplers and others don't.  But again, I am making recommendations.  It goes without needing to be said, that what one choses, is entirely up to them Wink.

I would like to note, that I am strictly speaking of freight car operations.  I have no and have no knowledge about, passenger cars.
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
ryeguyisme

Heavy Mountain Steam


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: March 03, 2016, 02:47:32 PM »

For those interested, I started an N scale version of this layout with my father when I was 14 as an exact scaling down from HO. The minimum radius is 7.25 inches and an N scale spectrum 2-8-0 will navigate it without a pilot truck but my D&SL 2-6-6-0's made from spectrum 2-6-6-2's will navigate it with ease. I'm 27 now and have reconstructed it with better track and expanded it to include a turntable, the original blueprint was 2' x 3.5' and now it's 2.75' x 5' roughly. It's a really fun layout so far. Planning on adding an Nn3 branch to it on the bottom level much like the original with HOn3.



Logged

jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: March 03, 2016, 08:22:00 PM »

Looks fun! Smiley
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
AJPiskel

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2016, 08:54:06 PM »

Hi Guys,

Love all the feed back.  It is nice to have a place to go to  learn new things and draw on others expertise.

While I am on here about restarting in the hobby, what is your take on the EZ Command DCC?

How is it to convert older dc locos to dcc?

Andy
Logged
on30gn15


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: March 04, 2016, 11:27:41 PM »

I have one of the EZ Command DCC systems. It serves my needs. It is a really basic system, pretty much a "drive this loco or that loco, turn the lights on or off" operation.
Converting older locos to DCC is one of those, "Well, it depends" operations.
Things with open frame motors, such as older Athearn, MDC Roundhouse, Mantua, will require new can style motors, and rewiring to isolate motors from frames. The contact sparking from those older motors causes RFI with the DCC system.
Recent issues of Model Railroader magazine have touched on this matter.
Logged

When all esle fials, go run trains
Screw the Rivets, I'm building for Atmosphere!
later, Forrest
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: March 04, 2016, 11:36:41 PM »

Define "older" Athearn loco please.
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
on30gn15


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: March 05, 2016, 12:19:42 AM »

Older Athearn meaning 1970s and 1980s.
Here, this style: these 2 are slooooowly having On30 sized bodies built for them.
IMG_2502 by Forrest Wood, on Flickr
Note that on rear one the brass flywheels and motor casing were at some point colored with magic marker.

Back to talking about articles in MR, page 70 in Feb 2016, and page 82 in March 2016, the DCC Corner feature, have some relevant information, with March 2016 installment being titled "Are your locomotives DCC friendly?"

Ring field motors of 1980s vintage, such as this Italian job from Lima, and its Bachmann contemporaries, are as I remember, not the first candidates for simple addition of a DCC decoder. That question is one that someone else will have to address, as having no desire to convert one to DCC I didn't make a point of keeping info on the matter.
IMG_2503 by Forrest Wood, on Flickr
« Last Edit: March 05, 2016, 12:53:56 AM by on30gn15 » Logged

When all esle fials, go run trains
Screw the Rivets, I'm building for Atmosphere!
later, Forrest
Woody Elmore

View Profile
« Reply #39 on: March 05, 2016, 08:52:14 AM »

Getting back to John Allen, you must remember that he was working in the Lionel era where all the track plans had straight sections and curves  and very toy like operating accessories. He showed that model railroading could be a lot more realistic.

Okay, so he used dinosaurs as a joke. What made the layout great was that there was switching as opposed to running long trains. I think he was a member of the Baker coupler fraternity and they weren't the best for switching so switching must have been a chore.

Another "great" model railroad was the O gauge layout of Frank Ellison. He emphasized running with time tables. He also had whimsical names for places. For example, there was an over the counter medication called Carter's little liver pills. On his layout he had Carter's little river mills.
 
At an NMRA convention I saw a film of John Allen's third layout in operation. The scenery was spectacular. One of Allen's innovations was the use of mirrors to make an area look larger.

Give Allen's memory  a break - he was a pioneer. His layout was great in that it influenced people in adding scenery and operation to their home layouts. And the Varney ads were terrific!
Logged
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: March 05, 2016, 09:08:34 AM »

Older Athearn meaning 1970s and 1980s.

