Switch controls on a very small layout

Matt, I _can only speak for my system_ and the throttle I use (Digitrax and DT400). If you check out the DT400 on the Digitrax site you can see the panel (buttons) on that throttle and follow. There will be a number of pushes, first push a button to "switch mode"*. Second you must enter the switch number, and third you push either "thrown"* or "closed"* to change the switch. Nothing happening to the engine controls while you are doing this. To go back to the engine controls (out of switch mode) you can either move the throttle a notch or push exit.

While Jon is telling the truth, he is not telling the whole truth. Going into switch mode on a DCC handheld does not affect the engine controls. That much is true.

-BUT- It also means that your engine is off in never-never land running on autopilot with no control at all. You cannot send commands to your locomotive while you are in switch mode, because you can only be in one mode at any moment in time. If you need to stop, change speed, or if anything goes wrong while you are in switch mode, well, that's just too bad. Sorry. There's nothing you can do about it.

I do not think that it is such a good thing to try to make a handheld unit that can do everything possible to control the whole layout. IMO that area of DCC has gone "overboard". There is just no sense whatever in making operation of the accessory features so cumbersome and memory intensive.

Some people like being able to perform many different functions from the handheld unit. We are all different in that respect. I do not like switching modes while my locomotive is running, and I do not always want or need to stop in order to perform some of them. Throwing turnouts is one of those functions.

I really like using DCC to control the trains. For almost everything else, there are better ways.

A True Believer:

Captain Handbrake

Actually, I muich prefer to use a diode matrix to throw turnouts in a yard configuration. With this method, you just hit the button for the track you are wanting to shove the cars into and the route is fully thrown for that track from the yard lead. Cheap and easy to do.

-- Why isn't there an Ozone Hole at the NORTH Pole?

I hate trying to use the controller to try to throw switches. It is a pain in the butt. I don't have any wings either so my butt stays sore all the time. I don't need the aggravation of trying to make a simple job hard by misusing technology. I don't think I like the idea of using computers either. I don't have one and am not all that keen on getting one. Now, don't get me wrong. I think the whole idea of DCC is pretty good, but I also think that it is not the only and complete thing to end all things that you need to run your layout.

........F>

Aw, c'mon Jon, you know what I mean I have this one, but I don't have one for running my trains. I mean, I don't want one either. I don't like automation. I think it's a hobby all of its own. The hands on aspect is one of the things that makes it fun for me. Did you know that I do not use magnetic uncoupling? Nope, I don't. I cut those little thingies right off the bottom of the Kadee couplers and use little 2mm diameter bamboo skewers about 4 inches long that I get at the market.

........F>

Try using Team Digital's SRC8 swith & route controllers to make neat panels that only have 12vdc and Loconet connections to the layout. You can set up 8 switches & 8 routes in each SCR8. The run $40 at Loys Toys and other discounters. Thats only $5.00 per switch. Works great on a Digitrax layout. Larry in Colorado

I use my (MR) computer to take over those tasks which are non-prototypical, and those which one operator could not/should not do on the prototype. Some parts of that may be 'automation', but that automation is there to simulate more realistic operation and to enable me to take on roles that would not be available to me if I were the entire railway workforce.

That's not going to work if you have any track further than 2 feet from the front of the layout.

Regards, Greg.P.

Here is another concept for you guys to mull over. On Tony's Train Exchange site Don Fiehmann writes about a train cam. This is one of the end statements.

"With a computer program like Decoder Pro and the TV set next to the computer you could run a train and watch out the cab window. You could see the signals and position of the turnouts before you get to them."

Bottom line here is with the train cam you could operate a RR just as if you were setting in the cab. I guess you could have a switchman with you but the ability to operate switches from the handheld _might_ be useful. The concept here is you would only see the RR from the cab (looking at a TV screen) and not be walking along with your train. Sorta of like running a train simulator but in reality operating your own RR! Thoughts?

That my be true for you, but it doesn't apply to me. My preferred style of operation doesn't require any of the kinds of duties that a computer is good for. If that were to ever change, then I might consider one. They are very handy if you can use them.

It's not going to work at all if you can't move with your train and you can't reach every place where you might want to uncouple a car. No one thing works equally well for everyone. Everyone needs to realize that and be governed accordingly. For those who enjoy a lot of car switching and spotting, and who have the luxury of being able to move with their train, the manual style of uncoupling is wonderful. For those who cannot move with the train, for what ever reason, be it layout design, disability, or what ever, the magnetic method is the only game in town. In fact, some people have even told me that they actually prefer to use magnets, even though their use is not mandated by any other requirement. That is the part I cannot fathom. Why would you want to use them if you didn't have to? Oh well, diff'rent strokes............

........F>

My thought: A lot of people would find that entertaining, but it's not for me.

........F>

entire railway

It's something of a concern, but my computer can operate trains rather better than I can! ;-)

front of the

Sure - I'm disabled, so my layout isn't designed with walking in mind. I can roll around on an office type chair to where I want to go, but it's not great fun.

