@Mallard4468 posted:Why all the anger, hate, and bitterness regarding a hobby that is supposed to be fun?
I'm not angry and I don't hate anyone. I don't believe that I'm biter about anything. I'm tired of the negative feedback when I or one of my peers posts something on the subject and we are portrayed as the red headed step child.
Have you offered to submit an article to OGR? I'll bet that @Allan Miller would give it serious consideration. Easy to complain about what someone else is (or isn't) doing - requires more effort to take the initiative and create some content.
Why do I have to submit an article to OGR? How does an article in OGR magazine cure the issues we face on the forum? I posted plenty here on the subject of my conversions or updates. Bob Walker had a great article on the subject in run 314. What has changed here as a result? For the record I have submitted article to the magazine a few years back. It's still sitting with Alan Miller after multiple contacts from myself and Alan Arnold. I was told it was good, but it may need some better pictures. I'm not begging to have it published. If I'm ignored after three more contacts, they either don't like it or have too much material to publish. Why would I waste my time writing another article just to sit on his desk or find his rotary file can?
Recently, the LCCA magazine published a series of articles about modifying engines for dead rail. There's plenty of interest, but the information needs to be submitted by knowledgeable readers.
Thanks for that information. I was unaware of the article. I'll have to look into that.
Ron
@New Haven Joe posted:Ron,
I prefer battery powered engines. I've converted two and I hope to convert some others. I hope that manufacturers will start making making battery powered engines. If not, I suppose that we will have to do our own conversions.
I must admit that converting an engine is a daunting task for many - perhaps for most. It is also expensive. This is especially true for the first conversion when you have to buy a controller plus a charger, etc. The cost is offset by not having to buy transformer(s), command control system, lots of wiring and stuff to connect it with, etc. However, if you already have all of these items it is hard to spend extra to convert.
I think that battery power will become normal in time just like it has become normal with RC airplanes, drones, and many other toys. NH Joe
Joe,
I agree with you that the first time you crack open a shell, it might be a little scary with all the wires and electronics. Especially if you just purchased a brand new $500 engine. Personally, I like to buy used or broken stuff to upgrade to keep my costs low. Although truthfully my MTH F7's were pricey. They ran terribly as track powered engines and I almost sold them twice. So the decision to convert them was easy. I didn't care if I ruined the existing electronics.
We've both been around for a while. Think of how our knowledge of the hobby as grown through years of dabbling, reading and trying things for the first time. Before I started this hobby with my son, I knew very little about platform construction, wiring, electronics and artistry. While no expert, I'm smarter now than I was when I started.
I got my start with MTH transplants, robbing PS2 or PS3 boards out of cheap RK engines and putting them in nice Premier PS1 engines. Those first few were scary. I didn't know what I was doing. And I got a lot of help and advice on this forum from GRJ, GGG, Alan Marcus and Marty Fitzhenry. One particular evening GRJ and I had a virtual conversation on a tricky transplant right here on the forum for several hours. It was like he was standing next to me in my workshop. I was very grateful. I would love to be able to pay that forward If I can share what I know. https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...tlantic-steam-engine
BPRC is like everything else in this hobby. I could do it for under $100 or spend $1,000 if I wanted to. It all depends on what you want.
I don't have any LionChief engines, but maybe I'll try to find one and prove the concept. I'm convinced I could do it for under $100 needing only a battery, charger, charge jack and switch. There would be no controller or electronics to buy because the existing LC product lends itself to be all ready for this type of upgrade.
Have Fun!
Ron
For the record, battery power is just another operating mode, not the be all and end all. I constantly operate conventional and TMCC on my layout for various reasons. As pointed out, there are quite a number of available wireless systems compatible (and necessary) for battery power. A key point with battery power, the conversion has to be done thoughtfully and carefully. I previously posted a battery power primer written by a fellow modeler which is quite detailed. Once a conversion is completed, battery management ( charging, running, storage) becomes important. I feel that OGRR is handling this discussion appropriately.
