N Gauge newbie lost in a sea of DC wiring ideas trying to model locations from my youth (1950-60s Crawley, Sx)

[mjfjo]

Hello and thank you in advance if anybody can help.

I have noticed many helpful posts on here for struggling beginners of which I am very much one! In my youth (40 years ago) I did model a small N Gauge US layout and then thought nothing of the hobby in the intervening years. However a few weeks ago while on a local walk I thought I would like to model the area around my local (Crawley, West Sussex) station roughly around the late 1950s. I am not too bothered about complete prototypical accuracy but rather to capture locations around the Railway Hotel stables where my Dad worked a carpentry workshop in one of the coachhouses behind the station (the original long gone station). Also the goods yard at the time had some interest and also James Longley works where my Dad also worked and other parts of town. So my interest is as much in my local history allied to family history as to complete railway authenticity but I would like to create the double track working and also the sidings in a useable configuration.

I also want "roundy roundy" with the other side of the layout maybe giving a hint of the Sussex countryside and I have also drafted a third outer line with some designs on running the Arnold Brighton Belle set around here (with maybe an approximation of part of Three Bridges station to the far right of layout plan).

I started to lay some Streamline code 80 in the station area but then I read things about Cab control, setting blocks/sections and called a halt before I get too far and make expensive difficult to correct mistakes, as finances are very tight and I have already committed more than I meant to.
on the mainline lines I was planning to use streamline medium or long points with some small setrack points in some of the tighter sidings. Tightest curve I have so far is 12 inch for inner Up line.

I am now totally bewildered as to how to wire the layout, originally thinking I could just do what I did 40 years ago and install one track feed and away I went! I have bought Gaugemaster D twin track and also a Combi, but now wondering if I have made a mistake and should have gone for DCC with maybe less complex wiring (but more expense)?

Already totally confused as although I like the train running side I am as keen to model the locations of my youth as anything.

Appreciate any ideas, thought from those more experienced (everybody I would think). I have attached a sort of draft layout if it helps. One final thing, have there ever been any EMU units of the type 2-BIL in BR green modelled in N Gauge?

Thanks

Mike

 

[jpendle]

Hi,

 

First, Peco Code 55 is much better than Code 80 as it is more robust and has a slightly more accurate profile. Setrack points are very unrealistic and some longer N Gauge locos may not like them.

 

Second, DCC wiring is no more or less complex than DC wiring, the "only 2-wires for DCC" thing is a gross exaggeration.

 

Having said that, my N Gauge layout uses DCC and I would strongly recommend DCC for anyone starting out from scratch.

 

As far as the wiring goes, then we really need to get an idea of your level of expertise with electrics as that will determine our answers.

 

Also a minimum radius of 12" is good, some loco's will struggle below that.

 

Regards,

 

John P

[mjfjo]

Many thanks for the quick reply John, my observations on it as follows:

I had seen comparisons between Code 55 and 80 but although still difficult to source at the time 80 was available in limited quantity whereas 55 seemed less so, and unfortunately once I get an idea I am rather impatient to get going! Also as mentioned originally cost is a factor and also I am not going to get too hung up on the total realism aspect when i am running trains locos that are two or three inches long. Maybe if/when I build my next layout after making all my mistakes on this one!?

 

Any setrack points might be used on small sidings being used by a Terrier or similar, they were available when I bought my initial supplies, but I do have streamline to use on main lines.

I did used to fix computers and peripherals but have forgotten most if not all I learnt, but can still solder (have fitted a few feed wires to the bottoms of rails - but unsure do I need on all portions of track, when do I split into sections etc?).

Ideally I would like to run seperate trains on both main lines and also (if/when finances permit) the outer perimeter Brighton Belle line which I suppose will have some link into the rest of the layout?

I think if I hadnt jumped in I would probably have gone down the DCC route, but not sure I can change course now, athough that is one of the reasons I have downed tools and tried to get some advice before any changes are cost prohibitive (they may already be a problem).

By the way I do not envisage any working signalling and initially I will probably have to go with manually controlled points.

Many Thanks

Mike

[RobinofLoxley]

A lot of questions here. I have myself been through a year or so of learning to understand DCC by following relevant threads on here, which costs only your time. People will help you provided you are amenable to being helped.

