You have my vote, Dan. Also because you have a very nice S Scale layout. Most of my turnouts are #8 or longer. My layout is divided into power districts, so if someone runs a switch, it only affects other operators who are within striking distance!
But I understand your point now. Thanks. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dan Vandermause To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 2:40 PM Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Ground throws Roger: Although most operators are careful enough to avoid running entirely through a turnout thrown against them, it is actually fairly easy to let your engine drift into the powered frog area, causing a short. With DCC, this minor infraction will shut the system down, and then all the operators look around asking "Who did that?". Now, at the risk of sounding like a politician, I must flip-flop here and admit that I usually power-route my frogs on #8 turnouts out on the mainline, using the Tortoise switch motor contacts. Since the frog is longer on the #8 turnouts, I like to power route those frogs. However, Bill Lane's original question was how to wire a turnout simply and reliably on a module. If you hard-wire the points/closure rails, and leave the frog dead, the turnout has a solid electrical path everywhere (but the dead frog). The wiring could not be simpler, and standard ground throws can be used. Most HO layouts use dead frog turnouts with no problems. So, to summarize my position, I am in favor of dead frogs, and I am also in favor of live frogs. Ask me again tomorrow, and I reserve the right to change my answer. Please vote for me. Dan Vandermause --- In [email protected], "Roger Nulton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dan and Larry, > > Being new to DCC, I'm wondering why a derailment is preferable to a short. I've found power routing the frog provides much smoother operation through the turnouts, especially for sound, but then I'm not always running modern locos. > > Roger Nulton > Tacoma WA > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dan Vandermause > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 6:50 PM > Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} Ground throws > > > Bill: > > I would concur with Larry. In the DCC world, where intermittent > shorts will shut down operations, it is most important to wire > turnouts to minimize these potential shorts. > > By hard-wiring the points/closure rails to the adjacent stock rail, > you eliminate the potential for metal wheelsets to bridge the gap > between point and stock rail, causing a short. > > By leaving the frog dead, this minimizes the chance that a > car/locomotive running the wrong way through a turnout will cause a > short. With a powered frog, when equipment rolls into a turnout > thrown against it, a short circuit will occur at the frog, long > before the equipment actually derails at the points. With a dead > frog, no problem occurs until the equipment actually derails at the > points. > > Thus, you can have it both ways -- a simple and reliable turnout for > DCC calls for hard-wired points and closure rails, and a dead frog > (minimize the length of the dead zone to avoid contact problems. A > simple ground throw will operate this turnout, with no extra wiring. > > Today's locomotives have enough pick up points to make the dead frog > a non-issue. > > On my layout, I mainly use HO sprung Caboose Industries ground > throws, but where I need a little extra throw distance, I use the O > scale sprung ground throws. > > Dan Vandermause > > --- In [email protected], "Tomalco Track \(Larry Morton\)" > <tomalco_track@> wrote: > > > > Bill, > > I recommend you do not rely on the points contact to power the > rail when > > using DCC. Ed Kozlowsky's suggestions are good, I built a layout > several > > years ago using that method and had no problems. My current layout > has all > > dead frogs. > > > > Larry > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bill Lane" <bill@> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "S Scale List" <S- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 6:44 AM > > Subject: {S-Scale List} Ground throws > > > > > > > Hi Guys, > > > > > > I recently bought a bunch of the Caboose Industries O Scale > sprung ground > > > throws for my new yard module in the making. I wanted to be sure > I had the > > > needed throw. My other thoughts were possibly having sure a firm > point > > > engagement that I could power route from the points greatly saving > > > additional wiring. Since they are modules, I have visions of > blasting a > > > ground throw during a move through a doorway. If I could just > screw on a > > > new > > > unit without messing with wiring and a contactor, it would be > MUCH better. > > > > > > I did not try to install any yet because there is NO track down, > but on > > > the > > > 5 second initial look-see, they are not as massively oversized as > I > > > expected. What do ya'll think about relying on the points to > carry the > > > power? I have not been a fan of it before, but again, I am hoping > to > > > GREATLY > > > simplify the wiring this time. > > > > > > Thank You, > > > Bill Lane > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
