I don't mean to denigrate those who choose to stay with DC; after all, it's all I've ever used to power my trains too. But, for realism in operations (sound, fine speed control, lighting functions, independent and consist control of multiple locos, etc) it's hard to argue it's the best option out there, even now.
I am not personally vested emotionally in DC but there are a lot of folks here who are - even to the point of having a DC only thread and yes, many argue vehemently about each side and have their reasons. I just mention it because there are those who would "argue it's the best option out there" for them. I know you feel strongly and have reasons for making the rather definite statements, but well, nuff said... I'm more of a spectator when it comes to the padded room arguments between the DC/DCC crowd but it can get pretty passionate! =D
I'm not convinced a touchscreen is the best way to control trains...
I definitely do not prefer touch screens for control - for me I like the tactile feedback or feel of a mechanical knob for controlling train speed at least. Even though Digitrax is can be more techie and some say harder to work than NCE, I still wanted controllers with displays and regular rotary knobs so thats what I bought over 15 years ago. Since then I have had opportunities to get my hands on the NCE controller and the thumbwheel is pretty good too. Main point being, knobs and buttons are to me just superior for controlling things.
DoughlessYeah, I'm not trying to make a statement with my comments, I really just wonder that if my throttle is tied to my smartphone, what happens when I change smartphones for other purposes? Would the layout app move to the new phone seemlessly?
No worries, it's all good! It just seemed like a good chance to have a "world has gone to heck in a handbasket" speech! =P Good point about changing smart phones. I would hazard as long as you change to a same O/S smart phone, you could probably use the same app - e.g. if you are uing IOS or Android or Windows 8, if you stay with the same OS on the new phone, probably you can reload the app and keep going. But versions sometimes come into play just like on computers etc.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
riogrande5761 As far as the smart phone upgrade merry go round, thats seems to be driven by the whole mindset of "You gotta" or "I gotta" have the newest shiniest highteck phone with all the latest bells and whistles - the charge led by Apple and Android to feed their huge billion dollar money making machine. No one has a gun to our heads - we can get a smart phone and use is for more than one or two years, more like double that and be fine.
As far as the smart phone upgrade merry go round, thats seems to be driven by the whole mindset of "You gotta" or "I gotta" have the newest shiniest highteck phone with all the latest bells and whistles - the charge led by Apple and Android to feed their huge billion dollar money making machine. No one has a gun to our heads - we can get a smart phone and use is for more than one or two years, more like double that and be fine.
Yeah, I'm not trying to make a statement with my comments, I really just wonder that if my throttle is tied to my smartphone, what happens when I change smartphones for other purposes? Would the layout app move to the new phone seemlessly? Is the changeover simple or is there an abundance of fiddling just to get back to the point I was?
And what if the smartphones move beyond the tech of the layout app, like a new computer being unable to run an older version of excel etc...
As it seems now, there are a lot of risks with tying my layout throttle to a device that I use in every day life. For me, there has to be a clear advantage for it to be a deal maker.
- Douglas
riogrande5761I think it is true for most of us that we want to run model trains like a real railroad would. I expect some of our "DC camp" folks might beg to differ that they can't run model trains like real trains - you "poked the bear" there! But personally I agree with you about DC blocks
But personally I agree with you about DC blocks
I'm not convinced a touchscreen is the best way to control trains, but in a lot of other ways the new BlueTrains/Bachmann EZ App bluetooth system looks almost exactly like what I'm wishing for. Direct command control to the loco, independent of track power (DC/DCC/battery). Potentially all the functionality of DCC, plus more due to the increased bandwidth of BT 4/LE. Really interested to see where that goes.
I won't have a layout for another couple years either, enough time to see if the BT option goes anywhere, I suspect.
This has been an interesting topic to follow.
It may be three or four years before I can build a layout, and even then, it will be a small switching layout. My thought has been to wire it for conventional DC, maybe use toggles to be able use DCC. I am still not sold on DCC, even though I have several decoder equipped locos and a full DCC system.
I am sure that battery powered systems will become common in HO. Not sure that I will want to make the switch; as I really don't want to invest in another different technology when the existing stuff works just fine.
I'm also enough of a techophobe that I will never run trains with a phone. As I tell my kids and my wife; a phone is a phone is a phone, I will use it to communicate with them, and that's it. If you whippersnappers want to watch movies, surf the web, etc., go ahead. Get off my lawn....
