# Crossover figure 8



## britblad (Jan 2, 2012)

so i have a loop that has a figure 8 as part of its loop i have both cross tracks isolated and powered as 2 different blocks so do i need 2 reversing loop units or do i need more or less ?


----------



## tjcruiser (Jan 10, 2010)

I don't think you'll need two blocks or special reverse loop equipment. You really don't have a reverse loop. If you trace out the path of Rail A and Rail B, you'll see that they never lead into each other. Rail A is the outer rail for half of a fig 8 and the inner rail for the other half (and vice versa for Rail B), but the rails never touch.

If you look at a typical crossing, there's no electrical cross-connection between Rail A and Rail B ...










TJ


----------



## britblad (Jan 2, 2012)

Right but its a figure 8 not just a cross over when the track comes across the outside becomes the inside track and the inside track becomes the outside track hence a sort when you cross thru the switches that i forgot to mention. there is a loop outside the figure 8 that is part of it to realy its 2 reversing loops!


----------



## NIMT (Jan 6, 2011)

Is this what you are talking about?


----------



## britblad (Jan 2, 2012)

yes NIMT that's exactly what I'm talking about


----------



## NIMT (Jan 6, 2011)

Here are two of many possible solutions.


----------



## britblad (Jan 2, 2012)

thanks for the help that gets me where i need to be!


----------



## Brakeman Jake (Mar 8, 2009)

Well,I do like pattern number two much better as I feel that number one has an oversight...forgive me Sean...While it has the advantage of needing only one AR1,version one makes for an extremely short polarity reversing section of track,thus allowing only one loco to cross it at a time.Consists would indeed short out (my Challenger spans longer than an X crossing).

The same electrical pattern would work (powering the X crossing) but having the insulators at the end turnouts (or half way) as in version twnly one AR1 needed just the same as long as no more than one loco (or consist) enters the lengthened crossing area.

Then,for an extra expense (second AR1),version two is obviously best.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Couldn't you put a short piece of insulated track on each leg of the x-over of the length necessary to prevent the short on the first one?


----------



## Brakeman Jake (Mar 8, 2009)

As Sean stated,there are a few ways that would do.What I meant is that the Xover should be lengthened somewhat on all(un-insulated from the Xover) legs to accomodate longer locos and/or consists.But doing this...well...might as well have the insulators at the turnouts like in version two.

Then,one may elect to have no insulators in the eight figure and insulate both ends of both the outer straights connecting the loops then have these as reversing sections.And if only one train is to run at a time,both can be powered by a single AR1.


----------



## NIMT (Jan 6, 2011)

Jake,
You are exactly right! I just over simplified it!


----------

