I'm probably beating a dead horse here, so I apologize in advance, but I am confused about converting from DC to DCC. When I built my layout, I did not believe I needed DCC (it is only 4'x8') so I wired it for DC in seven blocks. Now that I have over half the scenery and ballast done, I realize its a real pain to do what I envisioned. I am probably going to get a basic NCE system, so do I need to tear up my track and remove the insulated joiners from the non-common rail? I understand that a seperately powered, completely isolated track is needed to program a locomotive, is that true? I own no decoders, and only one is DCC ready. So how hard is it to convert a locomotive that is not DCC ready?
The rights of neutrality will only be respected, when they are defended by an adequate power. A nation, despicable by its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral. -Alexander Hamilton
Don't panic!
No need to remove the insulators, just wire all the blocks to be powered by the DCC system all the time.
You porobably will want a programming track that you can isolate from the rest of the layout. One option would be to have it off the layout entirely, if you don't have a good way to do it. Usually a yard track will work fine.
Some locos are very, very easy to convert, and some a very difficult, and many are in the middle. What do you have?
Jeff But it's a dry heat!
indiana rr I'm probably beating a dead horse here, so I apologize in advance, but I am confused about converting from DC to DCC. When I built my layout, I did not believe I needed DCC (it is only 4'x8') so I wired it for DC in seven blocks. Now that I have over half the scenery and ballast done, I realize its a real pain to do what I envisioned. I am probably going to get a basic NCE system, so do I need to tear up my track and remove the insulated joiners from the non-common rail? I understand that a seperately powered, completely isolated track is needed to program a locomotive, is that true? I own no decoders, and only one is DCC ready. So how hard is it to convert a locomotive that is not DCC ready?
Just as the other poster indicated, don't panic, it will be no problem to wire all your blocks together for a DCC system, no need to disrupt your trackage.
And, converting you locos will depend on what they are, but most any loco can be converted without too much difficulty.
I have to ask, and comment, about this whole situation however - What are your "goals" that lead you to having so many blocks on such a small layout in the first place? Sounds like you might have gotten some poor advice about how to apply DC to your layout. 4x8 layouts seldom present opertunities for more than maybe two trains to be moving at once, and the time it takes for them to make one "loop" is so short as to make it difficuilt to select blocks and allow other trains to share the same trackage, So if your plans include such action, DCC may well be the best control system for you.
BUT, keep in mind, even with DCC it will be difficult to manage two or more trains in such a limited amount of space unless they are simply on two different routes of track, so the real benifits of DCC might not even help much.
Many people over the years have made DC layouts more complex to operate than they really needed then to be. Having too many blocks or not using simple ways to "automate" the function of some of the blocks. I have not seen your track plan but seven blocks sounds like a lot on such a small layout unless many/most are just sidings for parking locos.
DCC does has specific advantages on a small layout but don't assume it will automaticly make the complex or continuious movement of two or more trains easier or even possible without having an operator for each train.
This time a different BUT, if you will have multiple operators in such a small space, DCC is defenately the way to go.
Sheldon
Welcome aboard.
Many people get the idea that DCC is a "big layout" thing. As a small layout guy myself (5x12 in HO) I really appreciate the value of DCC. Big layouts are relatively easy to "block up" in DC, which lets you run multiple trains, but that's hard to do on a small layout. The blocks get to be too small, and you spend all your time flipping toggles. DCC takes all the bother out of that. On my layout, I can have a couple of trains looping around on "autopilot," while I do switching in the yard or interleave some trolleys between the mainline freights. Actually, DCC handles this much better than I can. The thing that gets overwhelmed with too many trains is the guy holding the throttle.
My programming track is a siding near the front of the layout. Most of the time, it functions as a normal siding, but I have a double-pole, double-throw (DPDT) toggle switch that turns it into a programming track. Both rails are insulated where it joins the main line.