@Ron045 posted:I really enjoy battery power trains. Like the others here who either dabble or are hard core I would enjoy a forum to discuss solely this topic. Unfortunately, we have been asking OGR for at least 2 years and hear, "That's not a bad idea" but then we never hear or see anything. It seems unless you are Legacy, TMCC, DCS or Conventional, you are just some oddball freaks. I have news folks... this stuff is wildly popular if you take your head out of OGR and look around the internet. There are many different control systems to choose from that have compatibility with each other... Even MTH PS3 and Lionel Lionchief. I myself have three MTH PS3 engines that run on battery. While I don't have any, LionChief is probably the simplest of battery upgrades with nothing to buy except a battery, charger and a charge jack if you don't want to remove the battery form the engine.
I am more than willing to help anyone learn more. I can answer many questions on BlueRail, RailPro and using LiIon (Not LiPo) batteries. I have many videos on YT user my same user ID if you are interested... or just email me.
I've grown tired of the nay sayers telling me how to enjoy my hobby or what they perceive are my limitations because they don't have a clue what they are talking about. I've enjoyed OGR for many, many years but lately find myself frequenting other forums where I can discuss this topic of BPRC with others who have a passion like myself.
Are you listening OGR? You have an opportunity to grow and capture a different segment of the hobby to bring even more people together. Unfortunately, more people here put us down and tell us how we are wrong for doing what we like.
I remember going through these same growing pains with RC airplanes 30 years ago. I had this tiny underpowered foam 3 channel plane. The glow fuel and gas fellas laughed... isn't that cute. Now electric RC planes dominate the industry.
Here is a video of my MTH PS3 battery operated trains using BlueRail.
Here is how I charge... No batteries ever leave the engine.
I'm having fun! Are you?
Ron
This is very interesting, while electric (third rail center) is the easiest. I can see the advantages of battery, the detail your can put in would far surpass anything in 3 rail. I am thinking of an elevated subway line (2 rail) with an outside dummy third rail. It would look spectacular.
Also thank you for sharing.
@Dave Koehler posted:you really dont know much about it
Tell me what it is that I'm missing. I'm counting the number of wires on the layout, and the length of each, and I don't see a significant savings in the number or length of wires by going to battery power. Period.
Since R/C cars, planes, helicopters and boats don't have signals, switch machines, or electrically powered accessories they don't have the same challenge.
Maybe there's another argument for on-board battery power but this one isn't cutting it.
I have zero problem with it if you throw all your switches manually, and you have no signals. Unfortunately that's not me. Converting what I have to battery power would cost an awful lot, and still not deliver much in the way of savings.
Mike
I have been following this discussion for the last two years and find it extremally intriguing and thought provoking.
Running your expensive trains via battery power seems to have the advantage of eliminating the possibility of ruining the expensive electronics in them due to momentary shorts, voltage spikes etc.
The issue seems to revolve itself with some folks needing to preset their routes and maintain their automatic signaling operation. Possibly these could be converted to some form of battery power as well while still maintaining the ability to select a specific switch and setting it to ones desire?
These are not insurmountable issues as the solutions exist. It's only a matter of recognizing the appropriate application to the issue at hand.
I suspect that within the next ten years we will see a mainstream manufacturer offer engines powered in this manner. As the desire to acquire "electric" cars take hold so will the desire for our "electric" trains to be electrically powered by a battery.
And if not, an upstart company may do just that and become the next MTH in the model train world by offering only battery operated trains and control systems.
@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:Tom,
1000's of feet of wire just to power the track? You must have a massive layout.
Are you sure some of it's not for electric switch machines, accessories, or signals?
Mike
My wiring so far is only for track power. Layout is large but not massive. About 240 linear feet of around the wall modules on five levels in two rail and three rail. There are five 2 rail branch lines each with multiple blocks and sidings plus two point to point separate 3 rail RRs on their own levels. Various staging sidings spread around and assorted industrial yards. Somewhere around 150 blocks. 5 TTs and 115 turnouts and lots of track. Conventional AC and DC switchable power depending on who is working which line on what power source.
