# DCC for track *and* battery power?



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Im planning to setup my railroad with both Track and Battery power!
why both you ask? why make things so complicated?
well..for me, its not complicated..it actually makes things very simple..(for the railroad itself anyway..perhaps not so simple when it comes to choosing a control system!)

Here is my track plan:


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes Scotty, QSI/G-wire will do both jobs for you. The system will run either, early on I was running track power and now have pretty much gone to battery as track conductivity has gone to ****, and I don't have the funds at this time to fix the issue with it, but I have used the QSI/G-wire, and T-9000 throttle, and now am using both it and the NCE Gardenwire throttle. I run two 500ft. loops 80x40x80 twice. When funds are available I will make my outer loop track powered also. Regal


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi Scot, 

Another option if you can wait a bit, is to use the upcoming Massoth DRC-300 wireless receiver, which allows the use of any DCC decoder to be used on either battery or track power. It is similar to the G-wire (I'm not sure if that's the right name) except with the Massoth you can use any brand decoder, which is a big advantage. The Massoth navigator handheld then acts as the central station and can run several trains on it's own. You could run your live steam that way too obviously, by using a simple function decoder (like the 8FL) that can operate servos. They should be in production this summer, and in the meantime if you go to their website you can read up on it. 

Keith


----------



## George Schreyer (Jan 16, 2009)

Just be sure that ALL of your battery powered locos have their track pickups disconnected. If you do or do not get a single controller to operate both systems, at least they won't smoke each other.


----------



## StanleyAmes (Jan 3, 2008)

Scotty 

I Use DCC track power but for use elsewhere several of my locomotives also have the Gwire receiver. 

For these locomotives I also have on-board batteries and hybrid drive so all the conversions are done automatically. For best results I switch between the G wire or Track signal. 

By putting some on board power in the locmotives, I never have to clean the wheels or track. The only time I have to charge the on-board power is when I wish to run on layouts with no track power.

Stan


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Interesting..thanks guys!
good stuff..


Posted By Cougar Rock Rail on 01 Mar 2011 08:49 AM

Hi Scot, 



Another option if you can wait a bit, is to use the upcoming Massoth DRC-300 wireless receiver, which allows the use of any DCC decoder to be used on either battery or track power. It is similar to the G-wire (I'm not sure if that's the right name) except with the Massoth you can use any brand decoder, which is a big advantage. The Massoth navigator handheld then acts as the central station and can run several trains on it's own. You could run your live steam that way too obviously, by using a simple function decoder (like the 8FL) that can operate servos. They should be in production this summer, and in the meantime if you go to their website you can read up on it. 



Keith



Keith,
is that this system? 


http://www.shourtline.swl4.com/ME_8130701_DiMAX_DRC_300_Wireless_Omni_Power_Controller$.html

If im reading that right, does that mean you need the $130 "transceiver" in each locomotive, *in addition* to the regular DCC decoder?
Or is the $130 "transceiver" *also* the DCC decoder?
the way they say "Works with any DCC equipped loco" makes that unclear..(at least to me! 

thanks,
Scot


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Keith,
is that this system?

Yes Scot, that's the one...just isn't out yet. You still need a decoder after that but it can be any make.

Keith


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

My suggestion to Klauss approx. 2 years ago was I wanted something smaller then a central station so I could place it inside either a LGB locomotive, tender, or a trailing car.

I stated to him I have been using the LGB MTS battery power for a few years now and it works flawlessly! Range is not as good as the bosted 1000' range of the new board, but was more then what I needed for my application. I tested it out at Marty's steam up 3 years ago on his layout and I could stand on one end of his layout while my train was at the opposite end and I had full function of all the MTS sounds.

I just could not fit or use a central station in just any engine as the size of the central station made it almost impossible to use in some cases, unless you used it on a flat car and made a tarp cover for it._ (of course you had to remove the electronics from the red case)_

I guess my suggestion did not fall on deaf ears after all. I just wonder if I will get to test it out like we talked about on the conversations we had when I first approached him about comming up with this option for LGB engines.

Will let you know if I will get to test it or not. I totally forgot all about this untill I read this post and saw the advertisements about the new battery/track powered wireless controller.

CAN'T WAIT!!!









Bubba


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

If cost is no object, then I would pick the Zimo or Massoth systems where you can use the same throttle for both conventional track powered DCC and battery powered DCC. 

