# Aristo Revolution - Multiple Power Districts?



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

I wonder if someone can shed some light on the subject question.

With any track powered command control system, the power (current and voltage) required by all engines and cars that are operatingat the same time must be provided by either one power source or multiple power sources if they are specifically designed for that purpose.

With multiple power sources which are typically required if the total current required exceeds 15 amps (raltively easy with MU operation), the layout is divided into power districts with each power source feeding a district. 
Trains would travel from on district to another and in doing so would short the output of the power source of one district to the output of another power source in the adjacent district.
DCC Central Stations and DCC boosters are designed to tolerate having their outputs shorted while the train passes between power districts - normal power supplies do not.

How is that handled with the Revolution running on track power and requiring more than one power district?

Knut


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Knut... I'm not sure if I completely understand your question but will try to share an answer. 

When running REOLUTION controlled trains on powered track, DC track power is set to a "comfortable" maximum operating level. Generally 18-22 volts. Each locomotive would be controlled by an onboard REVOLUTION receiver and can be operated with full control anywhere on the powered loop. There is no need for "Multiple Power Districts" on the powered loop.


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

Well Greg is the DCC expert here, but my understanding of the need for multiple power districts is to prevent shutting down an entire club sized layout while somebody tries to figure out where the short occurred. For example: a loco derails in a turnout causing a short. When you have a bunch of trains running and they all stop at the same time, which one caused the short? Multiple Power Districts make it easier to find the fault while the rest of the layout continues to operate. On most home layouts this isn't really an issue.

With an outdoor garden railroad using the Revolution or any other on-board track powered system, you simple need to have a power supply capable of providing enough power (amps) to run all of the trains you want to run at one time. Two trains running at once, each one drawing 1 or 2 amps? You need a power source capable of at least 5 amps. Of course wiring from the power supply to the track needs to be able to handle that same current as well.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Del Tapparo on 15 Jul 2010 11:36 AM 
With an outdoor garden railroad using the Revolution or any other on-board track powered system, you simple need to have a power supply capable of providing enough power (amps) to run all of the trains you want to run at one time.



That is true in theory but not in practice and applies to DCC as well.
Trouble is that with MU latch ups especially if your engines also have smoke and sound and multiple motors, you can easily draw 3 amps per engine so a larger layout where you have say five trains with three engines each operationg would require something like 45 amps to run these trains.

You could of course theoretically use a 50 amp power pack, same as you could use a 50 amp DCC booster, but nobody would do that because with the first short anywhere on the layout, the results would be disasterous.

So to get around this problem of a 50 amp power pack feeding into some short, layouts that use command control systems with power from the track are divided into power districts so that each district is fed by a power pack (or booster) of a lower current capacity - 15 amps maximum is pretty much the standard acceptable although I know of one 20 amp booster.
This exact same issue applies to the Revolution system - you can't just keep increasing the size of the power pack and feed the whole layout from it if your total current requirements are more than 15 amps but you also can't do what boosters are designed to do in DCC, use four 15 amp boosters in the above scenario feeding four power districts.

With battery operation you don't have that problem, each engine is fed by its own on-board battery and shorts because of a derailment or while running through certain types of switches are a non-issue, but as soon as one switches to track power and command control you have this potential issue to contend with.


I just wanted to know how multiple power districts like that are handles with a Revolution system - I get the feeling the answer may be "They are not"


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Knut, 

With the revolution, if all the power districts are separately fed from separate sources, isolated from each other, and producing approximately the same voltage, is there really an issue? As a train crosses from one district into another, there might be a point where one truck is one side, one on the other, but assuming the Revolution receiver just sees a 'merged' voltage coming in to it, would it really affect anything? I can't see the individual power supplies seeing any kind of short--maybe a momentary fluctuation in current demand, but not a short. 

Keith


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

How many trains do you intend to run at one time? Will you have multiple operators? Is this for a large club or exhibition layout? 

I suppose you could divide your layout into power districts, each with its own power supply. As long as the voltages are set the same the on-board track power controller wouldn't care if it has proper filtration. 

