# Aristo TE and -9 Problems



## Tehachapi Dave (Nov 10, 2008)

I have 4 Aristo -9's that I use on track power inside our home on the inside portion of our Tehachapi Loop Railroad. Last fall I placed a steel tube through our foundation wall and started laying track outside. I do not want to clean track outside and built a battery car.

I placed a 14.4 v NiMHA battery pack feeding an Aristo te receiver in a stack car to power the engines. There appears to be a problem between the TE receiver and the -9's. The receiver will only power one engine at a time and only at low speeds. This was making me crazy as I switched everything around and still the problem. I then plugged the stack car battery pack into 2 of my sd-45s and they ran perfectly. I then ran my sons new gp-40 and another sd-45 which both ran well.

I talked to Aristo and they had not heard of this. Has anyone else had this problem and better yet how to fix the problem would be really great?

Thanks,

Tehachapi Dave


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

If I remember correctly, the SD-45 wiring from end to end was a solid connection and engines could be lashed together. Problem with a battery car was the first engine had to carry too many amps on the etched circiut board, esp for 4 engines. 

I believe this was changed on the Dash-9 and the MU connectors are not tied to each other form one end to the other. 

However, since you are trying to run 4 dash nines from a single battery, you should install more robust wiring in the engines as the circuit board etcheswill not handle all that current especially in the first engine. 

Best way to handle 4 engines with a battery car and not to have to rewire is to place the battery car in the middle of the 4 engines, not at the end. This way, only 1 engine has double the current flow through the etched circuit boards.


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

How odd. 





I wonder if there are thermal cutouts cutting out when 1 loco is trying to pass the current for 3 more through it. They put those so you don't burn up wires when you derail and the front truck gets wheels shorted to the opposite rail. 


I've never looked inside a dash 9. I do have a tendancy to pull the guts out and wire equipment the way I want it.


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

On aristo locos when you run more that one engine on Battery power, you must re wire all but the lead loco so the poly fuses dont trip, this is another good reason i run track power, no issues like this...
Nick


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

I have no experience with diesels but I would think you need more than 14.4V to get satisfactory speeds.


----------



## jmill24 (Jan 11, 2008)

The 14.4 volt battery can be a problem. First the TE needs 12 or more volts to operate and you drop 3 volts going thru the TE so now you have 11.4 volts to power a loco designed to run on 18 to 24 volts. I don't believe the SD45 has the poly fuses so two lashed together may work. I know two GP40's will need a bypass, from expierence. Dash9's do have poly fuses and also need bypass wiring.........Jim


----------



## Paul Norton (Jan 8, 2008)

Posted By Tehachapi Dave on 01/14/2009 10:55 PM


I placed a 14.4 v NiMHA battery pack feeding an Aristo te receiver in a stack car to power the engines. There appears to be a problem between the TE receiver and the -9's. The receiver will only power one engine at a time and only at low speeds. 



What size are the cells in the battery pack and what mah (milliamp/hour) rating does it have? If it will only power one Dash 9 at low speeds, it sounds like it can not provide enough current (amps).

As others have posted, the TE has to have greater than 12 volts to function properly. Our club members have always used 18 volts or better to power either their Aristo-Craft or USA Trains locomotives.

For our large six-axle locomotives (Dash 9, SD-70, etc.) we use two lithium-ion battery packs wiring in parallel in our Evans battery cars. The lithium-ion pack is rated for 21.5 volts, but only for 2 amps of current. To provide 4 amps of current the packs are wiring in parallel.









http://ovgrs.editme.com/files/EvansPC/PowerCar.jpg 
On all the Aristo-Craft diesels I have opened, the MU plugs were always linked to each other through the circuit boards. This allows a number of MUed locomotives to share power. If the locomotives were track powered and one hit some dirty track, the other others would provide power through the MU plugs. MUed SD-45s could share power from a trailing battery car, but the unit closest to the battery car would have the current for all the locomotives passing through it. 

