This thread was one of the much better examples of what this forum can be.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
NittanyLion dehusman Really the only thing you want to change is load the DCC software on a microprocessor in a PC rather than have it on a microprocessor in a proprietary command station. I'm pretty sure you can do that now since you can run DCC off a Raspberry Pi. Everything you want to do can be done today. I have no idea on how to do it because I have no interest in a "roll your own" DCC system, but there are modelers in my area that are running DCC without a commercial system. How much power can they run through one of those? I've got an Arudino that I use as a JMRI interface, but limited to a decoder programmer. I can run enough power through it to move two locomotives around a christmas tree loop but not much else
dehusman Really the only thing you want to change is load the DCC software on a microprocessor in a PC rather than have it on a microprocessor in a proprietary command station. I'm pretty sure you can do that now since you can run DCC off a Raspberry Pi. Everything you want to do can be done today. I have no idea on how to do it because I have no interest in a "roll your own" DCC system, but there are modelers in my area that are running DCC without a commercial system.
How much power can they run through one of those? I've got an Arudino that I use as a JMRI interface, but limited to a decoder programmer. I can run enough power through it to move two locomotives around a christmas tree loop but not much else
DCC++ use an Arduino and motor shield. the motor shield has separate power connections for the motor which can be much higher than Arduino
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
I've got a motor shield and I'm running it off a wall wart. I just never really considered that they could handle the same power as a full up DCC system.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general.
And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general.
Have you?
AEP528 ATLANTIC CENTRAL And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general. Have you?
You must not read enough of Sheldon's posts/conversations. He probably understands differing points of view on the hobby as much as or more than most here.
You might think that because of his direct writing style and sureness of his choices (I don't know him, just going by how he writes) that it comes with a narrow point of view. I think your perception and judgment is way off.
- Douglas
DoughlessI think your perception and judgment is way off.
maybe not
gregc Doughless I think your perception and judgment is way off. maybe not
Doughless I think your perception and judgment is way off.
In the numerous posts where Sheldon explains his priorities, methods, and decisions; I don't recall him ever advocating that people adopt them; or fails to understand alternatives that are reasonable.
The strong convictions of others can bother some people, usually because the other won't have their mind changed. People then confuse the other's committed decisions with narrowness of mind.
My Modular Club uses DCC. Way more possiblities.
Doughless S AEP528 ATLANTIC CENTRAL And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general. Have you? You must not read enough of Sheldon's posts/conversations. He probably understands differing points of view on the hobby as much as or more than most here. You might think that because of his direct writing style and sureness of his choices (I don't know him, just going by how he writes) that it comes with a narrow point of view. I think your perception and judgment is way off.
S
Sheldon routinely offers his opinion, but is ALWAYS careful to say, usually early, that it's just his druthers in the way he manages his layout, and that he respects, and even dabbles in, the DCC way when he's at the club. I have no recollection of him ever suggesting that we DCC'ers are wrong, misguided, misinformed, or lacking some perspective, except what he offers of his own orientation.
i think we have a different interpretation of
new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic
i'm curious what new understanding people may have realized
gregc i think we have a different interpretation of new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic i'm curious what new understanding people may have realized
How about the simple idea that different goals may result in different solutions?
No matter how many times myself or others state our goals, someone says something like "but it will be harder change later", or "but you can't do X". How many times do you have say "I don't need or want to X", or "once it's built why would I change it?" before people believe it?
Well this time a few seemed to get it, and a few DCC users even explained their own frustrations with doing DCC a bit out of the box.
And I enjoyed listening to the various DCC perspectives that stated their goals without attacking my choices.
And for me, at this point, no matter if my perspective changes a little, I'm not investing the time or money it would take to covert to DCC.
I'm not altering my set of goals.
I've never been a trend follower.
I already own what I need to control my trains and build my signal system.
Greg, you seem almost obsessed with the idea of being able to easily make changes. In 56 years of building model trains, that has not been a big issue for me.
I'm not one to do things in a "temporary" way and have to change them later. Or, to be unhappy with my original design, I have 5 decades of experiance.
And I have no expectation that anyone would want to follow in my footsteps.