It's an interesting question that I haven't seen asked before.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Cougar Rock Rail on 15 Jul 2010 01:02 PM 
Knut, 

With the revolution, if all the power districts are separately fed from separate sources, isolated from each other, and producing approximately the same voltage, is there really an issue? As a train crosses from one district into another, there might be a point where one truck is one side, one on the other, but assuming the Revolution receiver just sees a 'merged' voltage coming in to it, would it really affect anything? I can't see the individual power supplies seeing any kind of short--maybe a momentary fluctuation in current demand, but not a short. 

Keith



Keith -

The output impedance of a regulated power supply is in the milliohm range.
If it wasn't there wouldn't be any regulation.
You can visualize that by picturing an equivalent 'black box' circuit of the power supply with an output impedance of "R"

If "R" is zero ohms, the output voltage stays constant as the power supply delivers its output current.
If you now make "R" 1 ohm for instance, there will be a voltage drop across "R" depending on the current through it and the output voltage will drop.
Basic ohms law.


So now, if the outputs of two basic power supplies are bridged each one is feeding into the other because the impedance of the other power supply is much lower than the load impedance of any locomotives on the layout.

Each power supply will "see" the other supply essentially as a short and shut down unless the power supplies are designed to have their outputs paralled. But these are special and expensive power supplies, not the ones used to run model trains.

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Del Tapparo on 15 Jul 2010 01:08 PM 
How many trains do you intend to run at one time? Will you have multiple operators? Is this for a large club or exhibition layout? 

I suppose you could divide your layout into power districts, each with its own power supply. As long as the voltages are set the same the on-board track power controller wouldn't care if it has proper filtration. 

It's an interesting question that I haven't seen asked before.


This is just a question that has come up in my mind that relates specifically to the Revolution.

It doesn't apply to systems using DC since you can only individually control one train at the time anyway and it doesn't apply to on-board battery operation.


But it does apply the DCC and to the Revolution with track power - DCC adresses the issue with the booster design, just wondered if Revolution handles this at all or if it's just being ignored.


FYI - I know of many private layouts that use multiple 15 amp boosters - up to four plus a Central Station.

How would something like this be converted to a Revolution system - feeding the layout with a 60 or 80 amp 24 volt supply I would think is rather risky.


Knut


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

Keith - 
The output impedance of a regulated power supply is in the milliohm range.
If it wasn't there wouldn't be any regulation.
You can visualize that by picturing an equivalent 'black box' circuit of the power supply with an output impedance of "R"

If "R" is zero ohms, the output voltage stays constant as the power supply delivers its output current.
If you now make "R" 1 ohm for instance, there will be a voltage drop across "R" depending on the current through it and the output voltage will drop.
Basic ohms law.


So now, if the outputs of two basic power supplies are bridged each one is feeding into the other because the impedance of the other power supply is much lower than the load impedance of any locomotives on the layout.

Each power supply will "see" the other supply essentially as a short and shut down unless the power supplies are designed to have their outputs paralled. But these are special and expensive power supplies, not the ones used to run model trains.

Knut 







I guess I don't know how they solve this problem in DCC (Where's Greg when you really need him?), but it's the same problem. Their equipment is just more complicated because it has to handle the DCC signal component. And why do you have to use "special and expensive" power supplies? There are tons of industrial regulated power supplies available for under $100 each.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Del Tapparo on 15 Jul 2010 02:14 PM 
And why do you have to use "special and expensive" power supplies? There are tons of industrial regulated power supplies available for under $100 each.


You only need the special ones if you need to parallel the outputs of two supplies or more.

If one supply is adequate for your needs, pretty much any supply will do.


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

60 to 80 amps? So I could run 60 to 80 1 amp trains. Even if you are talking big draw standard gauge stuff with lots of lights; 10 amps per train? That's still 6 or 8 trains running at once on the same track. This is not typical.

Both Aristo-Craft and Locolinc have had on-board track controls for years. This is not a new situation. Again, I think this is an interesting question, but I don't think it is going to be a common problem.


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

OK, Knut, I think I maybe see what you are saying: So if the load (the locomotive) is being supported by one power supply, so during the time it is bridging the two since one is taking care of the load, then there is effectively no load on the other so that's why it senses a short? 

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I think it's as Knut and Del said early on. 