But, I cannot remember the last time someone said "cost is no object" 

If you have only 2 battery powered trains, vs a bunch of other locos that will run track power, I'd convert those to DCC track power. Get the Massoth or Zimo solution (handheld communicates directly to the loco) for those 2, and save money on all the rest of the locos. 

Adding a wireless receiver to all your locos becomes very expensive very quickly. 

I'd also make the entire layout DCC powered. You might only have to buy one more $45 autoreverser. 

Greg


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

That's why using a battery trailing car is way more cost effective! theres no need to place a board in EVERY engine.

LGB engines are the easiest to convert to battery power...all you do is remove the brushes in the gear box.....EVERY BRUSH!!! REMOVE the accessory plug cover in the rear of the tender connect a FEMALE part of a MU plug into it, or for the older style accessory connection use 2 of those male pins they use for connecting lights up in series on their passenger cars, plugging them into the OLD style accessory plug holes. Either way you tap into the accessory plug old or new, then connect to your battery trailing car.
If the engine has the NEW style accessory plug the FEMALE end of a MU plug fits right into that accessory plug , and WAAALAA!

OR if you want BOTH battery AND trtack power, then the job gets harder! The wiring for doing so is not worth the effort, (IMHO). You would have to take the track pick ups from the motor block OR the board then wire a switch into the circuit...easy...NO...do able...yes!

Most cost effective way of doing it is using a battery trailing car, if you run more then 1 engine you could have 2 battery cars..OR select 1 engine other then your trailing car and place one inside it.

No need to place a board inside EVERY engine..unless you have UNLIMITED funds! I use the Airwire the same way...have boards in my Big Boy, Hudson, and dedicated diesels, but also have 2 battery trailing cars for othere engines!

I hope the new Massoth board is whay I have been waiting for.

Always (IMHO)

Bubba


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I believe what he asked was to have the same CONTROL system for both battery and track. 

As I stated, the number of DCC "throttles" that work with a command station (traditional track powered DCC) and can also transmit directly to a loco seems to be limited to Massoth and Zimo. 

Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 02 Mar 2011 02:33 PM 
SNIP
As I stated, the number of DCC "throttles" that work with a command station (traditional track powered DCC) and can also transmit directly to a loco seems to be limited to Massoth and Zimo. 

Greg 

Greg.
Please excuse my ignorance, but are you saying that the NCE "throttle" that will work with a G Wire RX, and thus an on board DCC system powered by regular track power or batteries, such as QSI, cannot also operate a Command Station trackside?
If so, does that mean R/C handpieces (throttles) such as NCE and AirWire have to be dedicated to on board use only?


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By Madstang on 02 Mar 2011 04:37 AM 
That's why using a battery trailing car is way more cost effective! theres no need to place a board in EVERY engine.

LGB engines are the easiest to convert to battery power...all you do is remove the brushes in the gear box.....EVERY BRUSH!!! REMOVE the accessory plug cover in the rear of the tender connect a FEMALE part of a MU plug into it, or for the older style accessory connection use 2 of those male pins they use for connecting lights up in series on their passenger cars, plugging them into the OLD style accessory plug holes. Either way you tap into the accessory plug old or new, then connect to your battery trailing car.
If the engine has the NEW style accessory plug the FEMALE end of a MU plug fits right into that accessory plug , and WAAALAA!

OR if you want BOTH battery AND trtack power, then the job gets harder! The wiring for doing so is not worth the effort, (IMHO). You would have to take the track pick ups from the motor block OR the board then wire a switch into the circuit...easy...NO...do able...yes!

Most cost effective way of doing it is using a battery trailing car, if you run more then 1 engine you could have 2 battery cars..OR select 1 engine other then your trailing car and place one inside it.

No need to place a board inside EVERY engine..unless you have UNLIMITED funds! I use the Airwire the same way...have boards in my Big Boy, Hudson, and dedicated diesels, but also have 2 battery trailing cars for othere engines!

I hope the new Massoth board is whay I have been waiting for.

Always (IMHO)

Bubba 
This entire post ignores the difference between the various engine in motor characteristics, sound and other feature set. So for one you can't pull a battery operated car behind a Diesel engine and then switch it over to a steam engine. Secondly you can have all the electronics in the car, becasue then you have to run to many wires into and from the engine to control all the various functions in there. So know we are installing a function board into the engine, then we have per engine the same cost of a DCC engine board with no need for an RF receiver, no need for a battery, no need for extra DPDT switches (to switch between battery power/RF receiver, and DCC operation)......... RF operation will also not give train automation or semi automation. All things to consider, because needs grow, and then what? 