As mentioned, all A-C diesels made after the SD-45 had polyfuses added to protect the circuit boards from shorts or overloads. If you MU Dash 9s, the one closest to battery car should shut down. There was a lot of information about this on all the large scale forums when the Dash 9s were first sold. I remember Marty posting as he runs his large locomotives hauling long trains using the TE and a battery car.

The solution is to solder jumpers between the MU plugs of each locomotive. The locomotive closest to the battery car will draw only the power it needs. The rest of the required power passes through the jumpers and MU plugs to the other locomotives.

Before you add jumpers however, you must have a battery pack capable of supplying sufficient voltage and amperage to power all the locomotives in an MUed consist.


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Remember this is a dash9 issue as the originator stated that 2 SD-45's were running OK. 

We needed to ask if only 2 dash9's were tried and what were the results. 4 dash9's could be a battery current issue as Pau lNorton suggested, but 2 dash9's and 2 SD-45' should respond the same way. 

Also, i believe that 14 volts being low is not a TE issue as HO and N scale run TE's at the lower voltage setting of the TE's, but those 4 motor aristo diesels do need over 20 volts to obtain good prototype speeds.


----------



## jmill24 (Jan 11, 2008)

* the SD45's do not have poly fuses and will not need bypass wiring for battery operation and this maybe the reason the 2 SD's ran and the Dash9's did not............Jim
*


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

Sounds to me like Jim has it right.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

When polyfuses "open" they are usually an effective open circuit, not passing any current. This does not sound like the problem, if they were open in the -9, there would be no motion. 

(Now, a silly idea, is one -9 running and the other not? one is powered, and the polyfuses are open on the other? I don't think so, but check) 

I considered that the -9 drew enough current to lower the voltage into the TE to make it erratic, but I discarded that idea because TWO sd-45's ran (should be even more current), and it's doubtful that someone with the obvious battery experience would not notice defective batteries or low charge (two other possible sources of low voltage). 

So, what is the difference? Well, you need to consider how small differences in internal wiring can make large differences in radio interference. The -9 has the famous Aristo noise generator circuitry, i.e. on on board PWM power supply for the lights. SD-45's are also famous for causing problems. Small differences in internal wiring can make big differences in interference, since often the wire length acts as an "Antenna" for transmitting internal RF noise. 

I would try, if possible, disconnecting everything inside the -9's except the motors... you need to make sure the smoke unit is off (easy), and you need to disconnect INPUT power to the on-board power supply for the lights (tough)... turning off the lights at the OUTPUT of this switching power supply is probably not sufficient to sort this out. 

So, that's my guess on what is wrong. It might not be the answer, but it is the step I would take if the locos were in my shop. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

I run my E-8 From a TE set up with 16.8 v 3.8 Ah packs and get about 3 hours of run time but thats just one loco. 4 locos? That's 16 motors. I doubt you would ever get the TE to run that much juice. I'm surprised the thing didn't start smokin'. 

-Brian


----------



## Jim Agnew (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Tehachapi Dave on 01/14/2009 10:55 PM





I talked to Aristo and they had not heard of this. Has anyone else had this problem and better yet how to fix the problem would be really great?

Thanks,

Tehachapi Dave



I had this exact same problem with my Dash 9's. You need to bypass the polyfuses. You will also have the same problem with the GP40's. Aristo is well aware of this problem and would not respond to Marty Cozad's question on the A-C forum when he asked about the GP40's prior to production. Aristo is concerned about fried circuit boards during derailments, when track powered.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yep, and the GP40 has more polyfuses in it than any other loco! 

Brian, he tried 2 SD-45's and the system works fine. 2 dash-9's don't. He's only trying to run 2 locos at a time. The current load should be almost identical between the 45 set up and the -9 setup. The TE will handle up to 10 amps. I know that even 4 locos will be under 10 amps. 

I still find it hard to believe it's the polyfuses, since they pretty much "trip" to completely off. Maybe I am misunderstanding Dave's statement: 
"The receiver will only power one engine at a time and only at low speeds." 