I'll agree with Keith to a certain degree in his post also. 

DCC boosters are designed to work together in multiple independent power districts, which can be "bridged" together when trains cross from one to another. It's been in the design forever of course, since the system was designed for multiple controllers, locos and "blocks", i.e. application up to large club layouts. 

Without going into the technical explanation and slight differences between the commercial systems, suffice it to say that all DCC command stations have a microprocessor, so your detection of "shorts" "overcurrent" etc. can be done in a sophisticated manner, not just on or off. 

In the Revolution setup, there is no "system", no central control, and no "system brains"... so you would just connect separate power supplies to separate "power districts". You would rely on the short circuit protection in each power supply to protect itself. 

But using identical power supplies should give similar results in a short or overcurrent situation, so here I'm agreeing with (what I believe) was the fundamental comment of Keith, why wouldn't it work ok? 

But the finer details, having the short circuit circuits work in "harmony" under a "marginal overload" is doubtful. 

If you kept way away from the max current of the supplies, I think you would probably be fine. 

This would be good to test by applying shorts between districts, but I doubt anything wrong could harm a Revo-equipped loco. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Del Tapparo on 15 Jul 2010 02:41 PM 
60 to 80 amps? So I could run 60 to 80 1 amp trains. Even if you are talking big draw standard gauge stuff with lots of lights; 10 amps per train? That's still 6 or 8 trains running at once on the same track. This is not typical.



It's not an issue of a number of trains running on the same track but a number of trains running on the same layout.
Big difference in my mind.

Anyway - the question isn't if this is typical or not, it obviously happens otherwise there would be no systems with multiple DCC boosters, the question was how is this situation handles with a Revolution system and so far the answer is: "It isn't".

As I said before, if the total current drain when all your trains are running is less than 15 amps and you only need one power supply, then you don't have this potential issue.
It's just that I run into more and more situations where locos include sound, two smoke generators and more features in general which all require power from the track - 1 amp trains are not that common any more.
I typically run a 10 car RhB passenger trains with a single LGB 2-motor engine which didn't even have sound and also no smoke since it's an electric engine, not steam or diesel, and that consist drew almost 3 amps going up an incline.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 15 Jul 2010 03:30 PM 

But using identical power supplies should give similar results in a short or overcurrent situation, so here I'm agreeing with (what I believe) was the fundamental comment of Keith, why wouldn't it work ok? 


Because each power supply would look like a short to the other one,

Nothing would happen to the Revolution receiver but I would expect the power supplies to shut down.

With DCC boosters, the shut down when they "see" a short is delayed - on many one can adjust that delay, the time between detection of a short and the booster actually shutting down.
Regular power supplies just shut down when there is a short.

- Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

More than that Knut, DCC systems can "analyze" and pulse the track power to determine if the short is still there, or it was a brief "glitch" in track impedance. My autoreversers do this in a very intelligent way. 

On DC supplies seeing each other as a short if paralled (I believe that's the scenario), if they have a simple circuit breaker, should not be a problem. A more sophisticated overcurrent detector or crowbar circuit might respond as you state. 

You are not talking about connecting 2 DC supplies in reverse polarity, right? 

Regards, Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 15 Jul 2010 08:21 PM 

You are not talking about connecting 2 DC supplies in reverse polarity, right? 


Right!

Just bridged with the right polarity 


I tried to find some relevant links about this on the net but everything I came across that talks about connecting the output of two power supplies in parallel
described this capability with supplies that are designed for that type of operation. 


Just googled again and came up with this which is quite relevant since a lot of people I know use the Meanwell S-320 series of supplies


_5. If we need a 600W output, can we use two units of S-320 connected in parallel?
_
_Ans:
__No, you can not do this connection because S-320 is not equipped with the parallel function. When two power supplies are connected in parallel, the one with higher output voltage will share more loading and deliver more (even "all") power to the load and cause these two power supplies to be unbalanced. We suggest using PSP-300 or PSP-500 because it is equipped with the current sharing function._

http://www.meanwell.eu/faq.html

The answer _"When two power supplies are connected in parallel, the one with higher output voltage will share more loading and deliver more (even "all") power to the load and cause these two power supplies to be unbalanced." _describes another possible scenario (other than the supplies just shutting down). The situation described here is that the load current is not shared equally, so with a layout that say requires 20 Amps to run all the trains, when the two supplies are bridged instead of each supply delivering 10 amps, one may now deliver 16 amps and the other 4 amps - if that happens the one trying to deliver 16 amps will shut down because the current demand is over the 15 amp limit - as soon as that shuts down the other supply is now being asked to supply the whole 20 amps and of course it in turn shutsdown._
_


Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Got it, and yes, the Meanwell (I have 2 of them) has a more sophisticated output protection system and you should not parallel them. 

Just as I said... the "dumb" supplies that have just a circuit breaker will probably be fine, more sophisticated ones may not function properly. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 16 Jul 2010 09:13 AM 

Just as I said... the "dumb" supplies that have just a circuit breaker will probably be fine, more sophisticated ones may not function properly. 


Now I have to ask the question - why would you expect the circuit breaker not to trip if you connect the outputs of two "dumb" supplies?

Regards, Knut


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Not expecting it not to trip, I believe I qualified the situation: 

"If you kept way away from the max current of the supplies, I think you would probably be fine. " 

I did qualify this situation also. 

Sure, if you run things to the point that bridging the districts would allow one supply to power the entire train AND the train was over the limit of a single supply, yes, you will trip the breaker on one supply. Then the load will transfer to the other supply and it will trip also. 

Is that the point you were trying to drill home? 

Yes, given all the caveats, in that specific situation, I believe that will happen. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

What started all this - me posting this new topic - was actually a comment by Jerys RR in another thread in this section:

_



For me the "awakening" was when I put four 8 amp MRC sound decoders into an Aristo-Craft FA/FB-1 ABBA set only to realize that I now had 32 amp decoder capability in 4 locomotives (with lights and sound) that I could never conceivably run within the limits of my 5 amp LGB MTS system. 

My "fix" with the Revolution would amount to two Revolution receivers (one per two FA/FB-1's) and nothing else since I bought the Revolution transmitter for other Aristo locos. An alternative fix with DCC (bearing in mind that I could have run two FA/FB-1's also from a single MRC sound decoder which only cost about $10) would have meant buying a new 15 amp Central Station and matching transmitter (plus various accessories). For me it was a no-brainer as the Aristo Revolution was by far the cheapest solution.

Click to expand...

 
__The DCC Central Station and boosers are designed to allow for multiple power feeds if required to provide more current than one booster can provide by itself, but the Revolution system is powered by regular power supplies which normally don't have that capability, so how is that situation handled - that' is what I wanted to find out.


PS - Sorry - I'm stuck on italics, Clicking on the "I" button again or any of the others does nothing. 

_


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Ahh... I see... actually that post sort of leaves me shaking my head. 

The capability of a decoder does not automatically make it draw full amps which is implied. If everything in the world drew maximum possible amperage instead of what is required, the entire earth's power systems would explode, not just shut down. 

Four Aristo F units should be able to run under 8 amps unless they are damaged. 

What I don't understand in the post is why you need to buy a new 15 amp central station to run an 8 amp decoder that's only drawing about 4 amps. 

So, not changing the DCC booster, using one $10 MRC is the cheapest solution, not buying a Revolution set ($200) and another receiver ($70)... 

In my book $10 is less than $270. 


Regards, Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Ahhhhhhhh!! Logic.


Unfortunately that does not apply to everyone Greg.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 16 Jul 2010 08:06 PM 
Ahh... I see... actually that post sort of leaves me shaking my head. 

The capability of a decoder does not automatically make it draw full amps which is implied. If everything in the world drew maximum possible amperage instead of what is required, the entire earth's power systems would explode, not just shut down. 

Four Aristo F units should be able to run under 8 amps unless they are damaged. 

What I don't understand in the post is why you need to buy a new 15 amp central station to run an 8 amp decoder that's only drawing about 4 amps. 

So, not changing the DCC booster, using one $10 MRC is the cheapest solution, not buying a Revolution set ($200) and another receiver ($70)... 

In my book $10 is less than $270. 


