i find the comments on brass track to be interesting.......

i have found that on dcc the brass track actually ran cleaner than the nickel silver. perhaps dcc has an ultrasonic cleaning effect on brass but not nickel silver? at any rate, even if you decide to go with nickel silver, which i think is a good investment anyway, you can use your brass track for sidings and yard tracks where your locomotives most likely won't venture.

does your brass track have fiber ties? if so, you may run into problems with the rails staying in guage. definitely replace any fiber tie track.

there is a third option of steel track. this will rust on you, and is very hard to solder to, much worse than either brass or nickel silver.

depending on how old your brass locomotives are, they are probably marghinal runners at best, especially if they have the old open frame motors. those motors also have a high current draw. if you convert them to dcc you may have to use a higher current (O scalemaybe) decoder, in addition to whatever modifications you may have to do to the locomotives. you might want to consider replacing these motors with a can type with a low current draw, at the same time you are isolating the motor from the frame in your locomotive.

as for scale couplers, i don't like them. sure they look good, but they tend to come uncoupled easier on rough track. better to use a srandard size knuckle coupler such as a kadee #5 or #148. since most new rolling stock comes with knuckle couplers i usually retain these unless they fail. any replacements i do are kadee which are metal and alot stronger than the other plastic types.

as for dcc systems, after much research i am using the zephyr by digitrax. i was impressed by most of the entry level systems capabilities. nce in particular has customer support second to none in the model railroad industry. but the digitrax unit i am using has the unique ability to use your existing dc power packs as additional throttles. i wish other manufacturers woudl realize how much of a selling point that is. for under $200 you can convert your dc layout into a 3 cab dcc system. other systems need dcc throttles for additional cabs at about $100 a pop.

the problem sounds like a short in the speed control. on the older rheostat type packs that usually meant replacing the rheostat, not something that i would recommend to a casual user. since the pack is under warranty i wouldn't even try to open it up to look. any check you do at home would probably void the warranty.

not too long ago i saw a csx hopper with c&o reporting marks. while csx isn't a fallen flag, i mention this because of the rarity. csx used the component railroad's reporting marks for about a year or so in 1986-1987 until their csxt mark was approved. most cars were restenciled with the csxt mark and i was surprised that a fully painted csx car was still running around with the original mark.

does anybody know if there is track planning software for ez track layouts, similar to what atlas has on their website? if so i could redraw the plan to eliminate those s curves. i have noticed that many of the layouts on that site have the same flaw though with some minor rearrangement of track most could easily be cured.

i have 1 f40ph, 3 h16-44, 1 gp50. 2 gp40. 2 gp35. 1 gp30, 1 sd45 all bachmann. i love the dcc on board. in this day of $200 locomotives, it's nice to get one with dcc for $50 or so......the only problems i have ever had with them is getting my digitrax to program the bachmann/lenz decoders.

those who think these are toys do not remember the crap AHM and tyco were putting out in the 70s.

Marx made toys and for a while had a line of O27 trains, kind of a poor man's lionel.

i can see a couple of things on this layout that will give you grief. most of the layouts on this site also suffer from this problem. the man who posted these layouts must be into lionel or some other tinplate because the arrangement of the switches reflect this.....

what i am talking about specificly are the wicked s curves going through some of the switches. recommended practice in any scale which uses cars with body mounted (as opposed to truck mounted) couplers is to use a straight section of track at least as long as your longest car between curves of opposite directions. the layout shown has this in two locations, at the top centre where the spur lines come off the runaround track, and bottom right where the spur line comes off the inner loop.

fortunately, a couple of minor modifications to the plan will drasticly improve these situations. at the top centre, use a right hand switch in place of the curve at the right end of the runaround track, replace the left hand switch with a straight. run the two spurs off the new switch as shown in the plan...
for the spur at the bottom, use a right hand switch instead of the left hand one shown in the plan, and run the spur line off to the left instead of the right.

your trains will operate much better using these modifications as they won't be trying to derail when you back them into these spurs.....

thanks. i need to find those pages on the british couplings as well...

I handlay my own track, so I can't use the Woodland Scenics inclines. I did use them in N scale, and i was impressed. But you can also curve your trackboards too with a jig saw. I currently lay all my track on 1x4 or wider pine board. It holds spikes better than anything else I've found, and can be cut to fit almost any situation.

Jeffery S Ward Sr
Pittsburgh, PA

Has anybody modified the Thomas cars and locomotives to use a standard knuckle type coupler like the other HO locomotives and cars have? if so, please tell us how you did it, and show photos if you have them.....

Jeffery S Ward Sr
Pittsburgh, PA

I am going to take this discussion a step further. You didn't specify whether or not you were looking for a way to translate grade percentages to actual field conditions such as building your layout. On the assumption that you are, I am going to share a little secret for setting your grades.....

ebtnut mentioned that grades can be rounded so that a 1% grade is 1" in 96" (or 1/4" in 24") , 2% as 1" in 48" (1/2" in 24") and so on. Why am I rounding thes and converting them to rise in 24"? Simple, 24" just happens to be on of the standard lengths on a level, commonly available in any hardware store and one of the "must have" tools of the experienced layout builder. After all, if your table isn't level, all other grade calculations are moot.

1/4" moulding strip is also commonly available, and cheap too. we can build a simple grade calculator out of this strip. First, take the strip and cut it into 1" 2" 3" and 4" lengths, one of each length. Next, stack and glue them together in a stairstep configuration. they should all be flush on one end, and look like stairs on the other end.

Using this device is very simple. For a 1% grade, set the calculator on ryour track board. Set one end of your 24" level on the lowest step of the calculator, then raise the track board under the other end of the level. when the bubble reads level you will be within a gnat's eyelash of a 1% slope to your track board. You should already have riser blocks fastened to the underside of your track board where it crosses your table joists, simply clamp them in the new position and screw them securely into the joist. Move the whole works another 2 feet up the line and repeat the process.....

For 2% you'd use the second step, 3% the third, and so forth.

I purposely didn't add steps for 5% and above as 4% is about the practical limit for grades on model railroads. even 4% will drasticly affect the number of cars you can run in a train as a given locomotive will pull something like 1/6 of what it can pull on the level....

i have been using these devices for 30 years to set grades, and the only thing i have ever found easier to use are the woodland scenics foam risers, available in 2% 3% and 4% inclines....


Jeffery Ward Sr
Pittsburgh, PA