 

My first point is that the difference between DCC and DC wiring is not the focus of your activities, it is the amount of time you will spend to have a layout that operates reliably. The more feeds that you have, the less you are relying on fishplate joints to carry current or signal. The more individual feeds the better, with special attention to points. The soldering isnt that difficult and since it is repetitive, if you first few efforts arent that good, practice will soon see you improve both in accuracy and speed.

 

As far as accurate scenery is concerned, I have quite  large layout fottprint and I accept trade-offs between the amount of scenery that is needed and its quality, especially as scenery can easily be revisited when trains are running. The layout style you are planning would be able to be divided into scenic and non scenic areas. And model building can be practiced without much damage, I would say there is more expertise here on building models than operating trains, just my opinion.

 

Good luck and welcome to the house of fun

[ITG]

I’d say, and this is not relevant to only N, but is based on my own experience (actually in 00). One of the key balancing act compromises is what you want or can accept today, versus what you might wish to aspire to in future.  Short term, early decisions (maybe on factors like set track v flexi track, live v dead frogs, DC v DCC, speed of getting to run trains v taking your time to get things (close to) right. - all these things are actually tricky decisions in the early stages. But what you will wish to avoid is looking at your layout in a few months time, and thinking “I wish I’d done x instead of y”.... because by that time you will have spent lots of time and money, some of which will be a sound investment, but other aspects will be spent and gone.

I restarted in this hobby a couple of years ago after a multi-decade gap, and I’m so glad I put myself through a steep learning curve, rather than stick to what I thought I knew. This meant I swung from my initial position on set track to flexi, from Dc to DCC, from dead to live frogs etc. Although thinking and planning seems like it’s not real progress, believe me, I found it so valuable. The best time to make the big decisions is right at the start.

[Dungrange]

5 hours ago, mjfjo said:

I started to lay some Streamline code 80 in the station area but then I read things about Cab control, setting blocks/sections and called a halt before I get too far and make expensive difficult to correct mistakes.

 

I am now totally bewildered as to how to wire the layout, originally thinking I could just do what I did 40 years ago and install one track feed and away I went! I have bought Gaugemaster D twin track and also a Combi, but now wondering if I have made a mistake and should have gone for DCC with maybe less complex wiring (but more expense)?

 

 

That's a relatively simple track plan, so shouldn't be that difficult to wire up as either DC or DCC.  The principles of wiring a DC layout haven't changed in 40 years.

 

You have an outer circuit that doesn't seem to be connected to the rest of the layout.  In theory, all you need is two wires to that track circuit (DC or DCC).  The fishplates then distribute the power around the whole circuit.  The issue is that the fishplates can become loose over time, and therefore you end up with the circuit being broken by dirt between the rail and the fishplate.  For those who crave reliability, the best way to overcome this is to ensure that every piece of track has it's own feed soldered directly the bottom of the rail, as that builds in redundancy.  DCC users are more likely to run a 'power bus' and connect a dropper wire to that from every piece of track, but the same practise is just as valid with DC.  However, it is not essential: just good practise for reliable running.  If you don't do that and you get a problem later, the problem can be sorted then: it's just not so easy to hide the new wire that you solder in place to bypass the loose fishplate.

 

On that outer circuit, do you want to just run one train, or do you want to run more than one train?  If you are only going to be running one train, then you only need one section.  If however you want to control two trains on the same circuit, then you need to split the circuit up into sections.  Cab control is just the name given to the switches that you use to decide which controller you will use to supply power to each section.  These can either be Double Pole Double Throw (DPDT) (or Single Pole Double Throw (SPDT) if you are using common return wiring) if you want to choose between two controllers, or rotary switches if you want to choose between all three of the controllers that you have.  The common terminals on the switch are connected to the track section and the terminals on either side of the switch are connected to your controllers, so that when the switch is to the left, power is supplied from controller A and when the switch is to the right, power is supplied from controller B.  Cab control is no more complicated than that.

 

For your inner circuits, the wiring is marginally more complicated, but the key point to remember is that you should always be feeding a track section from the 'toe' or switch end of a turnout. You'll likely need insulated (plastic) rail joiners between the turnouts that make up your crossovers, so that your inner two circuits are electrically separate.  The same would apply between the inner circuit and the sidings that you have to the right of the station.  How many sections you divide the inner circuits up into depends on how you intend to operate the layout.  If you're just letting trains run round and round, then one or two sections per circuit plus one for the sidings to the right of the station is probably all you need.  However, if you plan on changing locos in the station or adding a banker (probably not in your location), then you'd want additional sections in the station to facilitate these sort of moves.