The interest, for me, is in running a train like a real railroad would. To that end, DC block power always seemed 'wrong'. DCC is a lot better in concept, but the sensitivity to wiring issues and reversing/shorts is a distraction, and the control signal is still running through the tracks, which means the whole layout must still be powered.
I think it is true for most of us that we want to run model trains like a real railroad would. I expect some of our "DC camp" folks might beg to differ that they can't run model trains like real trains - you "poked the bear" there!
But personally I agree with you about DC blocks - from a long time ago, I didn't like the idea of having to control trains through power blocks which is what attracted me to DCC, as well as many others too I'm sure. And of course we can run DCC wirelessly now which gives a pretty complete feature experience - especially if you add other features like sound, turnout control etc.
I agree, issues like sensitivity, power loss, shorts etc. are definitely something we would all like to be without so there is an advantage to total wireless and removing dependancy for signal and 100% power from the rail. Keep alive goes a long way toward dealing with the worst issue, temporary power loss at a modest cost. Of course the deal breaker for many, especially those with limited budget and large rosters is cost - period. Many of us simply can only look and say, "thats nice" and look at the moths fly out of our wallets and just say "some day". In the mean time we work with the best we can afford.
I'm glad this topic has generated so much interest and discussion! My original post was purposfully broad. as I didn't want to restrict the scope right off the bat.
My perspective is as someone re-joining the hobby, who has not made a substantial investment in any of the current control technologies (eg: DCC or proprietary alternatives), but with a modest collection of 'legacy' DC HO equipment.
Radio control opens up the possibility of de-powering areas that provide complex wiring issues, though I rather like the idea of keeping power in some areas as a charging curcuit - if done properly, you could provide nearly unlimited run time with very modest battery capacity. A heavy 'keep alive' if you will, and with the control signal divorced from the rails, the unpowered sections wouldn't provide an operational problem.
rrebell I hear you. I have Meto PCS (T-Mobile) and have 4 phones with unlimited everything, $100 a month for the 4 and no added charges and a promise from the CEO that he will not raise rates as long as he is boss, all 4 are smart phones and cost less than $75 each. I have matched bar for bar on a long road trip with Verizon on an Apple (my sisters phone who was with us), same everything!
I hear you. I have Meto PCS (T-Mobile) and have 4 phones with unlimited everything, $100 a month for the 4 and no added charges and a promise from the CEO that he will not raise rates as long as he is boss, all 4 are smart phones and cost less than $75 each. I have matched bar for bar on a long road trip with Verizon on an Apple (my sisters phone who was with us), same everything!
rrebell, thats pretty good for 4 smart phones unlimited really. I would like to have an unlimited but I don't really need it right now - we don't burn much minutes on the cell towers at all, and can use the wifi connections for calls from work or home. I have a daughter in a private college (for 2 more years) eating 43% of my take home pay (I didn't have money set aside for her college), so when my wife added her son to our insurance we had to find ways of cutting monthly costs to help off-set some of it. We went to T-mobile which has a, get this, $3/mo pay-as-you-go for 10 minutes or 10 texts, then you pay 10 cents when you go over, which we surely do, especially my wife for her work. But even with that we spend maybe $30/mo now vs. $80 before and only really need to use the internet on wifi at home or at work for services which require it like skype or viber, or occasionally something else. I think if we both needed unlimited talk/text, we could get it for well under what I was giving Verizon before I finally cut their service.
Doughless Good point. It seems to me that the advantage of dead rail is that reverse loops and wyes can be unpowered, and threfore not wired. Less complexity. Also, since tech companies love to make thier phones obsolete every so often, when I have to buy a new smartphone just to make a phone call, will I have to redownload my layout app too?
Good point. It seems to me that the advantage of dead rail is that reverse loops and wyes can be unpowered, and threfore not wired. Less complexity.
Also, since tech companies love to make thier phones obsolete every so often, when I have to buy a new smartphone just to make a phone call, will I have to redownload my layout app too?
Firstly, if folks are averse to complex wiring, you can still have live rail to charge loco's with battery packs, but just dead rail the reverse loops which give some fits and have power to the easy to wire mainline sections, that way trains can get power over much of the layout, enough to keep batteries charged. I suppose it doesn't have to be all dead or all live, in a battery operated engine environment.