I spent a lot of time running wires on aircraft early on which gave me an appreciation of circuitry.
Wiring has always been an enjoyable activity so I admit to excess. This layout did come along when I really did not have the time to work on it so discovering battery R/C a short time ago was great timing.
One of several panels.
Not saying that this is the right, best or smartest way too go about wiring a layout...just my way.
Attachments
Images (1)
@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:Tell me what it is that I'm missing. I'm counting the number of wires on the layout, and the length of each, and I don't see a significant savings in the number or length of wires by going to battery power. Period.
Since R/C cars, planes, helicopters and boats don't have signals, switch machines, or electrically powered accessories they don't have the same challenge.
Maybe there's another argument for on-board battery power but this one isn't cutting it.
I have zero problem with it if you throw all your switches manually, and you have no signals. Unfortunately that's not me. Converting what I have to battery power would cost an awful lot, and still not deliver much in the way of savings.
Mike
Please feal free to run your trains the way you want. For me Running my train independent of the train layout . TPRC ( which was tried by both Lionel and AF over 55 years ago and failed) is a concept that was to reduce the amount wiring . The DCC and its variants promised the same thing, well that didnt happen! . you have more wiring now than ever before. BPRC /TPRC allows me to operate on any layout , independent, of which ever control, being used . As far as cost, you are paying a premium , for the electronics Installed by MTH, and Lionel ( and if you read the forum you will see the issues they have) as far as the layout accessories , lighting, ect. , it really has nothing to do operating the trains. With on board batteries and RC , I can do any thing you can do with out being tethered to the layout with a lot less wiring. its just a mater of thinking out of the box
"Maybe there's another argument for on-board battery power but this one isn't cutting it."
Does getting rid of the third rail, while running your collection of hi-rail equipment, interest you? There are some really impressive three-rail layouts presented here occasionally. I'm sure some of us have said to ourselves "Wow, that would be even better without the third rail."
@Arthur P. Bloom posted:"Maybe there's another argument for on-board battery power but this one isn't cutting it."
Does getting rid of the third rail, while running your collection of hi-rail equipment, interest you? There are some really impressive three-rail layouts presented here occasionally. I'm sure some of us have said to ourselves "Wow, that would be even better without the third rail."
Yup! code 148 rail will accommodate , both scale and high rail flanges, and if you use closed frog turnouts there is no problem
@Tom Tee posted:My wiring so far is only for track power. Layout is large but not massive. About 240 linear feet of around the wall modules on five levels in two rail and three rail. There are five 2 rail branch lines each with multiple blocks and sidings plus two point to point separate 3 rail RRs on their own levels. Various staging sidings spread around and assorted industrial yards. Somewhere around 150 blocks. 5 TTs and 115 turnouts and lots of track. Conventional AC and DC switchable power depending on who is working which line on what power source.
I recently looked at Adrian's thread where you can run all switch machines on a layout with just two (2) wires... Layout designed by a NASA Design Engineer first post @ about 3:30 into the video. With feeders gone and only 2 wires controlling all switch machines it seems that it would begin to become fairly barren of wiring down below. Tom, I know you throw your turnouts by hand... it's just mind-boggling to imagine hard wiring all those turnouts. 
I have zero wires on my layout. All turnouts use Caboose Industries ground throws and I use the hand crank on my Atlas turntable (which I may wire eventually). I have no powered accessories. I may wire some buildings for lighting also but the days of wiring track are over for me.
Batteries last well over 2 hours, plenty of time for how I operate my RR. If need be I can always bring an engine back to the yard to recharge and call up another to take it's place. I still want to make a water spout that coils the charging cable up on a reel, pull it out and plug it in:
Just haven't figured out how yet.
The 9.6v 2000Mah NiMh batteries I use are under $20 on Amazon, another $20 for the charger. I have 3 chargers, 2 for NiMh and 1 for LiPo packs. I only have 3-4 engines using LiPo and may change them out to NiMh, just to keep them all the same. You could make a car to carry the battery, but then you would have to run a cable from the car to the engine which I have no desire to do as long as I can get the battery to fit inside the loco. If I ever get an engine that is too small I'll try a smaller battery pack, like a 7.2 or 8.4v pack.
