To kill or not to kill the tracks in a staging yard, that is the question. Is it better in the age of DCC just to leave the tracks powered, or should at least some (like those with sound units or DC motors) be turned off until that train is scheduled out? I am in the process of rebuilding a 9 track staging yard and converting it from 2 cab Dc to DCC. A total rewire and the control panel (for the turnouts) will be moved / replaced / rebuilt too. The attached engine house will have killable tracks.
Phil
I have moved this post to Layout and Layout Building, a much better place for it, and where I meant to put it.
Timber Head Eastern Railroad "THE Railroad Through the Sierras"
Having a DC motored engine sitting on DCC powered tracks is a bad idea. If you're going to be running DC and DCC for a while until all your engines are converted, you'd be better to use a DPDT toggle switch to allow you to run either under DC or DCC. Yes you can use "00" to run DC but it doesn't work that great.
There's no reason you couldn't have a toggle switch or other switch set to turn power on and off to a section of track. Even in DCC there are still valid reasons to have separate blocks of track, like for signalling or for tracking down a short circuit.
Engines with sound generally can be set so they don't make sound until you call up their ID no., so you could have several trains in staging with sound engines on them but no sound coming out, if that's a concern.
After initial enthusiasm I seem to be becoming increasingly irritated with sound locomotives. Linn Westcott actually predicted this years ago with the first Herb Chaudierre/PFM sound systems. So on that basis I'd say, kill the sound of engines just sitting there.
As to things like lights there I have heard conflicting theories. Some say, keep an engine with lights dark until needed, to preserve the bulbs. Othere say no, it is the turning on and off of the lights that kills them prematurely so once on, keep them on until the end of the operating session.
Dave Nelson
dknelsonAfter initial enthusiasm I seem to be becoming increasingly irritated with sound locomotives. Linn Westcott actually predicted this years ago with the first Herb Chaudierre/PFM sound systems. So on that basis I'd say, kill the sound of engines just sitting there.
Oh, no! What will Broadway Limited and MTH do now? Another person's ears have told them the truth about small scale onboard sound. That's two such confessions on here in less than a week!
Again, proven fact, your brain does not like bad sound for very long - being a sound/audio engineer as a hobby, I knew this the first time I heard an onboard sound HO loco.
F8! F8! I heard the cry through the train room!
I sure am glad I saved that $10,000 (100 locos times $100 each for sound decoders).
Look guys, the point here is not to pick on those who like sound, but to simply point out that those of us who rejected it from the beginning had good reason and are not as "crazy" as you think.
Sheldon
Caveat - I presently run analog DC, but I believe this is even more valid for DCC...
When I stop a train in staging I want it to stay right where it is until I (and the timetable) decide that it has to move. If the track has been electrically isolated, there's no chance that a miscode by a guest operator will accidentally cause a cornfield meet somewhere down there where the sun can't shine.
As for saving lightbulbs, the LEDs which have replaced them are good for tens of thousands of on-off cycles. So are incandescent bulbs that are only running on a fraction of their rated voltage.
Now, sound. Having been at trackside when steam locomotives were in regular service I am thunderously unimpressed by even the best HO sound system. No way can a speaker the size of a nickel generate the chest-squeezing bass put out by 550 x 660mm cylinders exhausting through a stack 300mm in diameter. Maybe it will be possible, some day. That day isn't today, and I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to come. The laws of physics are against it.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
The NMRA National 75th convention in Milwaukee might be one of the last chances people will have to tour the late Mike Ziegler's fabulous Conowingo Central. While Mike had a sound equipped engine or two, mostly as a gimmick, he also had a decent quality little sound system hidden under his staging yard and played a loop tape, rather quietly, of random horn sounds and prime mover acceleration sounds. It was a commercial tape but i am not sure what source.
That was the best layout sound, I remain convinced. He had so many trains running at any one time that one would hear the sound, see a moving train, and the mind/ear would attribute the sound to the moving train. The guys on the other side of the scenic divider did the same with the trains they could see.
The key I am convinced: generic sounds, played rather quietly, over a decent quality sound system with some semblance of bass response. There was less "listener fatigue" (as the "stereo" magazines used to call it) with the larger speaker and quieter volume, than there is with onboard sound that Sheldon refers to above.
Just as in a really wonderful music sound system the location of the subwoofer can vary and the mind/ear still attributes that deep base to the overall music coming out of the speakers (that is, the mind/ear is not highly directional for deeper tones), I think for the fairly tinny sound of onboard speakers the mind/ear is highly directional. Ironically the more sound equipped engines folks seem to get, the more they crank up the volume and expose ever more the lack of innate quality while they probably should do just the opposite.
My own thinking as to sound is to focus on quiet but constant and repetitive sounds: of bubbling brook near my creek, crickets and waving grasses near the fields, the hum of factory activity in the industrial district, and perhaps a gentle white noise or slight sound of wind for the rest of the layout, and either perhaps forget about train sounds per se or follow Mike Ziegler's example and have quiet, constant, and generic locomotive sound. One difference is I will be running far fewer trains at a time than Mike did, so I may not be able to take advantage of the sonic illusion that he did.
dknelson The NMRA National 75th convention in Milwaukee might be one of the last chances people will have to tour the late Mike Ziegler's fabulous Conowingo Central. While Mike had a sound equipped engine or two, mostly as a gimmick, he also had a decent quality little sound system hidden under his staging yard and played a loop tape, rather quietly, of random horn sounds and prime mover acceleration sounds. It was a commercial tape but i am not sure what source. That was the best layout sound, I remain convinced. He had so many trains running at any one time that one would hear the sound, see a moving train, and the mind/ear would attribute the sound to the moving train. The guys on the other side of the scenic divider did the same with the trains they could see. The key I am convinced: generic sounds, played rather quietly, over a decent quality sound system with some semblance of bass response. There was less "listener fatigue" (as the "stereo" magazines used to call it) with the larger speaker and quieter volume, than there is with onboard sound that Sheldon refers to above. Just as in a really wonderful music sound system the location of the subwoofer can vary and the mind/ear still attributes that deep base to the overall music coming out of the speakers (that is, the mind/ear is not highly directional for deeper tones), I think for the fairly tinny sound of onboard speakers the mind/ear is highly directional. Ironically the more sound equipped engines folks seem to get, the more they crank up the volume and expose ever more the lack of innate quality while they probably should do just the opposite. My own thinking as to sound is to focus on quiet but constant and repetitive sounds: of bubbling brook near my creek, crickets and waving grasses near the fields, the hum of factory activity in the industrial district, and perhaps a gentle white noise or slight sound of wind for the rest of the layout, and either perhaps forget about train sounds per se or follow Mike Ziegler's example and have quiet, constant, and generic locomotive sound. One difference is I will be running far fewer trains at a time than Mike did, so I may not be able to take advantage of the sonic illusion that he did. Dave Nelson
Dave, I agree completely and have similar plans for my layout in the future.
I don't care for all the racket coming out of a staging area which is supposed to represent a place far away where the train went to after leaving the visible. Besides, I recently had an incident where a green operator selected a consist by the wrong number and ended up running a train out of staging back onto the visible with predictable results. So now, all 5 of my staging areas are doa with toggles.
Bob