But if someone chooses DC and wants advice, I would help them design what they need, not necessarily what I do.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general.
i agree with the statement.
but not criticising a differing view doesn't imply understanding it
something i learned from you is your approach for CTC where the panel logic is distributed in each of your relay nodes instead of being in the panel. i'll be thinking about the for years
ATLANTIC CENTRALGreg, you seem almost obsessed with the idea of being able to easily make changes.
obsessed? (kinda strong)
it's certainly a consideration based on a career in software developement needing to remain flexible and learning to think ahead to acommodate it.
it's certainly the approach of the tech industry to capture logic in easily changeable software rather than fixed hardware. Isn't that what PMF advocated?
do you understand this "view"?
gregc i'm curious what new understanding people may have realized
LINK to SNSR Blog
Robert, what an exceptional analysis of this.
The short answer is yes, years ago I actually started writing a book to outline how the system works and how to build it. I have lots of standard wiring diagrams to follow and explain the basic workings of the system
That said, it would require a learning curve depending on an individuals understanding of traditional relay logic, a backbone of industrial wiring since the late 1800's until other methods started to appear in the 1980's.
Sidebar - in the early 1980's I was heavily involved in the conversion of relay logic into Programable Logic Controller software. So I had to know and understand both.
Back to the trains.
Most of the circuits I use are the same industrial control circuits that have been controlling machinery for 100 years.
Any industrial electrician would recognize them instantly.
And my signals use the same relay logic the prototype used before computers and solid state.
My throttles are a packaged product, out of production now, but similar products are on the market today.
My detectors are a packaged product that has been around this hobby a long time.
I have some custom made circuit boards for some of the most repeated and wiring intense circuits.
I use small industrial "ice cube" relays. They have 5 Amp contacts and a long track record of reliability.
But I'm still not looking for recruits to build copies of my system.
Sounds like you made a pretty large investment in DCC equipment?
I doubt I have spent that much.
I agree, new people generally should go with DCC, unless they have already figured out that it is not in line with their goals.
Robert, maybe I should add, you know the scope of my layout plan better than anyone else on here. Consider how much DCC equipment it would require.
8 radio throttles
Multiple boosters
Only two reverse loop controllers
Signaling support for about 40 blocks
Multi location turnout control for 80 turnouts
145 decoders
Budget estimates anyone?
And if anyone says I don't need to convert all the locos right away I will scream. They are all NECESSARY for the 30 staged trains and the desired operating sessions.
The understanding of perspectives is important because oftentimes these discussions delve straight into the weeds of the different technologies, which tend to assume that only one perspective exists....The perspective of how to run a bunch of trains at the same time within a limited, often too limited, space.
IMO, the problem isn't really with DC, the problem is trying to do too much given the space or trying to satisfy too many operators.
DCC is for model railroading clubs. Take those layouts out of the equation and DCC or DC is a toss up for the typical home layout.
When I Google Earth my prototype inspirational railroad, and dozens of them just like it, its "trackplan" is nothing more than a ribbon of track with a few spurs spread out all over the line. Hardly more than even one runaround on the whole railroad. One train is running on the railorad at a time....not in the same area on the railroad....on the entire railroad.
Dozens of these railroads exist today. Probably hundreds existed during and since the transistion era.
Multiple trains at once...do people actually model that? (tongue in cheek)
I have one block, with a few kill switches for the parking tracks. Power districts? what are those?....
I run DCC. I use kill switches on parking tracks. All of my locos remain addressed to factory 3, because I use parking tracks. Consists stay together, are the same locos from the same manufacturer; so once the direction is set, both locos CVs get set at the same time. There is no addressing of the consist, both locos are 3.
Sheldon's discussions of why he does things, which is a discussion that flies at a higher level than an in the weeds discussion about the technology (IMO)......and adding cultural color along the way into life styles etc...., helps to understand the broader landscape by which we all make choices. THAT is the real value of these discussions, because that helps to open up the understanding about the different kinds of layouts that populate the hobby.