Now the question will a $500 DCC system be as good as a $1000 DCC system and are your sure that the ultimate investment might not be $1500 (you outgrow the old and have to buy the other one anyhow). Considering the expenses for track, switches, rolling stock for the above layout you are looking probably at around +3000. The difference of $500 will be 16% or less. There are operational differences that I would never want to miss. The expense is once, the lack of features is for ever. I would rather go for delayed gratification (one engine later). As matter of fact, if you abandon the battery power idea you saved all this money on the RF components.

This would definitely be my choice.


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 02 Mar 2011 04:39 PM 
Posted By Madstang on 02 Mar 2011 04:37 AM 
That's why using a battery trailing car is way more cost effective! theres no need to place a board in EVERY engine.

LGB engines are the easiest to convert to battery power...all you do is remove the brushes in the gear box.....EVERY BRUSH!!! REMOVE the accessory plug cover in the rear of the tender connect a FEMALE part of a MU plug into it, or for the older style accessory connection use 2 of those male pins they use for connecting lights up in series on their passenger cars, plugging them into the OLD style accessory plug holes. Either way you tap into the accessory plug old or new, then connect to your battery trailing car.
If the engine has the NEW style accessory plug the FEMALE end of a MU plug fits right into that accessory plug , and WAAALAA!

OR if you want BOTH battery AND trtack power, then the job gets harder! The wiring for doing so is not worth the effort, (IMHO). You would have to take the track pick ups from the motor block OR the board then wire a switch into the circuit...easy...NO...do able...yes!

Most cost effective way of doing it is using a battery trailing car, if you run more then 1 engine you could have 2 battery cars..OR select 1 engine other then your trailing car and place one inside it.

No need to place a board inside EVERY engine..unless you have UNLIMITED funds! I use the Airwire the same way...have boards in my Big Boy, Hudson, and dedicated diesels, but also have 2 battery trailing cars for othere engines!

I hope the new Massoth board is whay I have been waiting for.

Always (IMHO)

Bubba 
This entire post ignores the difference between the various engine in motor characteristics, sound and other feature set. So for one you can't pull a battery operated car behind a Diesel engine and then switch it over to a steam engine. Secondly you can have all the electronics in the car, becasue then you have to run to many wires into and from the engine to control all the various functions in there. So know we are installing a function board into the engine, then we have per engine the same cost of a DCC engine board with no need for an RF receiver, no need for a battery, no need for extra DPDT switches (to switch between battery power/RF receiver, and DCC operation)......... RF operation will also not give train automation or semi automation. All things to consider, because needs grow, and then what? 

Now the question will a $500 DCC system be as good as a $1000 DCC system and are your sure that the ultimate investment might not be $1500 (you outgrow the old and have to buy the other one anyhow). Considering the expenses for track, switches, rolling stock for the above layout you are looking probably at around +3000. The difference of $500 will be 16% or less. There are operational differences that I would never want to miss. The expense is once, the lack of features is for ever. I would rather go for delayed gratification (one engine later). As matter of fact, if you abandon the battery power idea you saved all this money on the RF components.

This would definitely be my choice.



AXEL 
Yes you can if you wanted to..you COULD place 2 seperate sound systems with a switch between..no wait you can't with a Massoth, because the sound and decoder is on the same board..IF you use Phoenix you could place 2 sound boards in the trailing car with a switch between them. Selecting between them the charistics of the engine you are running, AND if you wanted to change the sound you could with the COMPUTER INTERFACE of the Phoenix! I have yet to see Massoth or Zimo offer that option!

What you failed to see is that, like with all of us battery powered guys have seperate battery cars for EACH steam or diesel engine. Depending what we are running..I have 10($1,390), Airwire boards, for various applications, with the various Phoenix boards with the charistics of the engine I am running.
_(Expensive, yes, if purchased all at one time, I did not, I added as I went)_

What I was trying to express is that you can use the new Massoth board in a trailing car, like the ad boasts, like the Airwire, EXCEPT that you still need to add the decoders, so instead of the $130 now you have, what possible another $20-$70 for a decoder(s) or more if you buy a Massoth with both sound and decoder on the board ..don't know for sure as I use a R/C that has BOTH on the board @ $139...AirWire! _(don't forget the cost of a Phoenix for EACH Airwire board)_

I am totally happy with the Airwire system as I run EXCLUSIVELY battery power..EXCEPT in my test track in my ceiling mounted track.

