Couple of questions.
The German layout goes on but a little question has arisen. I have bought stock and locos from four different makers each with different type couplings. I think the best is that supplied by Roco. However I keep reading how good Kadee are, any opinions....by the way I don't play trains much so most stock is just coupled up and left. Another thing is DCC. I have realised that all my locos ( when I say all that's only three.....so far) have an NUM plug already fitted. When I wired the layout I followed DCC recommendations. Hence it wouldn't be much bother to convert to digital. But, I don't run lots of trains, I think sound would drive me frantic, I don't like complications. So seeing that my main priority is slower than scale speed running and reliability would the change over make sense? I will post some pictures soon. I am working on it. WOW, that track looks nice even if I do say so myself. :) Any thought appreciated. Brian.

Brian, There is no doubt that DCC has many attractive features. As you are primarily interested in slow speed control, then PWM (digital Pulse Width Modulation), as an alternative, can give better results without having to fit decoders in all locomotives. Our MR club has compared both systems. We installed test layouts for both systems. Those club members who were supporting DCC invited Mr Ziegler (i.e. Mr. Zimo) to discuss the results. Although he admitted that the PWM running characteristics were excellent, he, of course, pointed out all the other features that DCC can offer (permanent lighting, independent loco operation within the same block......). From the cost point of view the Zimo system was approx 5 times more expensive than PWM and that was before the costs of the decoders were considered. PWM operates much better than DCC or analog when the track is not perfectly clean. Our experience shows that keeping a large layout clean, including the occupied storage yards, is almost impossible. Starting from scratch with a relatively small layout, I would probably choose DCC today, because I like some of the extra features it offers. But the decision isn't straight forward. For more inconclusive discussion on this, try reading: http://germanrail.8.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=553 http://germanrail.8.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=557

As you say Alan " the decision is not straightforward". I have tried 'Googling' PWM with mixed results. Does anyone make an 'off the shelf' control unit with PWM? I did find one but it seemed like a 'made out the back' type of outfit based in the USA. Thanks for your speedy reply. Brian.

Brian, Our club has a large complicated layout. For this reason we designed and built our own PWM electronic boards so that each section of track has its own controller. I don't know what you can obtain locally, but this review may help .. http://www.scottpages.net/ReviewOfControllers.html As I understand it quite a few of the advanced model railway controllers use PWM.

I haven't made up my mind yet what will happen with the layout, but if I decide to continue I will change over to seperate DCC switching and DCC driving. 1. to stop a train and leave it there is with DCC a function of the driver, not of the switchmaster, who, with analoge, needs to throw a toggle to turn of the current. 2. driving will be again a responsibility of the drivers and setting the route and signals of the signalbox 3. Shunting is possible t scale speed. regards Jacq

Very nice ballast work indeed. Is that a canal scene you have there?

Trouble is no matter how you look at it Jacq I am the driver, signalman, and general dogs body, so it doesn't make a lot of difference. Most of the trouble with DCC is that it is too complicated for a Dinosaur to master. It's a bit like mobile phones, I don't use one, they are far too involved. However recently I read that in Japan they have introduced a revolutionary new one, it only allows the user to make and receive telephone call......don't reckon it will catch on. Re your item 3. I find that with my current locos and a Gaugemaster D controller scale speeds can be achieved which are far slower than the prototype. But this all creates a worry. My wife in the silly way wives have has just asked me if changing from DC will make any difference. I'm not often lost for words :D :D Trouble is this is all like the reason someone gave for climbing Everest " Because it's there". Hence we look, we read the reviews, the ad men begin to sow doubts in our mind and before we know it off we go again. However no matter what it's good to talk. :D Ah well. Better think up something else to worry about. :wink: Cheers. Brian.

Don't worry, be happy. I like your trackwork and the beer wagon.

couplers
While I am happy with Roco, there is a lot to be said for Kadee -- but not for their look-a-like competitors. Only Kadee works well on an S-curve. However, as you are in the UK, permit me to suggest you get a copy of the British magazine "Model Rail" (August 2006). It contains one of the best discussions of converting Euro NEM to Kadee and, of course, converting to Kadee from the British hook-tension system. Really a good article covering everything from "easy" to more complex "talgo" conversions. I called attention of Kadee to the article as the author really seems to have done his research. As for standard DC cab-control versus DCC, I have no opinion save that the traditional style is a lot less costly. Happy New Year.

If you like shunting and have radii of approx 24" have a look at the dingham coupling. Very nice looking and functioning like a charm. Even very easy rolling waggons couple without moving. Uncoupling with (electro) magnet. see: www.dingham.demon.co.uk Jacq

Right thanks guys. I guess a lot of reading to do. Anyway the layout is coming on. Brian.

And may I wish you all the best for 2007. :) :) :) Jacq those Dingham couplings look superb. trouble is I wouldn't fancy cutting all the buffer beams. Of the supplied couplings I do think the Roco take some beating. No, the smallest radius I have are a few small Peco points on sidings, there is hardly a curve over the rest of the layout. This is the Roco on 'maximum' extension. Under normal viewing the coupling is far less obvious and the 'closeness' very acceptably. Peter I am sure that you are right. In fact if I got a simple DCC controller and had Victors 'chip' my next loco it would be fun to try. at very little cost. This eveningI shall raise my glass to all of you Brian.

Brian, my little penny about couplers. Like you I have rolling stock from different makers. As it happens I have a Fleischmann majority of Eras I and II rolling stock so I decided for those couplers as standard for the above Eras. By the way my feeling is that the functioning and 'easiness' of Fleischmann are superior to Roco, also if they are more 'impacting', as far as aesthetic is concerned, compared to Roco ones. And 'cause I was unable to limit myself, for Era III (where I have a majority of Roco's rolling stock I 'll keep Roco couplers as standard. :wink: About Kadee I read more than once that they are really good, but maybe not so good for European rolling stock. Something to do, as I seem to remember, with the way the mechanism to keep cars away on curves works...