Dave, does this mean that: 
1. you can NEVER run 2 -9's 
2. one -9 will work, but only at low speeds. 
3. (here's the important one), does the system shut down at higher speeds with one -9, or is it impossible to go faster with a -9. 

If the system shuts down when you try going faster with one -9, then you do indeed need to go on a polyfuse hunt. 

I was interpreting your statement that the -9 would only go slowly, like there was a lack of current/power. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Tehachapi Dave (Nov 10, 2008)

I would like to thank everybody for suggestions to my problem. I have been a viewer for a number of years but just joined. I was stuck in Chicago yesterday and did not get home to early this AM i.e. 2:20 hence my late reply. I believe I did not explain the problem fully and as I was in a hotel room and I had the battery pack voltage wrong. 
The battery pack is 16.8 V as I have previously experienced the voltage drop problem. As some day I hope to fill our ½ acre back yard modeling the Tehachapi loop and other prominent locations between the loop and Bakersfield a bought 4.2 Amp Hr battery so as to have, what I thought would be plenty of running time. I figured that the 16.8 V battery would allow the TE to work correctly and as we are modeling a mountain mainline where the trains are rarely moving move then 25 miles an hour why spent the money for additional voltage.
As for running the -9’s I was only trying to run 2 at one time. I have four and tried many different combinations of the 4 different engine coupled as pairs. As I could not even get two to run together I never got to 3 of 4. I use two TE’s on the inside portion of the railroad which is basically a double track mainline operation. The railroad runs around the perimeter of our basement so as to allow eight foot or betters radius and we typically run 30 -35 car trains with two -9’s on the front and two on the back pushing. Works great until a derailment but that is another discussion.
The suggestion that polyfuses is the problem sounds correct as when operating at slow speeds one of the two engines would shut down. I’m a bit confused as I’m a mechanical engineer and not an electrical engineer, why to the engines run fine on track power and not on battery? Are the polyfuses only on the battery side of the input power circuit and if that is correct what are they protecting?
As you guys have been great so far how do you fix the polyfuse problem?
Thanks,
Dave


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Remove them! 

With this explanation, the polyfuses sound like the culprit. They are little circuit breakers, and will self reset after the overload is removed, and they have cooled down. 

When on track power, each loco pulls it's power from it's own wheels, through (usually) a 3 amp polyfuse (or one on each of the 2 wires)... no problem, the circuit breakers are matched to the load. 

When using the "battery connectors" in an Aristo loco, the wires usually have the polyfuses in line. 

When running from battery, the wiring is such that the load from BOTH locos can go through a polyfuse that is only rated for ONE loco, and you get a "trip". 

You need to jumper the polyfuses that are in the internal "power buss" that goes between the 2 external connectors.. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Just run track power then no issues!!!!!! Just a thought????
Nick...


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Troublemaker! 

Hey, keep your fingers crossed, hopefully tomorrow is the day your bell circuit comes alive! Got the circuit figured out Nick. 

Greg


----------



## Jim Agnew (Jan 2, 2008)

Dave, a simple fix for the polyfuses is to run jumper wires from one end of the Loco to the other end. Attach the wires between the battery plug and the PCB on one end of the Loco and the battery plug on the opposite end. Make sure you don't cross the wires by doing a simple continuity check. Plug in the lead Loco, if it travels in the same direction as the trailing Loco, you got it right.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I thought this was RC battery forum, why would track power folks care???? 

Dave e-mail me ,,[email protected]
And I KNOW Aristo knows about this for a fact..


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Marty.
Died in the wool track powered folks get a bit tetchy when they realise what they are missing out on and how much extra it is costing them.








The knee jerk reaction is to try and create animosity when there is none.
Just ignore them.


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 01/17/2009 8:04 PM
Marty.
Died in the wool track powered folks get a bit tetchy when they realise what they are missing out on and how much extra it is costing them.