A basic decoder has 7 wires. Two go to the track, two to the motor, and the other 3 to the front and rear headlights, with one wire "common" between the two lights. I won't go into detail here, but on older engines you may need to "isolate" the motor from the frame, but most newer ones don't have this problem. Depending on the bulbs in your engine, you may need to add a resistor to the common line to reduce the voltage. I like bright headlights, so while I'm inside the engine I usually replace the bulbs with LEDs, which is a pretty simple task.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
The problem re programming is that if you don't have both rails isolated, you could be reprogramming all the engines on the layout. If you want an on-the-layout programming track, you could just cut a gap into one rail opposite one of the insulated joiners at each end of a block. No need to rip out track.
Unless you have engines that are very old, you probably won't have a problem with converting them. Most engines made in the last 5 years or so come with an eight-pin dummy plug; pull it out and plug in the DCC decoder. These are "plug and play" installations. Older engines might need a "drop in" light board replacement decoder. These are easy too, but it's handy if you know how to solder wires to the terminals. If you do have to do a "hardwire" it's just connecting the wires coming from the wheels and the wires coming from the motor and the headlights to the right colored wires on the decoder. It will be explained in the instructions that come with the decoder.
Check your engines now, and start with the easiest ones like ones with a dummy plug.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Just as the other poster indicated, don't panic, it will be no problem to wire all your blocks together for a DCC system, no need to disrupt your trackage. And, converting you locos will depend on what they are, but most any loco can be converted without too much difficulty. I have to ask, and comment, about this whole situation however - What are your "goals" that lead you to having so many blocks on such a small layout in the first place? Sounds like you might have gotten some poor advice about how to apply DC to your layout. 4x8 layouts seldom present opertunities for more than maybe two trains to be moving at once, and the time it takes for them to make one "loop" is so short as to make it difficuilt to select blocks and allow other trains to share the same trackage, So if your plans include such action, DCC may well be the best control system for you. BUT, keep in mind, even with DCC it will be difficult to manage two or more trains in such a limited amount of space unless they are simply on two different routes of track, so the real benifits of DCC might not even help much. Many people over the years have made DC layouts more complex to operate than they really needed then to be. Having too many blocks or not using simple ways to "automate" the function of some of the blocks. I have not seen your track plan but seven blocks sounds like a lot on such a small layout unless many/most are just sidings for parking locos. DCC does has specific advantages on a small layout but don't assume it will automaticly make the complex or continuious movement of two or more trains easier or even possible without having an operator for each train. This time a different BUT, if you will have multiple operators in such a small space, DCC is defenately the way to go. Sheldon
I don't have your experience with large layouts, but I do have a fair amount with DC control on small layouts. Seven blocks on a 4x8 is probably about right for any rational attempt at 2 train operations using traditional small layout block wiring (Atlas components). Can some of them be automated? Yes, but generally not as easily as on a larger DC layout where the automation limits on operational flexibility rarely constrain operations.
The basic oval needs a minimum of 4 blocks just to have 2 trains chase. Having the passing siding controlled by the turnouts doesn't work as well on a 4x8 because that siding turnout block is needed too often for the other train. Using power routing turnouts eliminates having to set up any spurs or short branches as blocks. But Atlas a long time ago decided we were too stupid to understand gapping with power routing turnouts, and issued their Custom-Line turnouts with both legs live at all times. Their genius was two-fold: Atlas Custom-Line turnouts were considered simpler to use and therefore sold better than their competition, and Atlas sold more Selector boxes by doubling the number of toggles needed.
I totally agree that real 2 train operation - DC or DCC - on a 4x8 is generally impractical unless both operators are switching towns on opposite sides of the layout. The primary exception is the case where the track in the town(s) is laid out to allow switching without needing the main at all. If you really examine the case of one train circulating while the other switches with occasional need for the main, you find the circulating train comes through too often for the one switching to get any work done at realistic speeds. Nevertheless, it is occasionally fun to try. And sometimes just trying to get one train following the other can be fun. Both are in fact easier to do with DCC on a 4x8, but just by a little. The problem with 2 train operations under DCC on a 4x8 is that an incorrectly lined turnout almost always causes collisions.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Fred, I agree completely. I guess for me the idea of two trains "chasing" each other around the same route on a 4x8 is just so pointless that I failed to consider that as a requirement.
I was trying to prompt the OP to explain to us, or re-examine for himself his goals to help him make a better choice, DC or DCC.
