Skip to main content

All that time converting all those engines as opposed to spending dozens of hours trouble shooting the issue, dozens more hours researching the solution and then dozens more hours implementing the solution that may or may not work.

FROM THE WEBMASTER:
PERSONAL AND UNCALLED FOR STATEMENT EDITED OUT. Matt, keep your personal opinions about Elliot to yourself. This is not the place...

That was a factual statement, not a personal opinion

Last edited by Former Member

Elliot, With all the great work I see in your layout, I'd like to see you pull that base apart, tighten that nut and hopefully put this to rest. I did this for a friend after reading about this on the forum and it fixed his signal problem. I then sent the system in because the pulsing blue light quit and Lionel fixed it for free with no questions asked and no receipt. Watch for the loose parts though. I'd like to see you get all you can out of that beautiful layout!

gunrunnerjohn posted:

No offense Matt, but suggesting a wholesale conversion to DCC is a pretty lame suggestion.

I got the impression after reading Matt's first post was that he was saying from the outset he would have used DCC. I agree with that but suggesting to convert 50+ locomotives is definitely out there in my humble opinion. No offense Matt. At this point Elliot has to stay the course and hopefully he can get the system to work. I had similar problems when I had a 3 rail layout in the early 2000s. It was very frustrating. DCC has its cons too but if you have power you have the signal. That's what I like best about DCC. 

Good luck Elliot. I wish you the best in figuring this thing out. 


 

gunrunnerjohn posted:

The car comes from the NJ-HR club, and they used it to sort out their signal issues.  I recall them saying when the signal was in the 40's, everything was great.  When the signal dropped down past about 30 and lower, the wheels started to fall off.  Bob De Guarde or Chris Lord at the NJ-HR are the folks to talk to, they were intimately involved in sorting out the signal issues there.

40 millivolts ac?

Thanks John. As you probably know Matt and I go back a ways, as he had been helping me with the layout. I don't really recall him suggesting DCC, but he probably did, and it just went in one ear and out the other. It tends to register better in writing, as in "send me a memo". You're right, it's not particularly constructive or on topic for this discussion.

For the record, I'm in my mid 50's, my health isn't the greatest, but I am financially stable. There are even more reasons that I don't do traditional work, but those are enough. There was a time when I did work for a living, but those days are behind me. I consider this layout my work, and after a 6 year hiatus, I am trying to reestablish some kind of a work ethic.

One thing I would like to point out here is, that I owned almost every one of those locomotives before I even met Matt. His suggestion no matter when he made it, was already after the fact.

Last edited by Big_Boy_4005

I was unaware that you planned to use computer control, Elliot, and am very interested to see what you'll be doing.  I fully agree that the inability to talk to DCS from the outside world is a major drawback in the system.  I think one could probably get in through the back door now, with the wifi control module, but I'm not sure how much of that protocol is open to third parties at this time either.  As for DCC, it seems a fairly good system from what little I know, but I don't see much point in converting everything to DCC from TMCC.  Since it seems that the TMCC base works pretty well, I think the legacy problems will get sorted out eventually.  

As far as signal issues with TMCC, I think such a large and complex layout is bringing up things that were simply not tested for in the design of the system.  I wonder if the folks that are a bit more knowledgable about the system could input on the possibility of designing a signal amplifier, not just for the track side output but that boosts the ground plane side as well?  The idea that GRJ suggested that the amount of track causing capacitance issues seems plausible to me and I wonder if this could be overcome by boosting the output stage of the Legacy base? 

JGL

Great news!!

The base is working. What would normally take most of you guys 15-20 minutes, took me more than an hour, but I got it. Yes the nut was totally loose. Of course as I was putting it back together, one of the wires broke on the charger switch, so I soldered that back on. Thanks for the hint about the button. That saved me some headaches.

Dale, the numbers are in: 1982 no load and 976 with the layout connected. I think we have a winner!!!!

With this resolved, I can move on to track debugging which should be a little more academic. I know that if I place a wire above the track, it will work. The trick is to get the signal without making it ugly. And no, I don't run electrics so please don't say catenary.

Chuck, I totally agree that the challenge is part of the fun here. On my left forearm I have a tattoo that says " NOTHING IS EASY". If it was everyone would do it. There is a real sense of accomplishment when we can make things work, and maybe more so when we test the theoretical limits of an engineered product.

There will be more challenges with this railroad, I have no doubt of that.

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

Great news!!

The base is working. What would normally take most of you guys 15-20 minutes, took me more than an hour, but I got it. Yes the nut was totally loose. Of course as I was putting it back together, one of the wires broke on the charger switch, so I soldered that back on. Thanks for the hint about the button. That saved me some headaches.

Dale, the numbers are in: 1982 no load and 976 with the layout connected. I think we have a winner!!!!

With this resolved, I can move on to track debugging which should be a little more academic. I know that if I place a wire above the track, it will work. The trick is to get the signal without making it ugly. And no, I don't run electrics so please don't say catenary.

Chuck, I totally agree that the challenge is part of the fun here. On my left forearm I have a tattoo that says " NOTHING IS EASY". If it was everyone would do it. There is a real sense of accomplishment when we can make things work, and maybe more so when we test the theoretical limits of an engineered product.

There will be more challenges with this railroad, I have no doubt of that.

Telephone or power poles for the ground wire?

 

I've thought of poles, I'm not sure what kind of lateral reach the signal would have, ie how many tracks can one wire cover.

IMG_6280

I just added this structure yesterday. It runs right down the middle of a trouble spot. It will be very easy to add a wire here. The trick with poles is keeping them out of the way, so they aren't getting snagged.

 

Attachments

Images (1)
  • IMG_6280

Add Reply

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×