I was trying to be positive about the new Massoth option as I am the one who suggested to Klauss Stork approx 2 years ago, that made this Massoth R/C a reality.....ask him...please! 
Because I wanted to realize all the sound options that the OLD MTS offered without having to fit a cumbersome central station in tenders it would fit into or deviseing a trailing flatcar. I also have 3-4 central stations inside various applications.
But also being able to use the new board I will have to purchase a Navigator to use this new board..what $400? The T1000 is $200

The advertisement boasts that you can control all of the functions like a central station without having a central station.
Sorry Axel but track power is not the only way people want to control their engines, cost or not cost, some people DO NOT LIKE TRACK POWER...nothing personel! 
So I felt LGB should offer this option for us that want to control our LGB MTS stuff with battery, make it more mainline then fitting the cumbersome central station hap hazardly in a tender or something.

Really you should be greatful for the fact that it gives you another venue to make MONEY!


Beside only a fraction of people EVER jack with the "operational differences", succomming to forward, backwards, toot, bell, blowdown, and lights on lights off......most people want dependable train opperation..that's all, plain and simple!
I have had a complete LGB MTS layout track power and NEVER used the Universal remote to program OR switch a track.. Or did anything other then change from 5 volts to 24 volts OR change the speed steps. Keep it simple..that's what we want!

I have heard many battery powered guys, for that matter track powered guys state all they want to do is start the train...sit down with a beer and watch it go round and round! What else is there if you don't switch???









As far as making a wrong choice, that is why I always suggest to people either joining a club, or at least frequent a club and do your homework FIRST before spending ANY money so as NOT to make the mistake you are stating Axel! 
Most importantly if dealers are not helping the consumers make the correct choices, they are NOT being good stewards! 

Nothing personel..it's just business!









Again IMHO

Bubba


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Babba:

I have for a long time advised poeple and continue to do so. I am the creator of the applicability guide, that guides what technology to use, and what the decision criteria are. The boarder lines are fluctuating and it is important to understand this.

However, with that said, you are unfortunately not stating facts and you are "rooting" in one single direction. I call that Polemic. Why?

In your previous posts you stated you are saving money with one battery car for x number of engines, maybe tow or three battery cars for X+Y engines. Now you addressing that you use a battery car for every engines, then you state the cost of all RF receivers and that you have a sound board in every car for the individual characteristics, but forget to mention that the phoenix sound boards costs already as much an integrated DCC/Sound board. And then your cost savings idea goes even further to put TWO sound boards into your battery car and provide a switch to select which one is supposed to be operating. And how many wires do you run exactly between your battery car with all boards installed? And how thick are you tow main wires? 12/14 gauge at least (unless it is a tiny engine) Depending on the engine you can run 5A through this connection. And depending on the engine you need additional wires for + lines to users as smoke units and fan (if a fan driven smoke unit is used) as well as two different minus lines if you want this smoke to operate with chuff or load synchronization. One line to front lights, one tow rear lights, one to cabin light, one to running boards, one to side lights (some steam engines and some Diesel engines have lights that are going the side of the engine that are on or off for different purposes. Then the market lights. Of course you can tie it all together everything is on all the time, then you get away with just the power feeds. But Bingo now you are feeding parameters into the grid of my applicability guide. One line states: "I am not interested in realistic operation".

And that is all "COST SAVING"

This entire post unfortunately demonstrates what's wrong with some advise given here. Everybody at least knows I am a hobbyist that went into the business and that I triy to present as fair as possible the facts without alternative motivs - even flaws that we uncovered in our distribtued products and show potential counter measures. In addition I am spreading the word how to avoid mistakes at least all of the mistakes that I did and nowadays what I have learned from my customers as well. 

On top we install anything - therefore we can judge their operation. 

When we find out the desires of the customers, and their ulimate dreams, then we give the proper advise. Often, if poeple are unsure, we try to advise to start with a DC layout, but buy components that might be reusable, such as the new line of Powerpacks that can ultimate feed also a DCC system. We have found customers which have a very detriorated layout with Brass track (becasue it didn't receive any maintenance for >5 years) and the customer didn't want to refurbish it. We installed the Revolution into the train with battery power. Maybe one day the user might have a second locomotive. This was smack in the center of the applicability guide where automatically DC, and DCC fell out. 

If we are asked to install sound, then there is nothing wrong installing the this modern generation of DCC/Sound combos, because they not only give sound, but they add to the driving characteristics of the engine, because the motor control is active in DC mode as well. We adivse on a supsension layout two concentric circles going round and around to the proper DC implementation, another example of the applicability guide. No point in for DCC and no point for Battery and RF.