DoughlessDCC is for model railroading clubs. Take those layouts out of the equation and DCC or DC is a toss up for the typical home layout.
i believe there are many home layouts that have operating sessions with ~6 operators where DCC simplifies the wiring as well as the operation by avoiding the need to switch blocks and allowing multiple locomotives to operate near one another (e.g. yards)
gregc Doughless DCC is for model railroading clubs. Take those layouts out of the equation and DCC or DC is a toss up for the typical home layout. i believe there are many home layouts that have operating sessions with ~6 operators where DCC simplifies the wiring as well as the operation by avoiding the need to switch blocks and allowing multiple locomotives to operate near one another (e.g. yards)
Doughless DCC is for model railroading clubs. Take those layouts out of the equation and DCC or DC is a toss up for the typical home layout.
Partially agreed. I agree that it would make the wiring simpler for a layout that was trying to satisfy that many operators.
I have no way of agreeing with the idea that satisyfing 6 operators is the typical home layout. I would describe that layout as a club layout...even though its technically not a club. I'm assuming its not the typical home layout.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Robert, maybe I should add, you know the scope of my layout plan better than anyone else on here. Consider how much DCC equipment it would require. 8 radio throttles Multiple boosters Only two reverse loop controllers Signaling support for about 40 blocks Multi location turnout control for 80 turnouts 145 decoders Budget estimates anyone? And if anyone says I don't need to convert all the locos right away I will scream. They are all NECESSARY for the 30 staged trains and the desired operating sessions. Sheldon
Yes, I do have a pretty fair understanding of the scope of your layout. And I also have a pretty fair understanding of mine. I can see the huge task involved with converting your layout to DCC, and I would never begin to suggest that. And comparing our layouts wouldn't get us very far, either.
I am a fidgeter at heart, and I do not see things in terms of money. I realize money is a very important consideration, and my philosophy is difficult to explain, but in general, to me, my time is more valuable than my money. I would not shy at the prospect of buying 145 decoders (well, not shy too much), but I would absolutely panic at the amount of time it would take to retrofit and install 145 decoders. Not to mention the added fun of working in N Scale. Most of my 40 or 50 locomotives have factory-installed decoders. Four or five have sound, which I rarely use.
I have two AR-1 reversing controllers (about $35 each) and two boosters that do double duty as power districts and auto-reversers (about $100 each), all of which was very easy to install and bring online.
I have about 40 signaling blocks, and the detection circuit boards and signal controller boards add up to about $600 or $800. But the real expense for signaling was the cost of the signal towers themselves (right now I have about 60, and I am still a good 20 or so short). But whatever cost is associated with the hardware, it is insignificant compared to the amount of time I spent figuring out how to design and install and configure a signaling system that I was satisfied with. JMRI. I don't begrudge the cost, and the time has been completely enjoyable. A fidgeter.
Robert
Robert, agreed. The prospect of installing 145 decoders is much more of a barrier than the cost of them.
As for cost, part of my cost concern is not wasting money already invested, not so much the price structure of the ne items.
Same reason I will not replace older rolling stock
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general. i agree with the statement. but not criticising a differing view doesn't imply understanding it something i learned from you is your approach for CTC where the panel logic is distributed in each of your relay nodes instead of being in the panel. i'll be thinking about the for years ATLANTIC CENTRAL Greg, you seem almost obsessed with the idea of being able to easily make changes. obsessed? (kinda strong) it's certainly a consideration based on a career in software developement needing to remain flexible and learning to think ahead to acommodate it. it's certainly the approach of the tech industry to capture logic in easily changeable software rather than fixed hardware. Isn't that what PMF advocated? do you understand this "view"?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Greg, you seem almost obsessed with the idea of being able to easily make changes.
What/who is PMF?
Yes I understand the advantages of software in the real word, remember I installed some of the earliest programable logic controllers.
I'm not running a factory at GM here, or a water water pumping station, it's a train set.
Doughless gregc Doughless DCC is for model railroading clubs. Take those layouts out of the equation and DCC or DC is a toss up for the typical home layout. i believe there are many home layouts that have operating sessions with ~6 operators where DCC simplifies the wiring as well as the operation by avoiding the need to switch blocks and allowing multiple locomotives to operate near one another (e.g. yards) Partially agreed. I agree that it would make the wiring simpler for a layout that was trying to satisfy that many operators. I have no way of agreeing with the idea that satisyfing 6 operators is the typical home layout. I would put that kind of layout into the bucket of a club layout...even though its technically not a club...so I'm assuming its not the typical home layout.