Many of the large DC layouts I have built or been a part of have as few as 15 to 20 "asignable" track sections and yet they allow 8-10 operators to move seamlessly around the layout at the same time.
Thanks for your thoughts,
One thing I'll add to Jeff's comments, if you decide to go to DCC, instead of tying all the blocks together as splices, connect each block you currently have wired to separate terminals on a terminal strip, then jumper the other side of the terminals together to feed to your power source. Why? Troubleshooting. When things go wrong with your electrical system (notice I didn't say "if"), you'll be able to lift wires off the terminal strip separately to help isolate the problem.
TomDiehl One thing I'll add to Jeff's comments, if you decide to go to DCC, instead of tying all the blocks together as splices, connect each block you currently have wired to separate terminals on a terminal strip, then jumper the other side of the terminals together to feed to your power source. Why? Troubleshooting. When things go wrong with your electrical system (notice I didn't say "if"), you'll be able to lift wires off the terminal strip separately to help isolate the problem.
A good idea. The end result is the same, but a lot more useful if you have trouble later.
By the way, in my opinion, a smaller layout is an excellent place for DCC. It might even be more important than on a lorger layout.
Well to explain what I have on my layout, I have two industries to switch with a short section of mainline between them, along with a passing siding. The main is a contiuous loop, so I often try to juggle the through frieght while trying to switch cars into another manifest. The problem I often have is I spend more time switching toggles and things to make sure the mainline doesnt ram itself up the back of the switcher. It is a pain, and I often spend 2/3 of my time trying to prevent derailments while the fun is sucked out of the hobby. I think DCC would be easier to control trains with.
I can understand your wish to convert, since you don't have a dedicated towerman or a trained octopus to flip block toggles.
OTOH, if you ever decide to install a signal system, you'll be glad that your rail gaps are already in place. Even with DCC, you need to isolate the various blocks so the detector circuits can detect the presence of a train in a specific location.
I also heartily agree with the idea of bringing your rail drops to a terminal strip and jumpering them together there, both for troubleshooting now and installing signals later. Just put the terminal strip(s) in a location where you don't have to crawl under the table to make connections.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
indiana rr Well to explain what I have on my layout, I have two industries to switch with a short section of mainline between them, along with a passing siding. The main is a contiuous loop, so I often try to juggle the through frieght while trying to switch cars into another manifest. The problem I often have is I spend more time switching toggles and things to make sure the mainline doesnt ram itself up the back of the switcher. It is a pain, and I often spend 2/3 of my time trying to prevent derailments while the fun is sucked out of the hobby. I think DCC would be easier to control trains with.
I totally agree that DCC will make juggling 2 trains at once on a small layout much easier - and I'm still a DC user.
Just a caution - just because you can juggle 2 trains at once with DCC doesn't always mean you should. I guess I'm too senile to engage in the multitasking involved in keeping 2 trains actually running simultaneously on a small layout - and this from a former helicopter pilot used to using hands, feet, fingers, toes, and mouth independently and simultaneously to keep the thing flying and executing a mission. I can't imagine trying to keep the 2nd train running while planning and executing switching moves with the 1st, and calling it a hobby.
I'm a firm believer in one train and one throttle per operator on my 4x6 layout. And for that reason, DC still works fine for me. If I had a 2nd operator, DCC would definitely be in my plans.
fwrightI'm a firm believer in one train and one throttle per operator on my 4x6 layout. And for that reason, DC still works fine for me. If I had a 2nd operator, DCC would definitely be in my plans.
I am very much with Fred on this, and this aspect of operation has been discussed at great length on here before.
The ONLY way I operate more than one train at a time, even on a large layout like one that fills my 22 x 40 layout room, is when all but the one I am actually "operating" are on closed display loops of track requiring no turnouts to be thrown and no attention other than "is it still moving and on the track"
OK, I admit, I failed multi tasking in school, (actually I don't believe in it as a sound or practical concept, it actually increases the time per task for most jobs to be completed), and don't enjoy any such self imposed additional stress.
So for me, a 4x8 would likely only need one or two Aristo Train Engineer throttles an some places to turn off locos not in use. Seems like more than enough action for such a small space.
And, I do also agree that the virtues of DCC really shine on small or medium sized layouts with lots of operators/action.