 | | Re: A question about Insulation between tracks
|
|
The scenario you are proposing in indeed a problem. It happens commonly when using block control or reversing loops. A couple sugguestions: 1. If you are using block control, then create shorter blocks and adopt a rule that no two trains can operate (...) (24 years ago, 13-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: A question about Insulation between tracks
|
|
Brian Williams <brian_williams@ameritech.net> wrote in message news:GA49y7.7C2@lugnet.com... (...) [snip] (...) to (...) Of course, then you have the possibility of two trains having a head-on..... ROSCO (24 years ago, 13-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: A question about Insulation between tracks
|
|
(...) There's always a little more excitement when there's an element of danger! -BMW (24 years ago, 14-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: A question about Insulation between tracks
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I agree. Can you take me through it? If I have two trains on the same block, they will go the same direction, whether they get power from catenary with return through both rails, or whether they get power just from the rails. If I (...) (24 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: A question about Insulation between tracks
|
|
(...) Using a catenary supply, you have (effectively) 0V at the rails, and +9V..-9V overhead for forward / reverse. So +9V gives you forward. Whichever way the train is facing, it'll go forward. Two trains on the same track facing in opposite (...) (24 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: A question about Insulation between tracks
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford writes: <snip> You are correct, sir. Thank you for clearing up that misconception! ++Lar (24 years ago, 15-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