As far as the batteries running low and causing the engine to stop, I've run enough to know they last approx 2.5 hours, I simply tell Alexa to set a timer for whatever time I feel I want to run and when the timer goes off I bring the engine back to the yard for recharging. I think Bob Walker has developed some method of having a light blink or come on to notify him it's time to recharge, I know we had discussed it but can't recall if he designed a circuit.
Attachments
Images (1)
Western Electric Retractable Handset Phone cord Bell System Wall Telephone | eBay
This will allow you to create a retractable wire accessory. The engineering on this obsolete item is already done by Bell Labs, Not cheap, and made of UNobtainium, but if you only need one, I suggest adapting this as a solution.
Thanks Arthur!!! Almost looks like a fishing reel could be used!
That telephone reel (or any other) could be mounted under the table with the cord run thru a hole.
If I may jump in and vent. Let me start by giving all of you that have expressed your love of the hobby a thank you. I am not very technically savvy with anypart of building or running my layout. But that said I am here 10 years running legacy/ lion chief with buildings that are lighted, crossing singles, electric switches . Layout is small to medium approximately 46 ft in length 4 wide. My wire technique is a mess and I only use my cab2 functions about 50% of what it can do. I have also had to return it for repair 2 times along with my ZW-L transformer back for replacement. All in all the folks that visit seem very impressed . It's been fun and then very frustrating for not to be able to understand all of the technical talk on the OGR Fourm. In fact drives me nuts. What I love about this hobby is building scenery and then just running the train or trains. At 80 yes of age getting under a table to wire something is a ( I don't want to) deal . Can't see Can't get into a certain position and every other ugly physical feeling. Cleaning tack is another BS deal.
Then I saw this forum on Dead Rail. Wow I said this would fit the bill great. No Damm electrical problems. Just build scenery and run trains. Lionel can take my legacy / cab2 remote my ZW-L transformer and politically put it where ever. No climbing under layouts I can keep my head above the table and breath fresh air. You say this guy can't possibly like the hobby . Butt I do. Just get me away from the tech stuff and lead me to a manufacture that has the Dead Rails system thats what i want. That's my vent.
Also thanks to you Ron045 you made my day.
@Bill Grafmiller posted:Also thanks to you Ron045 you made my day.
If you want any help Bill, feel free to contact me.
Ron
Ron you got it thanks again.
Those of us who have experimented with battery powered wireless loco control systems have had very positive results with very few problems. I believe we will be seeing a lot more attention paid to this format.
Bob.
I do hope so. I really feel that keeping the hobby simple is a positive. Those who wish for technical gizmos my hat is tiped to them . I feel like a slave to using electrical systems and legacy type remotes.
@Bill Grafmiller posted:Then I saw this forum on Dead Rail. Wow I said this would fit the bill great. No Damm electrical problems. Just build scenery and run trains. Lionel can take my legacy / cab2 remote my ZW-L transformer and politically put it where ever. No climbing under layouts I can keep my head above the table and breath fresh air. You say this guy can't possibly like the hobby . Butt I do. Just get me away from the tech stuff and lead me to a manufacture that has the Dead Rails system thats what i want. That's my vent.
If you don't do any of these things then dead rail will be fine for you:
- Want or presently use remote control switches (with the exception of Fastrack ones)
- Light up your structures and/or streets
- Want or presently use operating accessories
- Want or presently use signals
All of them require wires. If you remove the power from the tracks you'll be saving very few wires, and they happen to be the simplest ones to understand.
R/C cars, planes, helicopters and boats have none of these accessories. No switches, no infrastructure lights, no operating accessories, no signals. For them R/C makes perfect sense.
I can understand that command control can be intimidating. Why not go back to conventional control? Get an old fashioned ZW or KW and go to town.
In the meantime sell your CAB2 and related stuff. It's worth big money currently.
Selling it will put that smile back on your face.