 

One comment on your track plan is that you don't seem to have anywhere to store the trains that you are not running - ie you don't have a fiddle yard.  That may be intentional, but without a fiddle yard, you're probably limited to having about three or four locomotives on the layout at the same time. 

[Kris]

18 hours ago, mjfjo said:

One final thing, have there ever been any EMU units of the type 2-BIL in BR green modelled in N Gauge?

 

Some EMUs have been made rtr but currently only second hand. They were not 2-bil's but 4-cep.

 

 

[mjfjo]

15 hours ago, RobinofLoxley said:

A lot of questions here. I have myself been through a year or so of learning to understand DCC by following relevant threads on here, which costs only your time. People will help you provided you are amenable to being helped.

 

My first point is that the difference between DCC and DC wiring is not the focus of your activities, it is the amount of time you will spend to have a layout that operates reliably. The more feeds that you have, the less you are relying on fishplate joints to carry current or signal. The more individual feeds the better, with special attention to points. The soldering isnt that difficult and since it is repetitive, if you first few efforts arent that good, practice will soon see you improve both in accuracy and speed.

 

As far as accurate scenery is concerned, I have quite  large layout fottprint and I accept trade-offs between the amount of scenery that is needed and its quality, especially as scenery can easily be revisited when trains are running. The layout style you are planning would be able to be divided into scenic and non scenic areas. And model building can be practiced without much damage, I would say there is more expertise here on building models than operating trains, just my opinion.

 

Good luck and welcome to the house of fun

Many thanks for taking the time to reply. I am leaning towards adding in more track feeds as soldering is one skill I seem to have retained, its what to do with all the wires when they have been soldered I am worried about, particularly with regards to sections and where I could feasibly put insulated joiners.

The scenery, model building side of things is the area I am looking forward to the most, which is why I have kept the track layout relatively simple (albeit not seeming very simple to me at the moment!).

I will continue to try and learn but having watched countless You Tube videos and read many of the threads on here I am still struggling to pick up a common thread on DC wiring my layout, but will soldier on.

Thanks Again

Mike

[mjfjo]

14 hours ago, ITG said:

I’d say, and this is not relevant to only N, but is based on my own experience (actually in 00). One of the key balancing act compromises is what you want or can accept today, versus what you might wish to aspire to in future.  Short term, early decisions (maybe on factors like set track v flexi track, live v dead frogs, DC v DCC, speed of getting to run trains v taking your time to get things (close to) right. - all these things are actually tricky decisions in the early stages. But what you will wish to avoid is looking at your layout in a few months time, and thinking “I wish I’d done x instead of y”.... because by that time you will have spent lots of time and money, some of which will be a sound investment, but other aspects will be spent and gone.

I restarted in this hobby a couple of years ago after a multi-decade gap, and I’m so glad I put myself through a steep learning curve, rather than stick to what I thought I knew. This meant I swung from my initial position on set track to flexi, from Dc to DCC, from dead to live frogs etc. Although thinking and planning seems like it’s not real progress, believe me, I found it so valuable. The best time to make the big decisions is right at the start.

I agree pretty much with all of your comments, but having read many threads, viewed 100s of You Tube videos, read books, magazines you have to make some sort of step forward and I have also to be realistic about finances and skill level and also the fact that a big part of my desire for my layout is the scene building, local history side of things. Flexi track (but I think code 80 as quite alot purchased already)will be the mainstay as will DC wiring (controllers already purchased) once I can fathom out sections, cab control wiring. I am sure there will be regrets but I can then apply that knowledge in future hopefully to a future layout?

Many Thanks

Mike

[KingEdwardII]

4 minutes ago, mjfjo said:

its what to do with all the wires when they have been soldered

With DCC, this is the part that is really simple. All that is necessary in DCC is to connect up the droppers from the track to a single set of bus wires that you run from one end of your layout to the other. Job done.

 

With DC, you have to worry about creating track sections and having the means to control power going to each section. This usually demands a control panel with lots of switches and wiring that goes from the control panel to each section of track. For anything other than a simple layout, this soon becomes a rats nest and requires a great deal of planning and discipline.