Coming back to the original thread, looking at the layout and the question DCC track *and* battery power?

I see interesting operational possibilities and wouldn't consider Battery as an option, considering that the reversing loop in the red line is a no-brainer in DCC. I would not burden myself or any of the customers to do dual installations, and running the entire layout is definately out of the applicability range battery power. (Oh sure, you can do it, like you can walk on hands to the next mall as well, but there are more obsticales to it, then I am willing to except for my own layout and that's the advise I am giving).


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks everyone! 
The last few posts have gone *whoosh* over my head a bit..but thats ok..I think I get the gist of it all.. 

Im really not interested in doing track powered DCC on the entire layout..for two reasons: 
1. lots of "stick rail" on the inner loops..small sections of track. 
2. live steam on the two inner loops. 

but those two issues are unique to my situation..(im using the small sections of Aristo sectional track simply because that is track I already own, inherited from my Dad's railroad. 
if I was buying track from scratch, I would go with much longer sections of flex track, which makes track power more feasable) 

So because of the particular "quirks" of my setup, I really think I want to use two seperate systems.. 
I think I will go with DCC track power on the outer loop..All my diesels will run on that loop, can have sound and lights, etc.. 
(also some larger steam locos, which can also be set up for DCC) 
DCC track power is perfect for that situation, and I will use all my long sections of flex track on that outer loop, minimizing rail joiners. 

Then the two inner loops will not be track powered, will be only smaller steam locos, with battery power. 
I already have a baggage car that is a "battery car"..I can make a second battery car in a box car for freight trains. 
then I can run many locos off of only two battery cars..yeah, the drawback is you always have to haul that one particular car, but I dont consider that a big deal.. 
I dont yet own any sound systems, for any locomotives, but sound could go in the two battery cars..it would only need to be "steam sound", not diesel, 
so only one sound card per battery car would work fine.. 

I think, from reading all the posts in this thread, that there isnt a good solution (for me) that will run the entire railroad off of one system.. 
so thanks! this has been most helpful!  

thanks, 
Scot


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 03 Mar 2011 06:15 AM 
Babba:

I have for a long time advised poeple and continue to do so. I am the creator of the applicability guide, that guides what technology to use, and what the decision criteria are. The boarder lines are fluctuating and it is important to understand this.

However, with that said, you are unfortunately not stating facts and you are "rooting" in one single direction. I call that Polemic. Not really I was stating the relavence about the new option you seem to be against, I don't care what people use, I was mearly stating that I thought the new board was a great idea for those of us who like battery power, your post, to me was negative about not only the new option but the battery power in general. And what you feel are its' limitations are. Again I don't care what anyone chooses to use, I like battery power, and if you think I was rooting, well your perogitive..let others decide. 

In your previous posts you stated you are saving money with one battery car for x number of engines, maybe tow or three battery cars for X+Y engines. Now you addressing that you use a battery car for every engines, then you state the cost of all RF receivers and that you have a sound board in every car for the individual characteristics, but forget to mention that the phoenix sound boards costs already as much an integrated DCC/Sound board. And then your cost savings idea goes even further to put TWO sound boards into your battery car and provide a switch to select which one is supposed to be operating. And how many wires do you run exactly between your battery car with all boards installed? And how thick are you tow main wires? 12/14 gauge at least (unless it is a tiny engine) Depending on the engine you can run 5A through this connection. And depending on the engine you need additional wires for + lines to users as smoke units and fan (if a fan driven smoke unit is used) as well as two different minus lines if you want this smoke to operate with chuff or load synchronization. One line to front lights, one tow rear lights, one to cabin light, one to running boards, one to side lights (some steam engines and some Diesel engines have lights that are going the side of the engine that are on or off for different purposes. Then the market lights. Of course you can tie it all together everything is on all the time, then you get away with just the power feeds. But Bingo now you are feeding parameters into the grid of my applicability guide. One line states: "I am not interested in realistic operation".
Axel you missed the BIGGEST point! KEEP IT SIMPLE, most people do not need the bells and whistles you get with the DCC. If people want DCC they will go to the DCC people. If people want battery power, let us have the new board, and be happy that Massoth will have their hat in that arena. 
Axel 4 wires...2 for power, 2 for speaker if you use sound....if no sound 2 wires, remember if you don't care about bells and whistles.

