Little over half way down this page on Allan Gartner's site: http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches.htm
are the instructions for wiring the Walthers non-DCC friendly double crossover.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Here is the critical excerpt from Allan's write up:
Conversion to DCC friendliness is therefore relatively straight forward.
1) Cut both closure rails to isolate them from the frog. Of course, you may want to fill the gap with a piece of styrene and epoxy as you would do with any rail cut. Do this to all four frogs and closure rails.
2) Replace the throw bar with a printed circuit board throw bar. Cut through the copper on the top so that the two point rails are not electrically connected to each other. Do this to all four sets of points.
3) Drop feeder from the point rails or solder bonds (jumpers) around the joiners used to pivot the point rails. This is optional, but I highly recommend doing this to ensure long and troublefree life of your double crossover.
Conversion time is probably under 15 minutes for the first switch. Probably much less by the time you get to the fourth one.
Rich
Alton Junction
SMOKING TRAINMy layout is DCC and it is a parallel run. I don't know what brand of Double Crossover I will purchase. Do you have a suggestion. One reply said I needed a Insulfrog type.
Bottom Line??????
Cheers,
Frank
It's too bad that Walthers doesn't make a Code 100 DCC Friendly double crossover.
Under the Walthers Shinohara brand, there is a Code 83 DCC Friendly double crossover. I have two of them on my layout, and they work just fine, requiring no special wiring or rail gap cuts. You just gotta be sure to place feeder wires on all four ends of the double crossover.
So, I just wonder why Walthers has not done this in Code 100.
I will say this. Whereas Walthers Shinohara has a whole line of specialty track in Code 83, the availability of the same specialty track in Code 100 is virtually nonexistent. That is one reason why my layout is done mostly in Code 83 track.
Rich,
That does seem a little odd,,,who know's?
richhotrain It's too bad that Walthers doesn't make a Code 100 DCC Friendly double crossover. Under the Walthers Shinohara brand, there is a Code 83 DCC Friendly double crossover. I have two of them on my layout, and they work just fine, requiring no special wiring or rail gap cuts. You just gotta be sure to place feeder wires on all four ends of the double crossover. So, I just wonder why Walthers has not done this in Code 100. I will say this. Whereas Walthers Shinohara has a whole line of specialty track in Code 83, the availability of the same specialty track in Code 100 is virtually nonexistent. That is one reason why my layout is done mostly in Code 83 track.
Understanding the Walthers/Shinohara business relationship is key. Before the Walthers deal, Shinohara made HO track in code 100 and code 70. They batch manufacture, which means they rotate what lines of track are being produced at any given time. Typically, supplies would run low on a given line before a new batch would be produced.
A while back (1990s I believe), Walthers contracted with Shinohara to produce a line of code 83 track. The code 83 line is sold exclusively under the Walthers name, and Walthers apparently has priority on Shinohara's production resources. So the Walthers code 83 track gets replenished more frequently than the other lines. With Walthers having the name and distribution and priority that the Shinohara brand does not, the code 70 and code 100 lines have fallen into very sporadic production.
The Walthers code 83 line was also the first Shinohara track with the "DCC-friendly" "upgrade". I'm not sure the Shinohara HOn3, code 70, or code 100 lines have ever had "DCC-friendly" turnouts. All the Shinohara brand turnouts I have seen still have power-routing and powered frogs (particularly in HOn3). For the most part, when wired correctly, the power routing and powered frogs work just fine with DCC. Occasionally, an out-of-gauge (in the narrow direction) wheelset will bridge the opposite polarity open point and stock rail, causing a DCC shutdown due to the momentary short from the back of the metal wheel brushing against the open point.
Given the lack of sales of new HO code 100 track, I would expect ever-longer intervals between production of Shinohara code 100 specialty items.
my thoughts and experiences, your choices
Fred W
Fred, thanks for that input.
Very interesting and very informative.
I installed a Shinohara code 100 double xover in our club layout, which can have either DC or DCC on either A or B. We use one switch to throw all four points at the same time, except there is an interlock so the points go or stay straight any time the power type is different. The switch has worked fine for years.