 

I came back to modelling recently but I have found that DCC can simplify some things enormously as well as providing some capabilities very hard to provide with DC. DCC is worth the effort and cost, in my experience.

 

Yours, Mike.

[mjfjo]

1 hour ago, Kris said:

 

Some EMUs have been made rtr but currently only second hand. They were not 2-bil's but 4-cep.

 

 

Thanks for your reply, thats what I was afraid of a shame as one of the staple services I remember as a boy running through our station.

Regards

Mike

[ITG]

2 hours ago, mjfjo said:

I agree pretty much with all of your comments, but having read many threads, viewed 100s of You Tube videos, read books, magazines you have to make some sort of step forward and I have also to be realistic about finances and skill level and also the fact that a big part of my desire for my layout is the scene building, local history side of things. Flexi track (but I think code 80 as quite alot purchased already)will be the mainstay as will DC wiring (controllers already purchased) once I can fathom out sections, cab control wiring. I am sure there will be regrets but I can then apply that knowledge in future hopefully to a future layout?

Many Thanks

Mike

Fair enough, but if the idea of cab control, sections and wiring is daunting, I would agree with those who suggest DCC. If you wait, build up a roster of DC locos, then decide to convert to DCC, that’s a lot of extra cost for decoders. Plus you’ll have already spent money on cab control, sections, switches, wiring etc, that wouldn’t be needed with DCC? 

[mjfjo]

4 hours ago, KingEdwardII said:

With DCC, this is the part that is really simple. All that is necessary in DCC is to connect up the droppers from the track to a single set of bus wires that you run from one end of your layout to the other. Job done.

 

With DC, you have to worry about creating track sections and having the means to control power going to each section. This usually demands a control panel with lots of switches and wiring that goes from the control panel to each section of track. For anything other than a simple layout, this soon becomes a rats nest and requires a great deal of planning and discipline.

 

I came back to modelling recently but I have found that DCC can simplify some things enormously as well as providing some capabilities very hard to provide with DC. DCC is worth the effort and cost, in my experience.

 

Yours, Mike.

Many Thanks

It sounds awfully like I would be better cutting my losses and switching to DCC before I get to far down the track, excuse the pun. Just need to see if Hattons will take back some DC in part ex for DCC!! One other issue is in my late 60s I am not desperately keen to spend hours under already fitted baseboards wiring for DC!

Regards

Mike

[Ian Morgan]

Worsley Works do brass etches for 2-Bil coach bodies, but they tend to be 'scratch aids' rather than kits. They can be made to look good with care. You would have to find a suitable chassis to mate it with, possibly Bachmann, Kato, Tomix, etc.

 

 

[mjfjo]

16 hours ago, Dungrange said:

That's a relatively simple track plan, so shouldn't be that difficult to wire up as either DC or DCC.  The principles of wiring a DC layout haven't changed in 40 years.

 

You have an outer circuit that doesn't seem to be connected to the rest of the layout.  In theory, all you need is two wires to that track circuit (DC or DCC).  The fishplates then distribute the power around the whole circuit.  The issue is that the fishplates can become loose over time, and therefore you end up with the circuit being broken by dirt between the rail and the fishplate.  For those who crave reliability, the best way to overcome this is to ensure that every piece of track has it's own feed soldered directly the bottom of the rail, as that builds in redundancy.  DCC users are more likely to run a 'power bus' and connect a dropper wire to that from every piece of track, but the same practise is just as valid with DC.  However, it is not essential: just good practise for reliable running.  If you don't do that and you get a problem later, the problem can be sorted then: it's just not so easy to hide the new wire that you solder in place to bypass the loose fishplate.

 

On that outer circuit, do you want to just run one train, or do you want to run more than one train?  If you are only going to be running one train, then you only need one section.  If however you want to control two trains on the same circuit, then you need to split the circuit up into sections.  Cab control is just the name given to the switches that you use to decide which controller you will use to supply power to each section.  These can either be Double Pole Double Throw (DPDT) (or Single Pole Double Throw (SPDT) if you are using common return wiring) if you want to choose between two controllers, or rotary switches if you want to choose between all three of the controllers that you have.  The common terminals on the switch are connected to the track section and the terminals on either side of the switch are connected to your controllers, so that when the switch is to the left, power is supplied from controller A and when the switch is to the right, power is supplied from controller B.  Cab control is no more complicated than that.

