Large Scale Central

Build log for Red Baron Railroad

General Discussion
#41

Ric Golding said:

Steve Featherkile said:

I learn 35 new things every time I visit Dave’s CCRY. I’m glad that you got a chance to visit. Now, go back and become a regular. (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)

I’ve emailed and talked on the phone with Dave since 1996. I’ve never had the chance to meet him or his brothers in person, but he has shared a wealth of knowledge and has been a great mentor in this part of the model railroading hobby. Its still on my bucket list to get out there and meet him and a couple of the other northwest guys.

No way Ric has a phone??

Anyone know his number? It would be nice ring him every once and awhile!

#42

Steve Featherkile said:

Nicolas Teeuwen said:

I went to visit Dave over the weekend. Learned a lot from both him, his brothers and the others who were running trains. Gave me a lot to think about as to what will and will not work/be easy for me when I build mine.

It was suggested that you take a camera. Did you? We want pics!

I did bring my camera but never ended up using it. I was too busy asking questions and soaking in knowledge. I will be sure to take some pictures (and video) the next time I visit. Photgoraphy/video has been one of my hobbies pre-house ownership and still is. I will post what I get next time I visit, which I plan to do soon.

#43
Apparently my post got made 4 times.
#44
Apparently my post got made 4 times.
#45

Apparently my post got made 4 times.

#46

Hi Nicolas, great track plan. It gets you running, and has wonderful regions you can fill with future expansions if you wish.

Dan Pierce said:

If you want ties with no gaps where rails join, look at the Trainli line where the ties are evenly spaced even at their switches.

I’ll echo Dan’s statement, and add more for you to consider. Since you’re running on rail power (unless I’ve missed something), you can save gobs of cleaning time by using TrainLi’s nickle plated brass. More expensive than raw brass, but less than stainless, and oxidation-free.

Cliff

#47

Cliff Jennings said:

Hi Nicolas, great track plan. It gets you running, and has wonderful regions you can fill with future expansions if you wish.

Dan Pierce said:

If you want ties with no gaps where rails join, look at the Trainli line where the ties are evenly spaced even at their switches.

I’ll echo Dan’s statement, and add more for you to consider. Since you’re running on rail power (unless I’ve missed something), you can save gobs of cleaning time by using TrainLi’s nickle plated brass. More expensive than raw brass, but less than stainless, and oxidation-free.

Cliff

That was the plan and the plan has changed. After visiting Dave, reading about my options I am likely going to start by battery powering my locomotives. The airwire system looks very easy for me to install in my engines. The biggest reason I didn’t want to go battery powered was because I didn’t want to have to take apart engines and the cost.

If I consider

  • having to buy brass track
  • having to buy rail clamps and make sure the track can expand
  • potentially adding jumper wires
  • having to run wires to the far end of layout
  • finding a way to make my track power remote without doing DCC for simplicity
  • running a wire from the power pack in the house to my layout
  • potential for shorts during derailment
  • special wiring for reverse loops, switches

The cost to go to battery is at least equal to all the extra cost/effort of the above and I was able to find a nice kit that will let me install it myself with minimal modifications to my engines.

I have not yet made any final decisions as I want to visit Dave’s layout again but at this point the plan is to pursue battery powered.

#48

I think going battery power is a good choice. (even better is live steam(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)) The longer you wait the more engines you will have to convert. That will hit the pocket harder. Better to do a few at a time or as you purchase them. Im glad I went battery although I still have a few engines that are track power.

#49

Good for you Nicolas… TOC has a hard-to-counter set of arguments for battery power in your climate.

I think you could do track power also, TOC and I had a long conversation about your situation.

But it will be easier for you to go battery.

If I was living where TOC is, and I wanted to stay track power, and have remote control and sound I would:

Use stainless steel track, the stock joiners and spot weld stainless steel jumpers between track sections. This will keep continuity and allow track to move in the joiners and you don’t have to buy any rail clamps.

Using a lot of power feeds for a properly constructed layout is a myth, so I would feet TOC’s layout with 4 feeds max if it was mine and track power.

Reverse loops are dead simple in DCC, $50 each and they wire to the adjacent rails, no long feeds back to power required.

The cost per loco would of course be less since no batteries, no chargers, and the complete sound and motor decoder is under $200. You have to spend $300-$400 a loco for battery. (realize in my case I have a lot of locos)

I have family in that region, so I may install one just to PO TOC ha ha!

AMS aluminum is about $3.00 a foot for 5 foot flex, $9.50 a foot for SS, so a 500 foot layout would cost (track only no switches) $1,500 vs. 4,750, so $3,250 more, so throwing in a top of the line wireless DCC system, at around 16-20 locos, top of the line DCC on SS track vs. battery power will be cheaper.

I heard you are not doing a big layout (so track cost is NOT the biggest item), but the locos and control system are.

So for you, battery should be best, again given your hostile climate.

Greg

#50

Nicolas

I have been following along but perhaps I missed it (as I don’t re-read 3 times )

What is your overall theme?

