Hands off or hands on?

[FJ and G]

The way I see it, there are basically 3 levels of controls.

1. Manual

2. Push button

3. Automatic

Manual control has the advantages of reliability, hands-on-fun, and cost savings. If you throw the switch or uncouple the cars, you can bet that your "control" will not fail or burn out and YOU become the brakeman or conductor of your train. On the minus side, you have to be constantly engaged in operations like real railroaders; although that could be a positive.

Push button people love to flip levers, play with block occupancy toggles and turn on and off accessories. A good compromise between manual and auto.

Automatic is the ultimate in lazy-boy control. You can use the control rail to turn on and off trackside accessories as the train goes by or get fancy with relays and infrared, magnetic and photosensor devices or you can go really hi-tech with TMCC and DCS, the latter, which I have used to program complex movements in a loop. On the downside, you are more of a passive viewer.

Each has its advantages and disadvantages. A combo of all 3 is what I'm striving for. And you?

Dave V.

[JFermani]

I plan on incorporating all three on my layout. Fully automatic mode will be good for when company is over and I want to talk while the trains are running. When the guests are ready to try their hand at running the locs, I plan to allow full manual control of everything on the layout. Watching the trains run is fun but can get boring. Always having hands on can get cumbersome. Currently I just have a temp layout up until the basement is properly fixed up and its mostly a manual setup. My kids love to run the trains using the cab-1 and get their hands "dirty" controling everything. The best feature of TMCC is being able to limit the top speed of my locs so I know the kids can't send them off the tracks.

Joe

[cnw1995]

Dave, can you describe how you plan to incorporate all three? I guess my preference would be manual - less to go wrong - and it betrays my struggles with electricity. Only four switches - all manual - at the front of the layout. Everything else works via the five-fingered switcher.

[Big_Boy_4005]

My operation is going to be very high tech along the mainlines, but almost totally manual for switching in yards and industries. I will be using a computer to regulate mainline activity. It will know the locations of all the trains, and may even control some. All signals and turnouts on the main will be computer controlled. Using the
TMCC Cab-1, operators will be able to ask the computer for clearance in certain locations.

I guess my answer to "hands on or hands off" is YES. [swg]

[FJ and G]

Elliot,

Are you using Chubb's computer plan?

When do you anticipate finishing your layout? I know a layout is never really finished but I mean have trains running and scenery.

I think that construction is the most exciting phase. You've probably done layouts before and know what you want as far as controls go. I'm also designing automatic mainlines and manual for switching. I'll probably uncouple and couple trains by hand as well, since I've had so little success in doing that automatically. Sometimes you have to bang the cars together so hard it sends it off the end of the spur if the knuckles don't catch.

dav

[daan]

Preferable is what Jfermani sais, a layout which can run itself when needed. I guess that it won't count for me, because my layout is too small for anything else but manual. (My switches will be controlled by a bowden-cable, like used one a bike). I have a Hitachi PLC (programmable logical computer), but for 6 switches and a few sidings I guess it's overdone to use that one..

[Anonymous]

daan,
i'd love to get a look at what you're doing to control your switches. i am planning a layout with 20 or so turnouts and want to control most of them manually using ground-throws, wires, cables, etc. do you have pics or descriptions?

i plan to use a good lot of traditional controls, toggles and buttons and the like. i probably wont employ any of the older lionel type boxes and will replace them with new toggles, switches and buttons. but... i will wire the tracks so that TMCC or DCS can be added easily. i like the speed control it offers, i just cant get too many transformers and engines to respond that smoothly even when i work hard at it the old ZW handles just dont work as silky.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Yup Dave, I have all of that stuff left over from the mall. The CMRI is going to do the detection, signalling and turnouts, and all of the logic. Combined with TMCC for train control, and it should be a lot of fun.

You are right building it should be fun, but operating it should also be fun, maybe ebven more so.

[Anonymous]

I'm writing software for Elliot's layout in the evenings. I'm still working the kinks out of the object model, but, hopefully, I'll have everything mocked up within a week or so & can start writing the functional spec.

Once that's done, it's on to coding!

Right now, I'm doing one of the things I love & am really good at. I just wish I had more hours in a day

Tony

[Anonymous]

Option #2 for me. Love to flip switches with lights.

Steve

[Anonymous]

Since I have very few visitors and no kids (grandkids are infants in arms) I am organizing my controls into cabs, towers and control centers as well as TMCC. An operator has to be at the site to throw a switch, uncouple cars, turn on lights etc. Control Centers are the transformers, towers are panels of controls operating switches and routing power and cabs have controls that operate the trains themselves. I rather like the thought of crunching the cinders to get to where a switch needs to be thrown and cars need to be uncoupled. I am also that officious SOB with a clipboard riding in the cab on some runs. You know railroads hire crews to operate their trains. They could probably run trains totally without anyone onboard....the technology must exist, and I operate the trains. Just call me Road Foreman R. E. Ottosen. BTW when I was on the IC it seems that railroads always referred to people by their initials and surname. Odd-d (with clipboard).

[Anonymous]

Since I have very few visitors and no kids (grandkids are infants in arms) I am organizing my controls into cabs, towers and control centers as well as TMCC. An operator has to be at the site to throw a switch, uncouple cars, turn on lights etc. Control Centers are the transformers, towers are panels of controls operating switches and routing power and cabs have controls that operate the trains themselves. I rather like the thought of crunching the cinders to get to where a switch needs to be thrown and cars need to be uncoupled. I am also that officious SOB with a clipboard riding in the cab on some runs. You know railroads hire crews to operate their trains. They could probably run trains totally without anyone onboard....the technology must exist, and I operate the trains. Just call me Road Foreman R. E. Ottosen. BTW when I was on the IC it seems that railroads always referred to people by their initials and surname. Odd-d (with clipboard).

[Dr. John]

I'll be using a mix of manual and push-button. All turnouts within easy reach are manual 1024s. Other turnouts will be remote 1121s and 1122s. I'll also have block control switches and accessory switches.

[daan]

@ woodsy, I don't have an example right now. It is a very old principe which was used by marklin in the very early years (round 1900). They used a very long spring, with inside a steel wire running through. If you fix the spring on one side on your switch and the other near the controllever, you can push and pull the steel wire and with that bring power from the lever to the switcharm in your switch. It is only one wire, without tension or rollers to guide, and you can form it in almost any direction. it very cheap and used on bikes (like we have 10 million of in Holland) for the brakes and gearchange.
If finished I'll submit a photo, I promise.

[lionelsoni]

Daan, what you're describing is called here a "choke cable" and is discussed under the topic "Selonoid [sic] vs. motorized switch machines (& vs. air)". They are (were) used to control the choke setting on automobiles. The cables used on bicycles that I am familiar with use stranded wire kept in tension by a spring at the receiving end, requiring that the transmitting end have some sort of detent or clutch to retain the wire in the desired position. A choke cable uses solid wire inside tighter-fitting sheath, with enough inherent friction that a detent is not needed.

[Anonymous]

The world has become very high tech, everything is automated. I have seen some layouts running on the new technology, that are really cool. I like the idea, but I 'd rather manual operation.