 

For your inner circuits, the wiring is marginally more complicated, but the key point to remember is that you should always be feeding a track section from the 'toe' or switch end of a turnout. You'll likely need insulated (plastic) rail joiners between the turnouts that make up your crossovers, so that your inner two circuits are electrically separate.  The same would apply between the inner circuit and the sidings that you have to the right of the station.  How many sections you divide the inner circuits up into depends on how you intend to operate the layout.  If you're just letting trains run round and round, then one or two sections per circuit plus one for the sidings to the right of the station is probably all you need.  However, if you plan on changing locos in the station or adding a banker (probably not in your location), then you'd want additional sections in the station to facilitate these sort of moves.

 

One comment on your track plan is that you don't seem to have anywhere to store the trains that you are not running - ie you don't have a fiddle yard.  That may be intentional, but without a fiddle yard, you're probably limited to having about three or four locomotives on the layout at the same time. 

Many thanks David for your detailed reply. I am sure in the end I could fathom the complexities of section/Cab control but it does seem extra wiring (lots of switches etc) and I am now leaning towards changing to DCC before I get too far on.

But again many thanks for your help.

Regards

Mike

[mjfjo]

2 minutes ago, Ian Morgan said:

Worsley Works do brass etches for 2-Bil coach bodies, but they tend to be 'scratch aids' rather than kits. They can be made to look good with care. You would have to find a suitable chassis to mate it with, possibly Bachmann, Kato, Tomix, etc.

 

 

That great thanks Ian I will investigate. I have just managed to pick up an Arnold Brighton Belle 2 car set on Amazon for a decent price (compared with everywhere else!) so at least have some EMU action for the local area!

Regards

Mike

[jpendle]

33 minutes ago, mjfjo said:

Many Thanks

It sounds awfully like I would be better cutting my losses and switching to DCC before I get to far down the track, excuse the pun. Just need to see if Hattons will take back some DC in part ex for DCC!! One other issue is in my late 60s I am not desperately keen to spend hours under already fitted baseboards wiring for DC!

Regards

Mike

Hi,

 

Hattons are NOT DCC specialists. I buy a lot of stuff from them but they do not sell a broad range of DCC equipment, decoders, DCC systems, DCC accessories, etc, so I wouldn't recommend trying to trade in your DC controllers to them in exchange for a DCC system as the choice will be very limited.

 

Again, before you buy a DCC system, you need to consider what you want to do with it, and do you want to constrain yourself for the future. If you have money to burn then that's less of an issue, if not, then time invested now will pay dividends.

 

Once you ask which DCC system to use you'll get as many opinions as there are systems out there to buy!

 

The only correct answer is to do some research and make sure that your chosen system will do what you want now and in the future.

 

And ask specific questions on here about the systems you are considering and the DCC functionality that you need or may need in the future.

 

Regards,

 

John P

[Pete the Elaner]

Having just read the entire thread, it is nice to see some good, unbiased advice & I agree with what I have read.

Many DC users use the minimum amount of power feeds & let the points energise sidings. While this is possible, it is not the only way to wire it.

By isolating after each point, you can switch the siding on or off from a control panel.

Going one stage further, DCC is wired up exactly the same, but every rail is live so loco lights (& sound if you have it) can be controlled at all times.

When wiring a layout, I would do things exactly the same above the board for DC or DCC. It is how the wires are connected below the board that I make a difference.

I also find it easier to have many small sections, so you cannot accidentally feed points in the wrong direction (which is easy to do if you are not careful). It makes problems less common & faster to find.

 

Although this is a valid reason to choose between DC & DCC, I feel that a more important difference is with the operation. DCC allows you to have complete freedom of where you stop & start locos, allowing you to isolate something in a place you never considered when designing the layout, running 2 separately & coupling them together to run as a pair etc. It also allows acceleration & deceleration to be set for each loco, with some newer decoders also allowing a separate brake feature. This works way better than any DC simulator/inertia I have ever used.

Some prefer more direct control (ie, turn the dial & the loco immediately responds) which is a perfectly acceptable choice & a good reason to prefer DC. It is also better if you have some hidden parts on the layout & cannot remember what train is in that section.