Why would you not want the four points to change together, unless you like derailments?
Hal
hdtvnut Why would you not want the four points to change together, unless you like derailments? Hal
Hal, I agree with you that you would typically want all four points to change together and that is how I operate my two double crossovers.
I suppose the one instance where you might throw less than all four simultaneously is in a situation where four turnouts have been installed to simulate a double crossover. In that event, each crossover pair might be powered separately, or operated manually, to traverse the entire double crossover.
LION NEVER wires his double crossovers to work in tandem like that.
Each route (pair of switches) has its own lever on the interlocking machine as it must have to lock out a conflicting routing, and also controls the signals. It is true in HO this may be of little import, but since these levers also route power to the terminal it is nice to have the no-intended route to be inert. (Albeit there are also signal levers for the terminal that also enforce this protocol.)
LION must align the switches and then also move a lever to clear the home signal.
THAT is the way it is done!
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Only both straight or both crossing are possible routes anyway, anything else would be conflicting. I can't imagine any case where you would need to line each of the 4 points individually. If say 1 is crossing over to 2, then oncoming traffic on 1 has to stop, oncoming traffice on 2 has to stop, and overtaking traffic on 2 has to stop. Which way the 2 to 1 points are lines makes no difference, so who cares if they move with the 1 to 2 points? Or flip it around, 2 crossing to 1 - same thing, just reversed. And if both are lined straight - it makes no sense for any of the 4 points to be set diverging, that's a conflict.
While you might not want to make the linakge to operate the whole thing from one point motor, you can wire them all together to move at the same time. Why overcomplicate things with individual control where it doesn't make sense, the only real outcome would be to miss alinging one and sending trains off the rails. Power routing is not affected by that either.
rrinker Only both straight or both crossing are possible routes anyway, anything else would be conflicting. I can't imagine any case where you would need to line each of the 4 points individually.
On a GRS Model-5 interlocking machine EACH SWITCH must have its own controller. While it is true that these controllers are paired with only one lever, the controls are separate. (if you look at the machine you will see a blank slot next to the lever which holds the apparatus for the other switch in the crossing) If a chunk of ballast or of ice prevents one set of switchpoints from closing, then the lever for that pair cannot be fully set nor the alignment locked so that a signal can be given. The towerman will have to go down to the ground to correct the situation. Obviously if one crossing is aligned, the lever for the conflicting crossing cannot be moved.
You can see the red painted signal levers on the outside or the row, the switch levers all have a blank slot next to them for the second switch for each crossover.
This is called safety.
Maybe you do not need this degree of safety on your model railroad, but it is quite necessary on mine what with trains running 3 minutes apart. The LPPs running my locomotives cannot really see the signals, but the interlocking does control movements and does lock trains from leaving a station (Control Point) unless he has a clear movement to his next station or through the interlocking, if any.
LION thinks that operating an interlocking tower in a prototypical fashion adds a nice aspect to operating the layout.
Havign all 4 sets fo points move at the saem time STILL does not preclude the inclusion of the (generally overkill for model railroads, since plastic people aren't alive to begin with) option of having an absolute interlock. Individual control of the points has the exact same problem - just because you flipped the toggle to move the Tortoise, how do you know the points closed? Maybe the motor is frozen. Maybe the connection broke. Maybe the throwbar is broken and only 1 of the pair actually moved. You can protect against all but the point becomign unattached to the throwbar by including a microswitch that is moved by the thowbar for positive feedback (instead of using the Tortoise contacts). So you would eb able to tell if the points all closed even if all 4 sets are controlled by one operating swtich. And set signals accordingly - instead of just assumign that because you changed the control panel switch, everything out on the railroad just worked.
Not too many people go through all that, but the option is there if you want to have full actual position feedback for interlocking. If your turnouts are power routing, you can actually do it without the microswitches, at least when there is some continuous power on the track like with DCC. The weak poitn there is making sure your turnouts are wired reliably so that power passes through where it is supposed to.