I have no way of agreeing with the idea that satisyfing 6 operators is the typical home layout. I would put that kind of layout into the bucket of a club layout...even though its technically not a club...so I'm assuming its not the typical home layout.
Greg, if you mean letting 6 operators loose with no dispatcher and possibly no signals to just roam around a layout and visually not crash into each other, then yes, DCC is much better and much less wiring. I will quickly and willingly conceed that.
Again, that is outside my desired operating goals.
Doug, I understand your point, but you might be very surprised at the number of 1500 to 2500 Sq ft home layouts out there. Within a short drive from my home I could take you to dozens.
Compared to a number of private layouts near me, mine is only "average" in size.
ATLANTIC CENTRALMost of the circuits I use are the same industrial control circuits that have been controlling machinery for 100 years.
one of the last relay logic guys retired when i started working in 1985 at Bell Labs. relay logic got replaced by transistors, TTL, ASIC and ultimately processors. (far from complete list)
power relays may be used today, if not MOSFETs, but relay logic isn't that common
ATLANTIC CENTRALBudget estimates anyone?
is this a challenge?
this seems like a justification for your approach. You've made it abundantly clear that you have what you need to complete your layout the way you want and know how to do it. No one is arguing with you.
but since you asked -- i'll ask what the replacement cost is for what you're doing? todays cost for the components (e.g relays) wireless throttles, ... and how much time to build your nodes scratch?
would it be comparable to a DC layout using electronics/processor tech instead of your relay nodes? (notice DCC is not the issue)
ATLANTIC CENTRALWhat/who is PMF?
PM RailfanDCC systems are finite in that they can only do what they do from the factory. Thats it. A PC can be programmed to do that, and so much more. Its infinite compared to finite.
sorry, PMR
ATLANTIC CENTRALYes I understand the advantages of software in the real word, remember I installed some of the earliest programable logic controllers.
perhaps you don't realize that todays logic is not just programmable, but field programmable. It can be reprogrammed in place with just a cable plugged into it
ATLANTIC CENTRALI'm not running a factory at GM here, or a water water pumping station, it's a train set.
but model RRs do change: finally adding signalling, new track, blocks, power districts, more signals, ... my 17 year old club is adding a new warehouse with ~5 spurs
maybe you're one of the few who can plan a complete model RR without any desire or expectation to change it. but many others don't.
ATLANTIC CENTRALGreg, if you mean letting 6 operators loose with no dispatcher and possibly no signals to just roam around a layout and visually not crash into each other, then yes, DCC is much better and much less wiring. I will quickly and willingly conceed that.
at an early OP session i attended there were
one of the operators would run an interlocking tower selecting routes
passenger ops was even more interesting because electric/diesel engines needed to be swapped, commuter trains put in coach yards
but from what i've heard, 6 is about max for a home layout
AEP528 ATLANTIC CENTRAL And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general.
ATLANTIC CENTRALDoug, I understand your point, but you might be very surprised at the number of 1500 to 2500 Sq ft home layouts out there. Within a short drive from my home I could take you to dozens. Compared to a number of private layouts near me, mine is only "average" in size. I'm not running a factory at GM here, or a water water pumping station, it's a train set.
We have spoken before about how size is not synonymous with complex, so I want to keep my comment focused on the 6 operator idea.
I would say that if your group of friends all have layouts that can support 5 to 6 operators, they are not typical home layouts. But that's a matter of experience and social circles.
Here in the ATL area, the Piedmont Division of the NMRA often will host a tour of members' layouts. Only a few home layouts that I've seen are very big. And of course, the bigger and more complex layouts are the ones that sign up for the tour, nobody signs up to show off their shelf switching layout, but even those are not on the scale of yours or your friends' layouts.
To your second point, yes, its a train set. That is a point that sometimes gets lost in these discussions.