Regards, Greg


I guss you forgot where the quoted post came from..........
First one on this page
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...v/topic/aff/98/aft/116086/afpg/4/Default.aspx

In any case, even if it doesn't make sense, it still triggered the question in my mind how is power handled witha Revolution system if the total power requirements exceed what one supply can safely provide in a Large Scale model railroad environment which in turn was the basis for this thread.


Regards, Knut


----------



## Jerrys RR (Jun 28, 2010)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 16 Jul 2010 08:06 PM 
Ahh... I see... actually that post sort of leaves me shaking my head. 

*The capability of a decoder does not automatically make it draw full amps which is implied.* If everything in the world drew maximum possible amperage instead of what is required, the entire earth's power systems would explode, not just shut down. 

*Four Aristo F units should be able to run under 8 amps unless they are damaged. *

*What I don't understand in the post is why you need to buy a new 15 amp central station to run an 8 amp decoder that's only drawing about 4 amps. *


Regards, Greg 

Posted By krs on 16 Jul 2010 11:43 AM 
What started all this - me posting this new topic - was actually a comment by Jerys RR in another thread in this section:

For me the "awakening" was when I put four 8 amp MRC sound decoders into an Aristo-Craft FA/FB-1 ABBA set only to realize that I now had 32 amp decoder capability in 4 locomotives (with lights and sound) that *I could never conceivably run within the limits of my 5 amp LGB MTS system*. 



Hi Guys,

I just happened across this topic and read the above which is totally out of context with the point I was trying to make. 

*I went back and reread my post and the miscommunication was my fault because I did not clearly explain why I needed the 15 amps.*

To put everything into perspective the context of everything was based on what Knut quoted:

"I could never conceivably run within the limits of my 5 amp LGB MTS system[/b]."

*My MTS/DCC capabilities were/are limited to my LGB 5 amp MTS Central Stations perhaps with the use of LGB 5 amp MTS **Boosters. This results in a 5 amp MAXIMUM ANYWHERE ON THE LAYOUT OPERATING UNDER MTS AT ANY GIVEN TIME.* While I have several MRC 8 amp DCC boosters I am not yet ready to trust them especially after a friend's failed shortly after he started using it. Even if I did it would make no difference because their 8 amps would be of no help.

*What is missing and throws everything out of context is NOT the FA-1/FB-1/FB-1/FA-1 with their sound systems and their 8 amp decoders - it is the fact (I thought I had mentioned but did not) that* *the F1-ABBA was pulling twelve (12) Aristo-Craft lighted (no light switch) Streamliners and the combined train pulls 12+ amps. * 
It was this combined 12 amps that exceeds/exceeded my maximum MTS/DCC power supply capabilities and led to my statement that I would need a 15 amp DCC Central Station or at least a 15 amp DCC Booster (if I was willing to trust a non-LGB 15 amp booster with my 5 amp LGB Central Station). Following the logic of this topic I might have needed multiple 15 amp boosters.

The point I was trying to make was that, as with my analog track operations, with the Revolution I can run anything up to the total amps available on the track rather than (as with MTS/DCC) being limited to the maximum amps of a central station and or booster (5 amps max in my case).[/b]

Once we start with this scenario my conclusion was that it was cheaper for me to buy 2 Revolution Receivers and put one into each pair of FA/FB-1's and power them with a MAG-15 (I already owned the Revolution Transmitter and the MAG-15) giving me 15 amps available to my complete train at a total cost to me (all that I was concerned with) of 2 Revolution Receivers and 2 Capacitor 6 packs (no smoke control needed here). These locos already had Aristo/PH Hobbies digital sound systems which I replaced with Dallee sound systems but I do not count that cost as I used those sound systems on other locos.

I finally finished that particular project (Revolutions into FA/FB-1's) yesterday but on B&O FA/FB-1's rather than the Warbonnet FA/FB-1's which I more or less replaced with a pair of E-8 Warbonnets that have Revolutions in them.

The fact is that I have not yet tried out the above combination to find out how well it works because I am using the B&O locos pulling B&O Heavyweights. 