 

You don't have to get lost in a sea of technicalities either. DCC is very configurable & while there are lots of clever things it can do (eg. lights, acceleration, sound, auto braking, speed curves), you don't need to know about them if you don't want. The only essential programming is change a loco address, but the other features are available if & when you are ready.

[mjfjo]

32 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Having just read the entire thread, it is nice to see some good, unbiased advice & I agree with what I have read.

Many DC users use the minimum amount of power feeds & let the points energise sidings. While this is possible, it is not the only way to wire it.

By isolating after each point, you can switch the siding on or off from a control panel.

Going one stage further, DCC is wired up exactly the same, but every rail is live so loco lights (& sound if you have it) can be controlled at all times.

When wiring a layout, I would do things exactly the same above the board for DC or DCC. It is how the wires are connected below the board that I make a difference.

I also find it easier to have many small sections, so you cannot accidentally feed points in the wrong direction (which is easy to do if you are not careful). It makes problems less common & faster to find.

 

Although this is a valid reason to choose between DC & DCC, I feel that a more important difference is with the operation. DCC allows you to have complete freedom of where you stop & start locos, allowing you to isolate something in a place you never considered when designing the layout, running 2 separately & coupling them together to run as a pair etc. It also allows acceleration & deceleration to be set for each loco, with some newer decoders also allowing a separate brake feature. This works way better than any DC simulator/inertia I have ever used.

Some prefer more direct control (ie, turn the dial & the loco immediately responds) which is a perfectly acceptable choice & a good reason to prefer DC. It is also better if you have some hidden parts on the layout & cannot remember what train is in that section.

 

You don't have to get lost in a sea of technicalities either. DCC is very configurable & while there are lots of clever things it can do (eg. lights, acceleration, sound, auto braking, speed curves), you don't need to know about them if you don't want. The only essential programming is change a loco address, but the other features are available if & when you are ready.

Thanks for that, so am I understanding correctly even with DCC you would have the control panel, section switches etc as DC?

Thanks

Mike

[jpendle]

1 minute ago, mjfjo said:

Thanks for that, so am I understanding correctly even with DCC you would have the control panel, section switches etc as DC?

Thanks

Mike

Not really.

With DCC you wouldn't need the section switches (for CAB control).

BUT you can still use a control panel to control point motors, rather than use the DCC system.

 

Regards,

 

John P

 

[Chimer]

As drawn, your layout is incredibly simple to wire for DC (or DCC come to that).  Your third circuit doesn't connect to anything else, so one controller and two wires does it.  Feeding the track in more than one place is probably a good idea, but there are no switches involved anyway.  The inner tracks are not very different.  You could just have two more controllers, one for each circuit.  Cab control at its simplest would see you using a couple of switches so that each circuit can be switched to either controller - which allows you to switch both circuits to the same controller when you want to drive a loco/train smoothly over one of the crossovers.  You will need isolating rail joiners on the crossovers (as you have shown), whether you need them anywhere else depends on whether you use insulfrog or electrofrog points - if electrofrog, you have to stop power reaching the frog from either of the diverging tracks, so the more places you feed power to, the more IRJs you are likely to need.  Insulfrog points (which includes all set-track points) don't care.

 

As others have identified, with DC you would need to break up the circuits into a number of sections to enable you to stop and isolate trains "out in the country" while you did anything clever in the station area involving both circuits.  Not needed with DCC, which would use just as many wires but no section switches.  DCC also enables you to stage a head-on collision if you want to .....

 

Finally, a niggly point, the right-hand of the two crossovers you've shown should lie the same way round as the one between the platforms - i.e. using left-hand points.  As you have shown it, it is a "facing" crossover, which was a no-no in real world practice (lots of discussion elsewhere on here about facing and trailing points, if you're interested).  Amongst other things, the rule guards against head-on collisions, even with DCC ....  

 

Best of luck!

[Pete the Elaner]

37 minutes ago, mjfjo said:

Thanks for that, so am I understanding correctly even with DCC you would have the control panel, section switches etc as DC?

Thanks

Mike

 

No, that is not what I meant.

When I lay the track, I would still use insulated rail joiners & create sections like I was wiring it DC, but connect them together below the board.

This may sound a bit backward but there are advantages:

It is easy to join 2 sections together if they are isolated at track level. If you need to split a section, this is a pain because you will need to lift track.