I know you stated you have and like USA trains locomotives I believe. However what era are you into modeling ?

What do you want to see running in your backyard?

The biggest hurdle to jump is just get model trains running outside whether it be a simple 8’ diameter loop or whatever.

We all realize that you want to get it right from the start however I hate to tell you that probably won’t happen. There isn’t ONE of us here that has and I can assure you of this!

It’s a hobby and have fun with it ! That is the important part !!

#51

Umm… I think there are a FEW people that are happy 10 years later with their original setups… of course many of them spent years reading and asking questions before the first piece of track was purchased.

Not to oppose the exalted rooster, but if I had to do it over again, it would be the same.

Greg

#52

  

#53

SHUT UP ROOSTER!

#54

I am happy with mine, 14 years later. But that was after a failed N scale empire and an HO stet up before that. Then there was the planned, but never built, HOn3 set up. So I knew what I didn’t want, and so, that pointed me to what I did want. If I had the rights to more real estate, I would build expansion plan 1, but I don’t, so I won’t. And Expansion plan 2 is pure fantasy at this point.

What Rooster said is true and false on my railroad. The basic track plan hasn’t changed much over 14 years, and it runs well. But I did have to realign part of a curve, move a switch and add a bridge to eliminate an S curve.

#55

But your basic control system, the way you laid your track, etc. is still the same right?

I’m just saying that if you consider what you want in the end, and play out the different implementations, you can keep 90% of what you do for a long time.

I have made only one track change, that was to change a crossover from back to back WR switches to #6. A few minutes with the track planning software worked it out.

There can be happiness, ha ha.

Greg

#56

Shawn Viggiano said:

I think going battery power is a good choice. (even better is live steam(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)) The longer you wait the more engines you will have to convert. That will hit the pocket harder. Better to do a few at a time or as you purchase them. Im glad I went battery although I still have a few engines that are track power.

I have two engines for now and while some day I may add one or 2, the ones I have will have to tide me over for quite a while. I am diesel only guy though so its unlikely I will ever have live steam (or fake).

I am 99% sold on battery power though.

#57

Greg Elmassian said:

But your basic control system, the way you laid your track, etc. is still the same right?

I’m just saying that if you consider what you want in the end, and play out the different implementations, you can keep 90% of what you do for a long time.

I have made only one track change, that was to change a crossover from back to back WR switches to #6. A few minutes with the track planning software worked it out.

There can be happiness, ha ha.

Greg

Thanks Greg. I will keep that in mind. Btw, love your site. It helped me figure out how to put the details on my GP 38 and SD 70. The documents the trains come with could use more details/pictures of how to attach the parts. Very valuable.

#58

Greg Elmassian said:

Good for you Nicolas… TOC has a hard-to-counter set of arguments for battery power in your climate.

I think you could do track power also, TOC and I had a long conversation about your situation.

But it will be easier for you to go battery.

If I was living where TOC is, and I wanted to stay track power, and have remote control and sound I would:

Use stainless steel track, the stock joiners and spot weld stainless steel jumpers between track sections. This will keep continuity and allow track to move in the joiners and you don’t have to buy any rail clamps.

Using a lot of power feeds for a properly constructed layout is a myth, so I would feet TOC’s layout with 4 feeds max if it was mine and track power.

Reverse loops are dead simple in DCC, $50 each and they wire to the adjacent rails, no long feeds back to power required.

The cost per loco would of course be less since no batteries, no chargers, and the complete sound and motor decoder is under $200. You have to spend $300-$400 a loco for battery. (realize in my case I have a lot of locos)

I have family in that region, so I may install one just to PO TOC ha ha!

AMS aluminum is about $3.00 a foot for 5 foot flex, $9.50 a foot for SS, so a 500 foot layout would cost (track only no switches) $1,500 vs. 4,750, so $3,250 more, so throwing in a top of the line wireless DCC system, at around 16-20 locos, top of the line DCC on SS track vs. battery power will be cheaper.

I heard you are not doing a big layout (so track cost is NOT the biggest item), but the locos and control system are.

So for you, battery should be best, again given your hostile climate.

Greg

No, it won’t be a big layout. The layout in the picture is about 262 feet. I might add a passing siding and then a small rail yard to the left of the house so I can keep the trains outside. I have two engines, and I only see myself ever getting a few more so the number of engines I will get will be small.

I have not yet commited to anything but all the info everyone is giving me is going to help out a lot. I probably won’t make any final choices until I visit Dave again in a week.

#59

Greg Elmassian said:

But your basic control system, the way you laid your track, etc. is still the same right?

I’m just saying that if you consider what you want in the end, and play out the different implementations, you can keep 90% of what you do for a long time.

I have made only one track change, that was to change a crossover from back to back WR switches to #6. A few minutes with the track planning software worked it out.

There can be happiness, ha ha.

Greg

Yes Greg, everything is still basically the same. Just a minor tweak, or correction for something I knew I shouldn’t have done in the first place. But the S curve through the rock wall did look cool, even if it didn’t work out too well.

#60

Here is day one of the installation outside.