In one major area the Revolution is superior to the regular Train Engineer - I was never quite happy with the Train Engineer with this particular power hungry train. The Train Engineer (as with other remotes I have used) only passes around 7 - 8 amps through it which is not enough for this train. I have not measured the new Train Engineer but I expect it to do about the same. In this way the Train Engineer also helped convince me to buy the Revolution because the track power can feed the Streamliners whatever power they need (limited only to the 15 amps of the MAG-15 or a Crest Everest) and all the Revolution Receiver needs to be able to pass through would be enough amps for just the loco motors, loco lights, sound systems and possibly smoke units.

While the MAG-15 (and my Aristo Everests) put out 15 amps that does not mean that the system is perfect.

*Knut does make a very good point regarding power sharing between blocks that can apply to the Revolution, Analog Track Power and to the Train Engineer (anything that gets its power from the rails as DCC does via Central Stations and Boosters).*

For one thing (this applies to MTS/DCC as well) lighted coaches draw power (amps) anytime the lights are left turned on and they are parked on the mainline or on a siding without the ability to switch the power to that location (block) off. This reduces the amps available to run anything else. One way I get around this with MTS is that I put $10 MRC decoders into my leading coaches which dim or turn off the lights in it and in all trailing coaches. With track/Revolution/TE power I park the unused locos, coaches, cabooses, locos etc. (anything that draws power for lights etc.) on a siding and I turn the power to that siding off.

*Another (more important) thing that Knut brings out is that there really can be a legitimate need for power sharing between blocks.* This can apply to the Revolution, Analog Track Power and to the Train Engineer but probably not to anyone who does not run a lot of trains or power hungry trains.

I ran into this a few days ago when I put a PA/PB/PA with 2 Sierra sound systems on a track along with 11 USAT coaches. With the lights off the train drew around 8 amps spiking occasionally to 15 amps and kicking off the breaker. When I turned the lights on the amps jumped to around 12 and the train could hardly make it around the layout without kicking the breaker off. 

In other words I am restricted to running this train with the lights off and trying to find a way to keep it from spiking (perhaps on LGB turnouts). To run it at night I will have to use a different loco with much lower amp draw and no spikes.

If someone comes out with a unit such as Knut was describing (similar to DCC boosters) it would be very nice and solve a significant problem for me. When I run a power hungry train on part of the layout I cannot also be running another one except on a different mainline isolated from the first and with a different power source. Actually if one was cheap enough it would seem to me that a DCC booster might work as I understand that the Revolution can work from DCC powered rails if a bridge rectifier is used between the track and the Revolution (I have not tried this).

When I drive trains out they come across the 1st mainline through a crossover onto the 2nd mainline. Then I switch to a 2 power system with a 2nd power supply controlling the 2nd mainline but if a train on the 2nd mainline accidentally crosses back there would be a direct short between the two power supplies. Perhaps Lewis can come out with something like a Booster Adapter that would enable multiple Crest Everests or Crest Elites to work in parallel with each other.

I occasionally do this with some older LGB power supplies running from one direct to another without any problems but LGB would certainly never have recommended it and neither do I. With the much higher cost of LGB power supplies they may have circuits designed to protect themselves (I have no idea why it works).

Personally I would much rather have a multi-Everest configuration moving from one 15 amp power supply to another 15 amp power supply than to jump to a 25 amp system unless I really have to (this would not fix my power hungry train situation but it would fix the multiple track multiple train situation). 

The Revolution is still quite new. I have no idea what Lewis or anyone else may be working on but I think it was good for Knut to bring this topic up.

As trains get bigger and longer they are going to be more power hungry and before someone jumps in I will add that I do realize that putting the PA/PB/PA on battery and leaving the lighted coaches on track power would be one way to address my situation. If they had the Aristo type battery switch (and would not need 3 batteries and a charger) I might have been tempted.

As always my comments are based on what is applicable to my own personal situation and on what is important to me. I make no effort at trying to convince anyone else what they should or should not do. Few people may have a LGB MTS layout with its 5 amp limitations (actually I suspect a lot of people do). For my comments to be of value to anyone else they must be seen from my viewpoint and even then others may decide different solutions are better for them. That is perfectly OK with me. I have no desire to tell anyone how they should spend their money.

Jerry


----------

