 | | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
|
Hold on for a few weeks. I have a new design to present which meets all your criteria for a remotely operated switch. In the meantime, you should absolutely design your layout for manual switching. It is much more satisfying (and prototypical!) (...) (22 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | James' beautiful Spanish-Brotli-bahn
|
|
Do you think,too,that James Mathis is every day more clever as a train builder? (URL) Foto - Crea e condividi i tuoi album fotografici online (URL) (22 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.trains) !
|
| |
| | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Ed McGlynn writes: (snipped) (...) This one, I have put to work so far in my current layout. It's the easy part, I think... (...) But how will the TS reach the inner loop, if the switch in the center is set to straight? Shouldn't (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
|
(...) I will, thank you. BTW, is it possible to use a regular wire (non-LEGO) to make tests? Later I'd replace it with the real stuff, but in order to test faster I may need to use this procedure (if it is possible, what are the specifications of (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Work in progress, an EMU
|
|
(...) That looks a little taller than I'd like to build one. I'm tempted to lower it overall and just use curves between the bogeys. Even though it's not so realistic it might fit better overall, and it means (allowing for bogus motor bogeys) you (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
|
(...) There's also a way to use only one controller to run at least two trains, but both are at the same speed. While probably not what Pedro's looking for, it leads into more complicated electrical block control. Here's a folder with an example: (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Low-tech & low cost controls
|
|
(...) Funny you should mention. I just this month gave a 10 minute talk to my train club on the merits of electrical block control. Perhaps I can help out. (...) True. (...) True. (...) Additional feeder wires every 25-100 ft or so should reduce the (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Advanced Design Train Roundhouse
|
|
(...) That's true. I'd recommend 48 if LUCNY had real estate right now to display Wayne's design, but we don't. I think starting with a 32 would be prototypical and fit our table design. (...) Yes, that's also true. Steamtown's table is large, but (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.org.us.lucny, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Advanced Design Train Roundhouse
|
|
(...) I would go 48 if I could. But I should hasten to point out that it is prototypical for engines not to fit on the turntable in US practice. It happened fairly frequently. The most common solution was to service the engine in the stall that was (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.org.us.lucny, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Advanced Design Train Roundhouse
|
|
(...) it, just the main drive. It's a fairly standard drive with the motor in the house. Another note, Steve's setup is very modular. Although it makes up a fixed configuration (that spans at least a 5x8 foot area when the yard is included), it's (...) (22 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.org.us.lucny, lugnet.trains)
|