That's a better descriptor and I would take it a step further and say, any one that does not have a gold casing around the motor Wink
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
jward


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: March 05, 2016, 11:26:21 AM »

here is my experience with the older athearn locomotives which I once standardized upon.....

the first thing you have to be aware of is the stall current on those older grey magnet motors. it can be quite high, well over an amp. this will affect your choice of decoder, as most are rated at 1 to 1 1/2 amps. you will need a more robust decoder than that if you want to use those motors. better yet, replace those motors with the gold flat side ones. one of the drawbacks I have seen in the older athearn motors is they can develop a weak magnetic field, and if so will stall and cook the motor rather than slip their wheels.

the motor is not isolated from hold the brushes in place. the bottom one has two tabs that contact the chassis. since you are going to have to remove these clips to solder to them anyway, swap the one with the tabs to the top of the motor, and after soldering the decoder wire to the bottom one cover it with a piece of electrical tape.

note that wiih the exception of the copper clips I just mentioned, the metal in an athearn chassis is difficult or impossible to solder to.  my workaround for this was to drill and tap a hole for a 2-56 screw wherever I wanted to make a wire connection, and use a brass screw in this mole to solder to.

the electrical pickup from the trucks to the frame is through a pin on the chassis resting on a hole in a metal plate on the truck, this is not reliable enough a connection for dcc, so you may want to find a way to wire around that. the metal tab above the gear tower provides the other conncection from the trucks to the motor via a metal clip. discard this clip and solder the decoder wire to one of those screws I mentioned, mounted in the tab.

MAKE SURE YOU REMOVE THE HEADLIGHT AND HEADLIGHT BRACKET AS THESE WILL CAUSE A DEAD SHORT ON DCC.

lastly, apologies to Bachmann but I would not recommend using ez command here for the following reasons: first, the power output is way too low  (1 amp) for the locomotives you wish to run. invest in another dcc system that has adequate power capabilities. mine is an entry level system with 2.5 amps and full programming capabilities, and the cost was under $250. which brings up the second reason I would advise against ez command: it can't do any programming other than locomotive address, and can't be upgraded to something that will. it is a very basic, stripped down dcc system. for me, the lack of programming ability alone is enough to remove it from contention. 
Logged

Jeffery S Ward Sr
Pittsburgh, PA
jbrock27

View Profile
« Reply #42 on: March 05, 2016, 12:37:47 PM »

the metal in an athearn chassis is difficult or impossible to solder to.

Yes but it is not impossible, or difficult, to solder to the steel headlight bracket receptacle that is attached to the front of the chassis.  Depending on the model loco, GP38-2 or F7A, I might or might not also remove all of the rest of the headlight assembly.   Nor is it difficult to solder to the steel components that are on either side of the truck assemblies on the gold case motor locos, right where it is secured by a brass grommet.  This style truck assembly comes with the gold case motored locos.  Make sure you remove the plastic (they also come with gold case motored locos) side frames before doing the solder work.  I also think it is always preferable to use either flag or spade connectors that have wire soldered to them to attach to the metal tabs that project up from the trucks (for SW models a rail joiner w/a wire soldered to it works well) this way it is easy to remove the connection to work on the trucks if you ever have to.

MAKE SURE YOU REMOVE THE HEADLIGHT AND HEADLIGHT BRACKET AS THESE WILL CAUSE A DEAD SHORT ON DCC.

Why, if you have taken c/o isolating the motor first Huh?

« Last Edit: March 05, 2016, 03:09:50 PM by jbrock27 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
ryeguyisme

Heavy Mountain Steam


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: March 08, 2016, 07:21:56 PM »





some progress shots for those interested Smiley
Logged

J3a-614

View Profile
« Reply #44 on: March 09, 2016, 05:21:28 AM »

Rye, I like those D&SL 2-6-6-0s you have on this layout.  They look right at home on it, even though way too large (compare them with the siding lengths you have). 

I can picture those engines being something Allen might have picked had they come out while he was still alive.  The 2-8-2s and 2-8-0s also had that look as well.

In fact, much of D&SL, particularly the original line over Rollins Pass, would look like something Allen would do, complete with those backbreaking 4% grades. 
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!