Mike
I am one who is sold out on TMCC/Legacy but, I can see the why a person may love the dead rail system. I can see dabling in it myself, although it is not an inexpensive way to go.
My layout is Flyer/Highrail using all 40s/ 50s Gilbert track. My wiring technique is not great but it works. Using 60-70 year old 10" sections of track is not the most efficient way to transmit power through the rails but with plenty of drops I have very little power loss so the layout runs very well. I have been using the nonpolar method of track cleaning which also has improved operation. That all said I find dead rail interesting, eliminating any cause of frustration with inconsistent running is inviting.
I have been to a couple of friends layouts, some using old track as mine, others using the newer nickle silver flex track where I have seen some running problems, be it wiring or track cleaning, the frustration surfaces quickly and the enjoyment is lost.
If the dead rail would have been around when I found TMCC, I might well have gone that way myself, because it does free you from the transformer while operating trains, being tied to the transformer was the most frustrating part of running trains for me.
Just my thoughts but, what ever the way you like running your layout, that is the best for you.
Ray
freerails.com has a dead rail catagory....
@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:If you don't do any of these things then dead rail will be fine for you:
Want or presently use remote control switches (with the exception of Fastrack ones) (You might be right)
Light up your structures and/or streets(Wrong)
Want or presently use operating accessories(Wrong)
Want or presently use signals (Wrong)
So people who use deadrail don't light their buildings, don't have accessories and don't use signals? You are assuming that these things need track power. Yes they need wires but they do not require track power with drops every X number of feet. You also don't need a big honkin' transformer to operate these things.
All of them require wires. If you remove the power from the tracks you'll be saving very few wires, and they happen to be the simplest ones to understand. I can't speak for everyone else, but I have more track wire than accessory wire.
R/C cars, planes, helicopters and boats have none of these accessories. No switches, no infrastructure lights, no operating accessories, no signals. For them R/C makes perfect sense. (Wow is this VERY wrong. Lots of RC stuff has operating lights and operating accessories).
BPRC is more than just eliminating wires. It's about trouble free operating. Just yesterday I was running a track powered engine that dies on my turntable. Why? It's worked perfectly for years. Dirty track? Loose connections? Who knows. I have to trouble shoot it a see. Time troubleshooting and fixing vs running and enjoying. That is my reason for battery.
Maybe you missed my comment back in April?
"Maybe there's another argument for on-board battery power but this one isn't cutting it."
"Does getting rid of the third rail, while running your collection of hi-rail equipment, interest you? There are some really impressive three-rail layouts presented here occasionally. I'm sure some of us have said to ourselves "Wow, that would be even better without the third rail."
Everything can be powered the same way, including switches, houses, signals, etc. It just looks better without the third rail. A battery system can use a battery in a boxcar, or tender, or baggage car, or an unpowered B unit. The occasional section of catenary or outside third rail can provide DC power along the way to recharge the batteries, or they can be plugged in after a session at a locomotive maintenance facility.
@Ron045 posted:@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:If you don't do any of these things then dead rail will be fine for you:
Want or presently use remote control switches (with the exception of Fastrack ones) (You might be right)
Light up your structures and/or streets(Wrong)
Want or presently use operating accessories(Wrong)
Want or presently use signals (Wrong)
So people who use deadrail don't light their buildings, don't have accessories and don't use signals? You are assuming that these things need track power. Yes they need wires but they do not require track power with drops every X number of feet. You also don't need a big honkin' transformer to operate these things.
All of them require wires. If you remove the power from the tracks you'll be saving very few wires, and they happen to be the simplest ones to understand. I can't speak for everyone else, but I have more track wire than accessory wire.
R/C cars, planes, helicopters and boats have none of these accessories. No switches, no infrastructure lights, no operating accessories, no signals. For them R/C makes perfect sense. (Wow is this VERY wrong. Lots of RC stuff has operating lights and operating accessories).
BPRC is more than just eliminating wires. It's about trouble free operating. Just yesterday I was running a track powered engine that dies on my turntable. Why? It's worked perfectly for years. Dirty track? Loose connections? Who knows. I have to trouble shoot it a see. Time troubleshooting and fixing vs running and enjoying. That is my reason for battery.