As an aside, I saw a BBC interview with one of the migrant's from Siria or one of those area's, a man in his late 20's or early 30's who had landed in Sweden and was talking about what he stated to be the "typical" migrants aspirations - which consisted getting a nice apartment, luxury car like a BMW or Mercedes and an the latest Apple Iphone. I was like, you come from a war-torn 3rd world existance, and you've bought into the American materalistic high status mentality! It made me shake my head and feel very sad that this is what "it all" boils down to now. You get those 3 or 4 things - thats the end game and then you've "arrived". Heck, I've lived most of my life happy to just have a reliable used car, a decent place to live in a safe neighborhood and I only recently got an inexpensive smart phone recently because I could save money using wifi connections much of the time. Yet these people come from violent, war-torn third world back grounds and thats what they have to achieve to be happy. *sigh*
Apologies about the rant but this whole I gotta get the latest smart phone every year or two seems to be something certain companies have rather successfully brainwashed a large part of the population and bilking even poor people into a mentality that they all have to have these very expensive "precious" gadgets to stroke and many really can't afford but give lots of money away willingly just to have their head bend down at every spare moment. Different world, thats for sure. I asked one co-worker in my IT department how much he spent a month on his smart phones (for himself, his wife and one child) and it was $250 a month!!! My wife and I were paying Verizon ~$80/month with two dumb cell phones and now that we have inexpensive smart phones with a pay-as-you-go plan, we probably spend less than half that, around $30/mo. since we can use Viber and Skype to call with Wifi service at work and home.
Doughless riogrande5761 I have to comment on the "dead rail" moniker in the title as others have. It sure seems logical to have live rail so that the system can allow loco's to charge batteries from the rail than have to pull them off and plug them into some power station some where when the batteries are discharged. Of course, then that begs the question as to why not stick with DCC and use a keep alive circuit so engines can easily cross dead spots and never loose power. Keep alive is, from what I read, still less costly per engine that "dead rail" radio control batter operated engines. There does sound like there could be potential for battery operation with radio control in the future when the techology progesses to the point it is more economical for folks with sizable fleets of engines. For those with small collection, it's probably more affordable even now. Will it see wide spread use like DCC is? Maybe, but probably not for some years. Good point. It seems to me that the advantage of dead rail is that reverse loops and wyes can be unpowered, and threfore not wired. Less complexity. But to take locos off of the layout in order to charge them, multiple times a week perhaps, than simply taking the time to wire a reverse loop or wye correctly would save a lot of time in the long run. To devote power to an isolated charging track would be more complex, since the operator would have to find a way to rotate the locos on and off that track. It would be easier to have the whole layout powered, except for the complex parts. As someone said above, it seems like we are just moving the complexity of what we do from place to place. As for your second point, I have a simple layout with a small collection of locos. Athough it would be less costly for me to convert to dead rail, I have no interest in it. My layout runs fine now, and if I have to relocate, I'll build the same basic layout. Since I already use wireless DC and DCC, I don't need to change-up what wirelsess device I use...like going from a wireless throttle to a smart phone. No advantage for me. Also, since tech companies love to make thier phones obsolete every so often, when I have to buy a new smartphone just to make a phone call, will I have to redownload my layout app too? Perhaps I'm too ignorant, but how often would my current layout app become obsolete? Would it always be able to run on my current phone or will I have to "upgrade " the app every so often? I like the idea of my wireless throttle being a layout-only tool. But people like to dabble or are downright fascinated with technology, so the experience of conversion to different systems may be enjoyable for them. And kids want to do everything via smart phones, so advancing the technology is certainly a beneficial thing for Bachmann and others to try. As a person who is not the least bit interested in technology, as being strictly an end user of it, I did not add DCC until DCC offered onboard sound...a completely different and new feature that DC could not competently (IMO) execute. If dead rail or battery power can offer a NEW FEATURE that DC or DCC cannot, then I might be interested.
riogrande5761 I have to comment on the "dead rail" moniker in the title as others have. It sure seems logical to have live rail so that the system can allow loco's to charge batteries from the rail than have to pull them off and plug them into some power station some where when the batteries are discharged. Of course, then that begs the question as to why not stick with DCC and use a keep alive circuit so engines can easily cross dead spots and never loose power. Keep alive is, from what I read, still less costly per engine that "dead rail" radio control batter operated engines. There does sound like there could be potential for battery operation with radio control in the future when the techology progesses to the point it is more economical for folks with sizable fleets of engines. For those with small collection, it's probably more affordable even now. Will it see wide spread use like DCC is? Maybe, but probably not for some years.