Faults are easier to troubleshoot because smaller sections are less complicated, but you get less issues anyway.

 

& possible extra benefits which are unlikely to apply to your layout at this time:

 

If you sell the layout or decide that you don't like DCC, you do not have to lift any track to do the conversion.

If you want extra features like block detection or asymmetric braking in the future, you can just make changes under the board to enable them.

The method is scaleable so if you find yourself at a club working on a layout, the method does not get any more complicated & if you need to break the sections up to provide more power, this can be done.

 

This will leave you with lots of droppers, but if you use 1 colour for all the inside rails & another for all the outside, you simply need to connect the same coloured wires together.

[KingEdwardII]

2 hours ago, mjfjo said:

even with DCC you would have the control panel, section switches etc as DC?

No, that is definitely not required.

 

You can have a control panel with DCC, if that's to your liking. Help yourself.

 

My "control panel" is a large computer touch screen. Shows me the current state of the layout and allows me to switch turnouts, operate signals etc all by dabbing on some screen icons with a finger. No switches, no wires...

 

DCC also allows for control entirely via a handheld - maybe even via a smartphone. At the moment I use my smartphone for driving locos, but I leave the turnouts & signals on the large touch screen since I find that easier.

 

Put simply, DCC offers you a wide range of choices.

 

Yours,  Mike.

[mjfjo]

17 hours ago, Chimer said:

As drawn, your layout is incredibly simple to wire for DC (or DCC come to that).  Your third circuit doesn't connect to anything else, so one controller and two wires does it.  Feeding the track in more than one place is probably a good idea, but there are no switches involved anyway.  The inner tracks are not very different.  You could just have two more controllers, one for each circuit.  Cab control at its simplest would see you using a couple of switches so that each circuit can be switched to either controller - which allows you to switch both circuits to the same controller when you want to drive a loco/train smoothly over one of the crossovers.  You will need isolating rail joiners on the crossovers (as you have shown), whether you need them anywhere else depends on whether you use insulfrog or electrofrog points - if electrofrog, you have to stop power reaching the frog from either of the diverging tracks, so the more places you feed power to, the more IRJs you are likely to need.  Insulfrog points (which includes all set-track points) don't care.

 

As others have identified, with DC you would need to break up the circuits into a number of sections to enable you to stop and isolate trains "out in the country" while you did anything clever in the station area involving both circuits.  Not needed with DCC, which would use just as many wires but no section switches.  DCC also enables you to stage a head-on collision if you want to .....

 

Finally, a niggly point, the right-hand of the two crossovers you've shown should lie the same way round as the one between the platforms - i.e. using left-hand points.  As you have shown it, it is a "facing" crossover, which was a no-no in real world practice (lots of discussion elsewhere on here about facing and trailing points, if you're interested).  Amongst other things, the rule guards against head-on collisions, even with DCC ....  

 

Best of luck!

As with the other in depth replies much interesting and helpful advice in here so thank you. I am leaning towards swopping over to DCC before I get any further down this DC route. I probably should have studied it more before jumping in and buying the Gaugemaster DC units, but after 2 months of reading/viewing I was getting swamped with so much information and so many conflicting views.

As for my simple (not to me its not! :-) ) layout, although I have the outer circuit standalone I am thinking I should make some interaction with the rest of the layout, would just one crossover to the rest of the layout be deemed acceptable practise or more than one? Would this scenario alter DCC connection if it was more integrated as described here?

Thanks for pointing out the issue with facing points - I had tried to find out more on this and had read some posts but I think some assume a level of railway knowledge I dont possess and I ended up just as confused. I had planned the layout with the points in both orientations, I was trying to follow the real life track plans but very difficult to work out from the tiny map schematic. I will certainly change this to two left hand points!

Many thanks

Mike

 

[Chimer]

Joining the third circuit to the others by one or probably two junctions would make things more interesting operationally, and more complicated electrically if you stayed DC.  With DCC it shouldn't make any difference.

 

For what it's worth, the diagram shows the wiring required for DC Cab Control if you just wanted two circuits which can be switched to either of two controllers.  You will see that you can switch both circuits to the same controller, but not both controllers to the same circuit.  In practice you would almost certainly need to split each circuit into a number of separate sections, so need more switches going off to the right (one switch per section).