Your last comment is a very, very good argument for dead rail and wireless control, especially if you have power problems. I couldn't agree more.
But I don't have power problems so I've instead looked at these as a way to reduce wire count. Unlike you I don't have more wire in my drops than for my turnouts, accessories and signals. Just the opposite. Because of these facts I can't justify converting my entire collection to dead rail, or to selling the entire collection and buying the items formerly in my collection again, this time with battery power and radio control because I don't get enough in return for the effort.
I believe that most of our fellow hobbyists are in the same predicament -- unless they don't have many remote controlled turnouts, accessories or signals in the first place.
Last point. People who buy and operate R/C cars, planes, and boats do not have layouts like we do. Have you ever seen a model marina, or a miniature airport modeled along with the planes? No. Operating gas stations? No. Approach-lit runways? No. Buildings? No. Functional Traffic Lights? No. Operating Lighthouses? No.
With cars, you might consider a racetrack to be a layout, but these racetracks have zero operating accessories. Most R/C stuff does not have associated operating lights and accessories. The vehicles themselves might, but because there are no layouts, or things that go on them, nothing else does. With all of these the fun is in the driving (or flying) and not in building or operating a layout.
In the same way if you have your fun driving your trains, and all the rest of the stuff like turnouts, accessories and signals is not for you, then by all means go dead rail.
For me these things are as important as the driving, so I still need nearly all the wires. It's not worth the effort to change.
Mike
@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:In the same way if you have your fun driving your trains, and all the rest of the stuff like turnouts, accessories and signals is not for you, then by all means go dead rail.
For me these things are as important as the driving, so I still need nearly all the wires. It's not worth the effort to change.
Mike
So we agree. BPRC is not for everyone. I just find it extremely interesting that this nearly three year old threat still has traction. The Op seems to be asking about the possibilities and the goodness of it. Yet all of the nay sayers have zero experience, but continue to tell us why's it all wrong for O scale without the experience in to back up their comments.
I only know of one person who tried it and said it wasn't his cup of tea. @gunrunnerjohn. I don't think he disliked it, he just didn't see the value since he was heavily invested the other way.
It's personal choice of what you like and what works... No different than choosing DCS, Legacy, LionChief or conventional.
I find in amusing that many people here have every one of those types of train systems to run but then assume BPRC must be all "all or nothing" investment. You can run a BPRC train at the same time as your track powered engines.
Ron
@Ron045 posted:So we agree. BPRC is not for everyone. I just find it extremely interesting that this nearly three year old threat still has traction. The Op seems to be asking about the possibilities and the goodness of it. Yet all of the nay sayers have zero experience, but continue to tell us why's it all wrong for O scale without the experience in to back up their comments.
I only know of one person who tried it and said it wasn't his cup of tea. @gunrunnerjohn. I don't think he disliked it, he just didn't see the value since he was heavily invested the other way.
It's personal choice of what you like and what works... No different than choosing DCS, Legacy, LionChief or conventional.
I find in amusing that many people here have every one of those types of train systems to run but then assume BPRC must be all "all or nothing" investment. You can run a BPRC train at the same time as your track powered engines.
Ron
Agreed.
Mike
Mike
Everything has it pro and cons so for me this seems to be a good alternative for me. The cab2 all electrical was not as user friendly as I would have liked. Yes I will still have electricity on my layout for existing buildings and switches . But on buildings it's going to be plug and play. Something in the order of the menards system. I would like to go to two rail and get rid of the ugly three rail look. Thinking of selling ZW-L and cab2. I am not out to bash the hobby for what it is that by any means is not what my intentions are.
So that said I tip my hat to all live rail and dead rail hobbyists. I will respond with a follow up after I have made the jump to dead rail. Thanks for your opinions.
It has been pointed out earlier, but worth mentioning again. Batter power makes sense only in conjunction with wireless loco control. Wireless control is about to get another player.