The knee jerk reaction is to try and create animosity when there is none.
Just ignore them. 







UUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRR UUUMMMM WHAT??? PLEASE..... [ FOOD ON THE TABLE] of course HE HE AND A HE...


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It's just yanking your chain Marty! 

You have to look at it from the other side once in a while... If I counted how many posts contained a certain battery car, the exact same picture, you would be laughing too, and it's in numerous track power threads. 

For all the times a battery guy has come on a track power thread, you have to admit turnabout is fair play sometimes... relax, you are battery power and happy, and Nick is track power and happy too. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 01/17/2009 10:31 PM
SNIP

... relax, you are battery power and happy, and Nick is track power and happy too. 

Regards, Greg


.......but gets a bit personal when a proper cost analysis is made using figures provided by a track power guru.


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Track power will work as both engines get their power from the wheels/rails. 

Battery power on the dash9s would work if the battery car was between the 2 locos. 

Sounds like the poly fuses are set to a current above one engines draw, but under the current draw for 2 engines.


----------



## flats (Jun 30, 2008)

I have never had any problem running my two Dash 9 with the battery car 
and te on the back of the two, or with any of the Sd 45, U25b, FAFBFA 
or RS3s. I would think a battery would be the cause, for if the volts and amps 
are not there than a no go. 

Ken owner of K&K the road to nowhere


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 01/17/2009 11:00 PM
Posted By Greg Elmassian on 01/17/2009 10:31 PM
SNIP

... relax, you are battery power and happy, and Nick is track power and happy too. 

Regards, Greg


.......but gets a bit personal when a proper cost analysis is made using figures provided by a track power guru.













It only gets personal if you let!!!HE HE HE Me on the other always HAPPY.........







its all in good fun.. WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE


----------



## Dougald (Jan 2, 2008)

Aristo has put those poly fuses on the Dash 9s and yes they are set above the draw of a single loco but less than what two locos draw. As a result, power cannot be passed through a loco to feed a second or more in an MU.

One solution is to insert the battery car between the locos as was pointed out already. A better (in terms of prototypical appearance) is to essentially run a bus the length of the loco to bypass the polyfuse for the power to drive the rest of the MU consist. 

Exactly why Aristocraft designed the Dash 9 this way is incomprehensible given that they themselves sell a battery car. It also precludes MUing Aristo and USAT diesels together without great care in ordering the lashup.

Regards ... Doug


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Ken, there have been wiring variations over the years, so it could be that your polyfuses are not "in line" with the "mu" cables. It has happened... 

Tony, the track vs. battery power controversy is not going to be settled alone by a cost analysis. I will agree also that one person's estimate is not necessarily the last word on the subject. 

Actually, I've updated my site on some of this, and would welcome your inputs (actually everyone is invited) on the track vs battery power section, in the beginners FAQs. You are more experienced than me, and I honestly solicit your input, I know I have missed some benefits of battery power, where I am trying to honestly provide objective guidence to newbies. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Some of these questions asked, for me, is eaiser just to talk them through on the phone. I don't type well and I don't type pages on the forums. I've had folks mad at me who live 3 hours away and i envite them over to show them answers rather than try to type it. I'd rather go see than read any day.


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 01/16/2009 9:47 PM
Troublemaker! 

Hey, keep your fingers crossed, hopefully tomorrow is the day your bell circuit comes alive! Got the circuit figured out Nick. 

Greg


Thanks Greg,this will be great, cant wait to get it, im very much lookin forward to it... got most of my sound units installed this weekend in the engines i will be running with at the next show so this circuit will come in very handy.
thanks...


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 01/18/2009 9:02 AM
SNIP
Tony, the track vs. battery power controversy is not going to be settled alone by a cost analysis. I will agree also that one person's estimate is not necessarily the last word on the subject. 

Actually, I've updated my site on some of this, and would welcome your inputs (actually everyone is invited) on the track vs battery power section, in the beginners FAQs. You are more experienced than me, and I honestly solicit your input, I know I have missed some benefits of battery power, where I am trying to honestly provide objective guidence to newbies. 