I invest in equipment, knowledge, and experience over the years and the culmination of that is to build a layout that you then operate. If it works, then enjoy it. In order to use that investment, I don't have to keep updating the technology like you might your PC.
sheldon, don't take this the wrong way, i appreciate your thoughts and would love to meet you
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL Most of the circuits I use are the same industrial control circuits that have been controlling machinery for 100 years. one of the last relay logic guys retired when i started working in 1985 at Bell Labs. relay logic got replaced by transistors, TTL, ASIC and ultimately processors. (far from complete list) power relays may be used today, if not MOSFETs, but relay logic isn't that common ATLANTIC CENTRAL Budget estimates anyone? is this a challenge? this seems like a justification for your approach. You've made it abundantly clear that you have what you need to complete your layout the way you want and know how to do it. No one is arguing with you. but since you asked -- i'll ask what the replacement cost is for what you're doing? todays cost for the components (e.g relays) wireless throttles, ... and how much time to build your nodes scratch? would it be comparable to a DC layout using electronics/processor tech instead of your relay nodes? (notice DCC is not the issue) ATLANTIC CENTRAL What/who is PMF? PM Railfan DCC systems are finite in that they can only do what they do from the factory. Thats it. A PC can be programmed to do that, and so much more. Its infinite compared to finite. sorry, PMR ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes I understand the advantages of software in the real word, remember I installed some of the earliest programable logic controllers. perhaps you don't realize that todays logic is not just programmable, but field programmable. It can be reprogrammed in place with just a cable plugged into it ATLANTIC CENTRAL I'm not running a factory at GM here, or a water water pumping station, it's a train set. but model RRs do change: finally adding signalling, new track, blocks, power districts, more signals, ... my 17 year old club is adding a new warehouse with ~5 spurs maybe you're one of the few who can plan a complete model RR without any desire or expectation to change it. but many others don't. ATLANTIC CENTRAL Greg, if you mean letting 6 operators loose with no dispatcher and possibly no signals to just roam around a layout and visually not crash into each other, then yes, DCC is much better and much less wiring. I will quickly and willingly conceed that. at an early OP session i attended there were yard switcher engine hostler & part time yard switcher 2 people switching an industrial switching area 2 engineers moving trains to/from staging one of the operators would run an interlocking tower selecting routes passenger ops was even more interesting because electric/diesel engines needed to be swapped, commuter trains put in coach yards but from what i've heard, 6 is about max for a home layout AEP528 ATLANTIC CENTRAL And maybe this has helped the group reach a new level of understanding of the differing views on this topic and on the hobby in general.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Most of the circuits I use are the same industrial control circuits that have been controlling machinery for 100 years.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Budget estimates anyone?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL What/who is PMF?
PM Railfan DCC systems are finite in that they can only do what they do from the factory. Thats it. A PC can be programmed to do that, and so much more. Its infinite compared to finite.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes I understand the advantages of software in the real word, remember I installed some of the earliest programable logic controllers.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I'm not running a factory at GM here, or a water water pumping station, it's a train set.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Greg, if you mean letting 6 operators loose with no dispatcher and possibly no signals to just roam around a layout and visually not crash into each other, then yes, DCC is much better and much less wiring. I will quickly and willingly conceed that.
First, there is no problem between us, I too hope we can get together in person at some point.
Second, to be clear, the relay was invented in 1835 and was applied to machine controls by the 1880's. 1880 to 1980 - 100 years.
Yes, the 1980's was the end of major new installations of control relay logic. I was there on the cutting edge of PLC's.
But it took decades for relays to effectively all be replaced. Just like railroad signal systems that are just now being totally modernized on the prototype.
Budget estimate - you missed a key fact from Robert, he got into the hobby and into DCC 15 years ago. 15-20 years ago was when I was first considering DCC and then decided to develop my current system.
DCC was different then, lots of the products you suggest today were just in their earliest stages and not known to everyone. Costs for lot of DCC hardware was higher, methods were not yet developed and tested like they are now.
Today, my system would cost more, and yes DCC costs less now.
That's great for new people, same new people I generally recommend they go DCC, but again it offers me no motivation to replace what I have, or learn stuff I have not kept up with.
For what I want to do, what I have is not broken. I generally do not replace useful things that are not broken.