I have to comment on the "dead rail" moniker in the title as others have. It sure seems logical to have live rail so that the system can allow loco's to charge batteries from the rail than have to pull them off and plug them into some power station some where when the batteries are discharged. Of course, then that begs the question as to why not stick with DCC and use a keep alive circuit so engines can easily cross dead spots and never loose power. Keep alive is, from what I read, still less costly per engine that "dead rail" radio control batter operated engines.
There does sound like there could be potential for battery operation with radio control in the future when the techology progesses to the point it is more economical for folks with sizable fleets of engines. For those with small collection, it's probably more affordable even now. Will it see wide spread use like DCC is? Maybe, but probably not for some years.
Good point. It seems to me that the advantage of dead rail is that reverse loops and wyes can be unpowered, and threfore not wired. Less complexity. But to take locos off of the layout in order to charge them, multiple times a week perhaps, than simply taking the time to wire a reverse loop or wye correctly would save a lot of time in the long run. To devote power to an isolated charging track would be more complex, since the operator would have to find a way to rotate the locos on and off that track. It would be easier to have the whole layout powered, except for the complex parts. As someone said above, it seems like we are just moving the complexity of what we do from place to place.
As for your second point, I have a simple layout with a small collection of locos. Athough it would be less costly for me to convert to dead rail, I have no interest in it. My layout runs fine now, and if I have to relocate, I'll build the same basic layout. Since I already use wireless DC and DCC, I don't need to change-up what wirelsess device I use...like going from a wireless throttle to a smart phone. No advantage for me.
Perhaps I'm too ignorant, but how often would my current layout app become obsolete? Would it always be able to run on my current phone or will I have to "upgrade " the app every so often?
I like the idea of my wireless throttle being a layout-only tool.
But people like to dabble or are downright fascinated with technology, so the experience of conversion to different systems may be enjoyable for them. And kids want to do everything via smart phones, so advancing the technology is certainly a beneficial thing for Bachmann and others to try.
As a person who is not the least bit interested in technology, as being strictly an end user of it, I did not add DCC until DCC offered onboard sound...a completely different and new feature that DC could not competently (IMO) execute.
If dead rail or battery power can offer a NEW FEATURE that DC or DCC cannot, then I might be interested.
DigitalGriffin The power density just isn't there for any realistic run time. Even if you took out all the chasis weight and replaced it with lithium you wouldn't have a realistic run time. 14 Watts is a lot for an little battery to supply over a long time. Sorry just the way it is.
The power density just isn't there for any realistic run time. Even if you took out all the chasis weight and replaced it with lithium you wouldn't have a realistic run time. 14 Watts is a lot for an little battery to supply over a long time.
Sorry just the way it is.
Good point. It seems to me that the advantage of dead rail is that reverse loops and wyes can be unpowered, and threfore not wired. Less complexity. But to take locos off of the layout in order to charge them, multiple times a week perhaps, than simply taking the time to wire a reverse loop or wye correctly would cost a lot of time in the long run. To devote power to an isolated charging track would be more complex, since the operator would have to find a way to rotate the locos on and off that track. It would be easier to have the whole layout powered, except for the complex parts. As someone said above, it seems like we are just moving the complexity of what we do from place to place.
RRR_BethBr One of my particular interests in the time I was away from the MR hobby has been RC flight - a hobby that has been entirely transformed in the last 15 years by (primarily) lithium batteries, brushless electric motors, and spread-spectrum radio technology. I'm curious; is model railroading taking notice? Is there a(ny) movement towards battery-powered, radio controlled trains in popular indoor sizes (HO, in particular)? I'm imagining a layout that needs no track wiring, no reversing circuitry, no hunting down shorts and wiring faults underneath the benchwork and scenery. I haven't started the conversion to DCC yet, and I'm of half a mind not to bother. The potential for R/C just seems... better. Am I alone in this thinking?