And that is all "COST SAVING" Again you missed the point about it being as expensive as we want it to be, all you need is the decoder, new board and NO SOUND...there cheap! OR you can be like me and OVERDO IT_!(sorry I posted what I have spent, as it obviously sent you off the deep end..I am sorry for that) _

This entire post unfortunately demonstrates what's wrong with some advise given here. Everybody at least knows I am a hobbyist that went into the business and that I triy to present as fair as possible the facts without alternative motivs - even flaws that we uncovered in our distribtued products and show potential counter measures. In addition I am spreading the word how to avoid mistakes at least all of the mistakes that I did and nowadays what I have learned from my customers as well. 

On top we install anything - therefore we can judge their operation. 

When we find out the desires of the customers, and their ulimate dreams, then we give the proper advise. Often, if poeple are unsure, we try to advise to start with a DC layout, but buy components that might be reusable, such as the new line of Powerpacks that can ultimate feed also a DCC system.This is guiding the unsuspecting into DCC. We have found customers which have a very detriorated layout with Brass track (becasue it didn't receive any maintenance for >5 years) and the customer didn't want to refurbish it. We installed the Revolution into the train with battery power. With this statement, what is this all about then? Maybe one day the user might have a second locomotive. This was smack in the center of the applicability guide where automatically DC, and DCC fell out. 

If we are asked to install sound, then there is nothing wrong installing the this modern generation of DCC/Sound combos, because they not only give sound, but they add to the driving characteristics of the engine, because the motor control is active in DC mode as well. We adivse on a supsension layout two concentric circles going round and around to the proper DC implementation, another example of the applicability guide. No point in for DCC and no point for Battery and RF.

Coming back to the original thread, looking at the layout and the question DCC track *and* battery power?

I see interesting operational possibilities and wouldn't consider Battery as an option, considering that the reversing loop in the red line is a no-brainer in DCC. I would not burden myself or any of the customers to do dual installations, and running the entire layout is definately out of the applicability range battery power. So here you mean bells and whistles? Here is a decision point if a person doesn't care about tripping switches and stuff like that, then why not battery power, as reversing loops are not a problem with battery power! (Oh sure, you can do it, like you can walk on hands to the next mall as well, but there are more obsticales to it, then I am willing to except for my own layout and that's the advise I am giving).

Sorry I mentioned the new Massoth option, the way this thread turned out was not my intension. 

Again IMHO

Bubba


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Scot, I have about 850' all sectional. Lots of joiners/clamps, but works well, so I don't see that as a reason not to power as DCC. 

I run steamers on my track (other people's steamers), it does not hurt anything, but you might want to wipe the rails after. 

Maybe another $45 for an autoreverser for the inner loop. 

Why not power it? It does not hurt anything, costs almost nothing, and then ALL your track powered locos can run everywhere... much nicer than being "banished" to the outer loop! (poor locos!) 

Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg. 

Any chance you could answer my question above please?


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 03 Mar 2011 02:05 PM 
Scot, I have about 850' all sectional. Lots of joiners/clamps, but works well, so I don't see that as a reason not to power as DCC. 

I run steamers on my track (other people's steamers), it does not hurt anything, but you might want to wipe the rails after. 

Maybe another $45 for an autoreverser for the inner loop. 

Why not power it? It does not hurt anything, costs almost nothing, and then ALL your track powered locos can run everywhere... much nicer than being "banished" to the outer loop! (poor locos!) 

Greg 



Greg,
interesting! I just assumed the multitude of rail joiners would make track power a major hassle..but perhaps not!
What do you use for joiners/clamps? and do you use any conductive paste?

Another thing i have wondered about..
with DCC, when you have FULL power to the rails at all times, does that help with track conductive issues?
as opposed to non-DCC track power, where the speed of trains is controlled by the voltage..
would low voltage make iffy track connections more of an issue, while full-voltage with DCC makes it less of an issue?

or does it not matter either way?

thanks,
Scot


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I use Aristo SS rail, Split Jaw clamps... every so often one needs removal and cleaning... I just started experimenting with some NoAlox paste (used for keeping oxidation away from aluminum connections) found at Home Depot, although I suspect ordinary grease would do the same. 

Yes, full power helps, it seems, but I'm not sure I can give good reasoning except that having constant track power makes all kinds of things much easier, lighted cars, smoke units, autoreversers, track powered switch motors. 

Most of my conductivity problems are traced to a joiner that just needs to be tightened, I might have one loose one every 6 months, out of hundreds... and I did not tighten them with an allen wrench, but one with a screwdriver type handle, so I was not real consistent. 

Greg


----------