Yes, I understand that modern approaches are field programable. Now 40 years later, I have long been out of that business and not kept up with that technology. And honestly, have no interest in relearning it.
Changes - I do understand how many others approach this hobby. I was behind the counter of a model train store from age 14 to age 22 learning all about their different approaches to this hobby.
And I have belonged to a number of clubs, designed layouts for friends, helped them build those layouts, and them operated on those layouts.
I have many, many hours running trains with DCC. And was partly involved wiring a few of them for DCC.
I know lots of people don't really know what they want, or, they change their mind. And you are correct, I'm not like that, I know what I want.
Or they simply start out accepting that it will be a "figure it out as they go" process. Good for them, that's ok, and DCC is best for them, and if they get into signaling or whatever, your approaches are best for them. In one way or another I have agreed with you on this before.
But after 56 years of "exploration" I don't approach the hobby that way, and likely never did to the degree that many do. What goes on at clubs has no bearing on my approach to the hobby.
Maybe the point that I have not been clear about is that my approach is more than just a DC control system.
It is a whole layout building philosophy:
Left is west - East is right
Being "inside" the "loop" of track, always viewing the track from the "same" side everywhere on the layout.
Low density of track to scenery - lots of scenery "depth"
"Staged" operations - lots of hidden storage
Very little "switching" on the mainline.
Most "switching" on imbeded ISL within primary mainline layout.
When I watch real trains on occassion, I seldom see several different locomotive crews working within close proximity to each other. Work rules and signals seem to prevent/minimize this. My layout is designed in a similar manner.
Large curves, long trains, reinforced by selective compression.
I would do all these things the same with DCC as the control method.
The features of DCC have never temped me to change my approach to the hobby, not even a little.
Operations - every layout is different, they are structured different regarding operations, there is no "textbook" example to go by. 56 years and hundreds of layouts visited (personal and clubs) has taught me that.
Better understanding - well yes, lots of people explained their reasons rather than just tell me how wrong I am. That was a pleasent switch from years ago. I think I already had a lot of that knowledge, but it was good to have it expanded on. And nice to be at least casually brought up to date on some improvments and enhancements that did not exist when I first considered DCC.
Evening
It was 1974.
I'm a blockhead and that's what made the layout fun.
The control panel schematic of the layout, switching blocks to run trains. One needs something more to do.
Do ya suppose what was round back then should come back round again?
Agreeable!
I'm thinking it should just be kept the same.
Old School
TF
DoughlessI would say that if your group of friends all have layouts that can support 5 to 6 operators, they are not typical home layouts. But that's a matter of experience and social circles.
When I was in College in Nashville, there were about a dozen layouts I knew of that could host six or more operators. That became my goal.
Back in Florida most layouts could really only handle three or four.
Now, I know of none (other than two club layouts) that can handle more than three.
Times change. If I built a layout that needed six operators, I seriously doubt I could ever get that many.
Yes, One can't forget about Lone Wolf and Friends.
SeeYou190 Doughless I would say that if your group of friends all have layouts that can support 5 to 6 operators, they are not typical home layouts. But that's a matter of experience and social circles. When I was in College in Nashville, there were about a dozen layouts I knew of that could host six or more operators. That became my goal. Back in Florida most layouts could really only handle three or four. Now, I know of none (other than two club layouts) that can handle more than three. Times change. If I built a layout that needed six operators, I seriously doubt I could ever get that many. -Kevin
Doughless I would say that if your group of friends all have layouts that can support 5 to 6 operators, they are not typical home layouts. But that's a matter of experience and social circles.
Really? The Round Robin group I was in has 12-15 people at someones house every week, and a total roster of participants numbering over 20.
And that is just one group that covers about a 10 mile radius.
A few calls and I could have a dozen operators on a weeks notice around here.
Come October, this organization will have a full schedule of open houses in the Baltimore/Philli/Willmington area every weekend in November and December. Typically 5-8 layouts every weekend, generally grouped so you can easily see them all.
https://www.modelrailroadopenhouse.com/index.html
There are club layouts, museum displays, roundrobins and modular groups all over this region.
And contrary to the experiance of others, lots of basement filling home layouts.