I designed my own couplers - Kadees look nothing like European couplers (major advantage lost) and they require major surgery of European stock (resale value destroyed).

They uncouple the rolling stock without hastle!?! ;-)

Regards, Greg.P.

Froggy scribbled:

(Scratching head) Interesting. That I consider them (magnets) a major hassle is why I neuter the couplers and don't have magnets.

Well, you know what they say about one man's treasure............

........F>

Lots of insightful opinions and suggestions regarding switch control and the many methods available. Great thread!

As for the train camera, I would not opt for that approach. It sort of defeats all the efforts that went into detailing and scenicing the layout. I would think that the camera would greatly minimize the view of this work. My guess is that the camera only looks forward, whereas a real train operator would be able to look from side to side, ahead, and possibly back [to some degree] - taking in whatever sites caught his or her interest. Similiarly, walking along with the train you are operating would allow you to take in all of the layout from the most significant to the most insignificant details.

Other than main line operations, am I correct in thinking that many branchline trains [era specific] stop to manually throw a switch. If so, it would make sense to then stop the model before a switch is thrown as well. This "stop time" would certainly allow for the button sequence to be carried out on the DCC, hand held controller. I merely offer this opinion as a way to justify the time needed to use the DCC unit if that is one's choice. It would alleviate the concern of a train running, unattended, while the DCC hand held controller was in a different mode [operating a switch].

I think any layout that exceeds a module in size is most likely conducive to a variety of switch options as dictated by switch locations on the layout. I have only drawn a potential layout on paper. However, if it were to become a reality, I am sure that I would use some Tortoise machines via a toggle switch, *maybe* some DCC decoders via the hand held, and some manual, slide switches via my hand to throw the many switches that I have included in the track plan. Location is the deciding factor in most of these choices, however I am also in favor of some hands on interaction with the layout [train] as well. In my planning, the Tortoise machines would handle any and all switches that were furthest from the aisle [beyond my reach] as well as switches that were partially obstructed from my view by a building, by a mountain, etc. Slide switches would be used in all cases where I could easily reach the switch. I have not used or seen a DCC decoder operate a switch so I am unable to determine if this is an option that I would choose. I could see its advantage over a Tortoise machine in a busy area where there are MANY toggle switches on the fascia. That may present just as much time to select the correct toggle switch as it would take to use the DCC decoder [button sequence].

------------------------

Given the heading of this thread, "Switch controls on a very small layout", I would think the slide switch approach is the optimal choice. You can reach all the switches by hand, and the slide switch allows you to power the frog, activate LED direction lights, and/or etc.

real train operator would be able to look from side to side, ahead, and possibly back [to some degree]< True it only looks forward. But with micro motors and DCC I sure some craftmans could make a swivel mount controlled by a DCC decoder that would allow the camera to move from side to side. Just another facet of the hobby that might interest some.

The fatal flaw in that reasoning is that it is precisely the action of operating the controller to throw turnouts that is awkward and cumbersome. It doesn't matter whether you stop the train or not. The root issue is that the controller/stationary decoder combination is a poor and expensive way to operate turnouts. Almost any other method you can think of works better and costs less.

You would soon discover that you don't like using the controller to operate switches. Almost everyone does eventually.

If you did, I am guessing that it wouldn't be long before you changed your mind. Been there, done that. Have the T-shirt.

I rather doubt it. There is just something irritating about fumbling around with the controller to do other things besides run the train. Some people don't have a problem with it. I do. So do most of the users that I know.

----------------------------------- Time flies like an arrow Fruit flies like a banana

........F>

I'm still scratching my head over why they would be a major hassle.

Greg.P.

If your old enough to remember before the days of remote control, one of the few things we had was ELECTRIC TRAINS. I still use the Kaydee under the ties magnets because they provide some "hands off" operation. I install my mainline magnets so they can slide out of the way or lift up and down to eliminate unwanted uncoupling. This takes away the frustration of their existence. Thru, I need to uncouple cars and engines in other areas, then I use the skewer tool.

use magnets, even

the part I cannot

I disagree with all but, the looking forward. Cameras are fun and give yet another view of the layout. Nothing prevents you from looking at the layout instead of the monitor. The camera may actually show you a more interesting view of the layout detail wise.

Paul

magnets, even

part I cannot

Pity you can't fly up here and operate on a local layout...major urban railroad district, dozens of industries and switching everywhere.

Either you put magnets everywhere so you can switch near each industry, or you do a lot of forward and backward to shove cars from a remote magnet into a siding/spur.

Owner chose the former. Lots of magnets, so they're all convenient, but every time you stop a train, you are over two or three magnets. Thus, when you pull forward, your train has disassembled itself, and must be put back together every time you make a meet. If that isn't a textbook definition of a hassle, I don't know what is.

Thing is, it's a sectionaal/modular layout. No module over 30" wide, no place unreachable with a bamboo skewer.