Regards, Greg


Hi Greg.

The track - v - battery debate will never be settled. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Also, I have never said that cost is the only factor that should be considered, merely one factor that should be legitimately taken into account.
Especially as the comparison I made was using the figures provided by Rayman. 
No one has actually disputed the message of my comparison. Some have tried to shoot the messenger instead.

As to your website pointers.
Congratulations on taking the trouble to produce such information. I am sure it will be of use.

1. This is a given. Oxidation of the rail and the continual cleaning that that engenders, is a very powerful reason why those that have chosen to go with battery power did so. As is never having to wire the layout in the first place. The cost difference of rail alone can make battery R/C economically viable, Add in the extra cost of electrically bonding every rail joint and th cost gap gets even wider.
2. This is sort of true and sort of not true. Yes you need the room to put batteries in the loco or use a battery trail car.
3. Having control of multitudinous locomotive effects is not for everyone. If that is what you want, then yes, R/C may be limited in that respect. But, then so is regular track power. I do agree you can only have that sort of complexity if you install DCC. 
4. MU'ing of like locos is perfectly possible. Even with the limited technology of my antiquated "Garage Door Controller" based R/C system. I agree that mixing unlike locos is not always possible. But then again not everyone wants to MU unlike locos. 
5. The unit cost of each battery powered loco certainly does get more expensive the more locos you have. Large Scalers with huge inventories of locos are not exactly common. My 25 year exparience in battery R/C has been that most battery R/C users have a somewhat limited roster. Anyway, if you are operating on your own, exactly how many locos can one individual "control"? As in have hands on control. Not merely switching on and letting run. If you are talking about multiple operators running together you only need to witness an operating session at the home of Dave Goodson. He regularly has 20+ operators running. All at the same time. Not just for an hour or so either.
6. Yes you have to have some chargers. But not that many and chargers are not expensive anyway. Charging is usually done when not running. Limited run time is another myth. Yes, the actual run time of a given set of batteries is limited. However, there is a very simple circuit available that will permit extending run times to virtually unlimited hours by simply plugging in an auxilliary set of batteries carried in a trail car. Plugging them in disconnects the on board batteries, saving those on board batteries for running light engine.
Unless the batteries actually fail there is no reason to gain access to them. Ever.

I agree that battery R/C is not for everyone. I also agree that it is impolite for the proponents of one type of power to "invade" the forum of another type of power. I don't do it. Unless the subject has been raised in the other forum.
However, where someone new is asking questions I consider it the right of battery R/C fans, to answer those questions honestly, without being called names by a proponent of track power.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks Tony, I will be revising my site after reviewing your suggestions. I will be modifying that page, you will see that it is now marked for modification. 

One thing I see right away is there is a "right way" and "wrong ways" to do battery, and your comments will help me flesh that out to further help beginners in making their decision. 

I'll also be after you to get some pictures of your hardware, I only have Aristo R/C stuff on my battery side, and I need some balance (ha ha, many people would agree to that!) 

Regards, Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, I am only too pleased to assist you in formulating a balanced approach to the subject. 
More power to you for doing so. 

I wouldn't say there were specific right and wrong ways of going about it. More like some methods work better than others in given situations. 
Which is best can depend on a lot of factors. Especially the type and construction of a loco. 

Please feel free to use any of the pix at the RCS and EVO websites. 
Pease wait until the end of the month though, as I am in the middle of a major website revamp and that entails changing the pix of some of the on board hardware.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 01/18/2009 3:17 PM
Greg, I am only too pleased to assist you in formulating a balanced approach to the subject. 
More power to you for doing so. 

...



I appreciate this "balanced" conversation... but I gotta ask...

"More power to you"... which kind of power... Track or Battery?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Raw electrons are always accepted!!! 

Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 01/18/2009 3:32 PM
Posted By TonyWalsham on 01/18/2009 3:17 PM
Greg, I am only too pleased to assist you in formulating a balanced approach to the subject. 
More power to you for doing so. 

...




"More power to you"... which kind of power... Track or Battery?



Both.


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

Love,, I's feel LOVE in the air....


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

.....every sight and every sound.......... 

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=NNC0kIzM1Fo


----------



## KVBarkley (Jan 9, 2009)

Yes, but remember, just what kind of electrons are they? Are Track and Battery Electrons different? 

Faraday did not take anything on faith, maybe we need to repeat his experiment: 
http://skullsinthestars.com/2009/01/13/faradays-unified-theory-of-electricity-1833/ [\url]


----------



## Tehachapi Dave (Nov 10, 2008)

This is quite a group, i ask a question and we digress into battery vs track power and a discussion on electrons and Faraday. You guys are just as focused as me i think i will fit in.

Dave


----------



## fildowns (May 17, 2008)

Hi Greg, 

I hope you can consider a suggestion from someone that has tried both track/DCC and onboard battery power for a number of years each.

And that is quite simply the amount of time available the beginner estimates they will have for their typical running session, and their frequency. This may all depend on where they are in their 'time of life'

Take me for example, early forties, still in full-time employment, teenage kid, other older, extended family that needs weekly attention....my average running session is 15 to 60 mins and then it may be 3 or 4 days before the next one (this is a normal working week we're talking about, not holiday times.)

So while in my DCC/track power days I was happy to clean track first - I didn't always have time to, if I wanted to run trains as well. 

For me this was the primary reason to go battery, I could leave a battery pack on trickle charge ready to go, but I couldn't leave the track cleaning itself!  So it's not just a case of whether you want to clean track or not, sometimes you just might not have time...I began to resent the time I was spending on maintenance, (and tedious maintenance at that) when my time was so limited. 

One might argue that now I spend valuable time converting engines to battery when I could be running them...but I really enjoy doing that. I didn't enjoy track cleaning.

If I were someone else : got 1 or more hours every day to run trains. Have a track cleaner car in most consists. DCC and track power? You bet!

So anyway...when planning a layout the beginner calculates all the things you list on your site, and not forgetting how much time they expect to spend and how often - this can help them decide on the battery question.

Like I said, just a suggestion.

By the way, I realise now I've read and taken advice from your site far more times than I've thanked you for, so...thanks for your time and effort in creating your site, I send a lot of people there.

Best rgs from the UK


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks, you are right, I need to add the dimension of time in, and to try to get the beginner to balance where his time is spent. 

I like to just run trains, not clean track. I set up 2 test loops, one of brass and one of stainless. The brass was in a protected area in the back on concrete, the stainless was around a tree on the front lawn and got run over by the lawn mower, hit with a weed wacker, fertilized and got wet every day. 

The brass needed cleaning if I did not run a train every day. The stainless was always ready to go, just like your train waiting to be run, sitting on the trickle charger. 

If there was no stainless steel track, I would probably be a battery guy!!! 

I'll do some more updating on my site of the Beginners FAQ's, and as you have probably seen, the 15 most recently updated pages are listed on the home page, so you can see if anything is new. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## kcndrr (Jan 7, 2008)

RGS 
I agree with you, a little different in home life though, we are DINKs, both a lot older though. 
We both work the 40 per week, but we have never had jobs that ended at 40 per week, we usually work 60+. 
Our layout is brass track, started when stainless was a kitchen utensil. also have over 30 turnouts that are brass. 
Could not see spending the funds for stainless when i had perfecltly good track already down. 
When to battery when all you could get was AA NiMH. I had to at the time convert all the locos to battery power (thanks Paul Norton); there was no battery power available locos. Times change but still enjoy running trains when I can; I get maybe an hour once or twice a month. 
Use Greg’s site also, and a lot of others to get it done here, and want to let all know that everyone who puts up information has a part in my layout. 

KC&DRR


----------