One of my particular interests in the time I was away from the MR hobby has been RC flight - a hobby that has been entirely transformed in the last 15 years by (primarily) lithium batteries, brushless electric motors, and spread-spectrum radio technology.
I'm curious; is model railroading taking notice? Is there a(ny) movement towards battery-powered, radio controlled trains in popular indoor sizes (HO, in particular)?
I'm imagining a layout that needs no track wiring, no reversing circuitry, no hunting down shorts and wiring faults underneath the benchwork and scenery.
I haven't started the conversion to DCC yet, and I'm of half a mind not to bother. The potential for R/C just seems... better. Am I alone in this thinking?
Right now I'm not on board with the idea. Last time it was discussed a few months ago, it was apparent that the cost per engine was well, cost-prohibitive, if you had more than a small collection of engines. I think I recall it was in the neighborhood of $60 per engine so if you have a large collection of say over 100 engines, and actually many people do, then 6 grand (per 100) is the kind of money most of us simply can't manage to afford, even over a couple years, to convert to "dead rail" operation. Sure, it's not cheap to convert a fleet of 100 engines over to DCC either but if one bought in bulk, it would be about 1/3rd the cost or roughly $2000 - that could be managed by many much easier over a couple years time. So basically a major difference cost difference for many, enough to easily be a deal breaker - unless you are one of the few where money is no object. Then by all means...
If you follow any of the Dead Rail forums, most guys are claiming an average run time between 1-1/2 and 2 hours on a full charge.
Mark.
¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
RRR_BethBrI'm imagining a layout that needs no track wiring, no reversing circuitry, no hunting down shorts and wiring faults underneath the benchwork and scenery.
This already exists.
It's called Brio.
no
rrebell No, what I am talking about it the original post, not where the discusion went.
No, what I am talking about it the original post, not where the discusion went.
The original post was "....battery-powered, radio controlled trains in popular indoor sizes (HO, in particular)?" Isn't that what we have been talking about ? - battery power, radio controlled engines that utilize off-the-shelf components (DCC decoders).
rrebell Accually we started with someone asking about battery vs DCC, not DCC vs wireless control. That being said a lot of the companys are trying to combine the two. Bachmann has the ability to change things, they have proven this time after time, no they don't neccisarily make the best stuff but they get everyone else started and they sell alot of their stuff in the meantime. I remember when you had to do alot of work to get an engine to run as good as a Spectrum and remember when On30 was almost non existant, I do!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now Bachmann is bringing out their bluetooth stuff, dead rail is about to expand big time, think about it, no more wiring shorts on track or powered frogs, heck, no more track wiring unless you want to and it can run on a DC, DCC or whatever layout.
Accually we started with someone asking about battery vs DCC, not DCC vs wireless control. That being said a lot of the companys are trying to combine the two. Bachmann has the ability to change things, they have proven this time after time, no they don't neccisarily make the best stuff but they get everyone else started and they sell alot of their stuff in the meantime. I remember when you had to do alot of work to get an engine to run as good as a Spectrum and remember when On30 was almost non existant, I do!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now Bachmann is bringing out their bluetooth stuff, dead rail is about to expand big time, think about it, no more wiring shorts on track or powered frogs, heck, no more track wiring unless you want to and it can run on a DC, DCC or whatever layout.
Have you looked at the other company's links ? They ARE battery power, but still use standard DCC decoders. So, it's not "battery vs DCC" it's on-board / wireless / battery powered DCC !
The blue tooth concept, along with the Rail Pro system are technological marvels, BUT - the downfall is you have to use THEIR proprietary components. The other manufacturers are utilizing standard DCC decoders with their battery powered systems making the actual "control module" already an NMRA compliant component.
rrebell RRR_BethBr HO DCC + sound equipped locos need provision for 1 Amp draw @ 15v (or so), though they may pull less current in normal operation (.3-.6 A). Either way, 180mah @ 7.4v isn't going to get you very far; certainly not hours of operation. OTOH, the situation is much less demanding than planes, where sustained current draws of 30+ Amps @ 12-16v are 'normal'. I would think a system designed around 11.1v (3S) batteries of around 1000mah might be pretty achievable. Would work better for steam than diesel though, as you need the room to stash that battery. Since we are not talking DCC, 7.4v is more than enough for say my Proto 2000 0-6-0. Also remember we are talking lipo batteries, the new batteries are smaller and more powerfull. Prieto's new copper battery or the Nano "yolk", 6 min charge time, 3x power. They also have a new car battery in the works that uses water, not kidding, you think Musk is building his new factory to build conventional bartteries, I don't think so!
RRR_BethBr HO DCC + sound equipped locos need provision for 1 Amp draw @ 15v (or so), though they may pull less current in normal operation (.3-.6 A). Either way, 180mah @ 7.4v isn't going to get you very far; certainly not hours of operation. OTOH, the situation is much less demanding than planes, where sustained current draws of 30+ Amps @ 12-16v are 'normal'. I would think a system designed around 11.1v (3S) batteries of around 1000mah might be pretty achievable. Would work better for steam than diesel though, as you need the room to stash that battery.
HO DCC + sound equipped locos need provision for 1 Amp draw @ 15v (or so), though they may pull less current in normal operation (.3-.6 A). Either way, 180mah @ 7.4v isn't going to get you very far; certainly not hours of operation.
OTOH, the situation is much less demanding than planes, where sustained current draws of 30+ Amps @ 12-16v are 'normal'. I would think a system designed around 11.1v (3S) batteries of around 1000mah might be pretty achievable. Would work better for steam than diesel though, as you need the room to stash that battery.
Since we are not talking DCC, 7.4v is more than enough for say my Proto 2000 0-6-0. Also remember we are talking lipo batteries, the new batteries are smaller and more powerfull. Prieto's new copper battery or the Nano "yolk", 6 min charge time, 3x power. They also have a new car battery in the works that uses water, not kidding, you think Musk is building his new factory to build conventional bartteries, I don't think so!
Actually, we ARE still talking DCC as most of the systems mentioned in the start of this thread (aside from Bachmann) utilize standard off-the-shelf DCC decoders. This is a real benefit in that we can still utilize all the features of our favorite sound or non-sound decoder, we aren't locked into some companies proprietary system (like Rail Pro).
Kupla thoughts:
If you're using battery power. And if the battery will need to be charged. What is wrong with charging from the rails as it is running? I don't see what you gain with "dead rails".
But.
Should you choose NOT to use the rails to charge the battery--essentially dead rail, signal detection is very simple. You do it like the real railroads. Which have dead rails. And, oh yes, like I used to do with Lionel 3-rail.
Ed
CVP Products' system is designed around the 11.1v battery and is supposedly capable of running the engine for 2 to 3 hours !
Ok, just one option, size 1.38x.8x.4 for size 7.4v 180mAH=aprox 3 hr run time. Not that I say this is the best option, just one I came accross.
There is one guy bI know of that runs his on a 9-v battery.
Yes, Li-Ion batteries. Heavily used in radio control planes and drones as well. The battery in a typical cell phone would barely fit in an O scale loco, and no way would it drive an O scale train for 6 hours on a charge - just because it can power your cell phone for 6 hours. There really aren't any small enough for N and Z. The one for my micro quad copter, which can sit in the palm of my hand, is too big for most HO locos, and it can only fly the quad for about 15 minutes. It's getting there. The new 20V DeWalt cordless tools are a fraction of the weight of my old 18V one with the old NiCad battery, plus they run longer on a charge. That would be a good battery for a G scale loco. It's all a trickle down, as things get smaller. G scale hasdone direct radio for a long time now - sure beats trying to keep track clean outdoors in all sorts of weather. It's doable in HO now, but those small battery packs don't run for hours. If you could charge from the rails, you could theoretically run as long as anyone using DC or DCC, unless you spent all your time switching in an unpowered part of the layout.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
The battery problem, is not a problem, they have very small batterys now that will give 6 nours or more in run time, and that is with the existing batteries. The new batteries will work for a week and recharge in less than hour (thanks to the resurch for cell phone batteries, you didn't think that this was done for trains, did you).To recharge the batteries, you can use a recharge track or a plug. As far as singnal systems, how many accually use them, a small percentage and like sound will be worked out (accually there are dead rail sound locos out there. As far as putting in batteries backward, once saw a fellow employee put in a dewalt battery backward, I ran over and pryed it apart in seconds but it was already getting hot.