# Uh oh... Double crossovers... Help.



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

I've put myself in a precarious position.
Because of space limitations, my track plan in the warehouse district calls for two double crossovers (three tracks between two rows of loading docks) that'll have to be joined that way.

I figure it'll create both a switching nightmare, and some troublesome operating issues like shorted frogs and voltage drops, but I don't have much choice.
Also, F.W.I.W., I've never once seen a D.C.O. in prototype trackage.

The Walthers D.C.O. is the only one I can find locally, and (as expected) it's pricey, not to mention that I've heard negative comments about them (i.e., "some have issues with bent ends").

I'm looking for a Peco brand, but haven't had much luck... and haven't heard one way or another about their reliability.

I may be biting off more than I can chew.
Any input or recommendations would be appreciated.
(Code 83 rail, if it matters).


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

I have a Walthers/Shinhora Code 83 doubl-crossover with #6 frogs, and it works quite well. The odd metal tire will short it, but my trains made it through most of the time. I just fed it at all eight rail ends, and that worked marvey.


----------



## santafealltheway (Nov 27, 2012)

I had a look on ebay, they are there, in code 83.

About 80 bucks.

Dunno if they are reliable, but I would assume they are.

The normal PECO switches i just got are amazing. LOVE em. 
Makes atlas look like s**t!


----------



## D&J Railroad (Oct 4, 2013)

I had one on one end of my yard and wasn't happy with it. Replaced it with a couple of #8 crossovers sets. Took up a bit more track but at least they are reliable.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

I purchased two Roco DCOs.. put them in and just could not get them to work reliably.. well they worked but derailments were VERY frequent.. and they would ALWAYS short out.. now Roco is not as good as Shinohara but they are the only brand that uses the snap switch motors and I did not want to add the expense of purchasing 8 tortoise switch motors when the rest of the layout is all snap switch motors (Peco and Atlas). 

I don't believe Peco makes a double crossover. 

What I did is replace the double crossover with two Peco single crossovers and all my derailments went away... well not all of them but all of them caused by the DCO. I am happier without the DCOs on my track, much less cursing. 

I still have the Roco DCOs and someday might either sell them on EBay or take another crack at getting them to work. (will cause more cursing I would guess).


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

LateStarter said:


> I've put myself in a precarious position.
> Because of space limitations, my track plan in the warehouse district calls for two double crossovers (three tracks between two rows of loading docks) that'll have to be joined that way.
> 
> I figure it'll create both a switching nightmare, and some troublesome operating issues like shorted frogs and voltage drops, but I don't have much choice.
> ...


No, they're not prototypical -- it's more of a convenience / space compression aid for modelers.

Walthers is the only brand I'm familiar with. I've heard people suggest Roco and Peco, but so far I only see double slips, which are similar but not identical. Walthers are $100 a pop MSRP, but I've never heard of anyone having trouble with a Walthers turnout before. I have almost 3 dozen (no double crossovers), and they're flawless.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

CTValleyRR said:


> ... I've never heard of anyone having trouble with a Walthers turnout before. I have almost 3 dozen (no double crossovers), and they're flawless.


Thanks...
Very encouraging.

A double slip?
The only one I've ever seen on real rails, is near a grade crossing on the Sub Base in Groton (late '60's).


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

FYI:
I can actually 'get by' with one DCO and two turnouts, but it'd create a logistics problem with switchouts from the docks (longer backing maneuvers).
My main issue wasn't in quantity, but rather in _quality_.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

If you really want to see a nightmare, I once ran across a short video from a guy who had made an HO-scale dual-gauge double slip crossover. I can't even fathom how tedious is must have been to build and troubleshoot that beast.


----------



## lajrmdlr (Apr 25, 2014)

Like on the real RRs double Xovers can be maintenance headaches. That's why they avoid them except in very crowded areas like passenger terminals or congested industrial areas. In fact it seems like they always be "justified" on model RRs. But w/ careful planning they can be replaced w/ single Xovers.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

lajrmdlr said:


> ... But w/ careful planning they can be replaced w/ single Xovers.


The only single crossovers I'm aware of, are code 100, N-scale, or Bachman EZtrack.
Or Fast Track templates.


----------



## D&J Railroad (Oct 4, 2013)

The double slips can be very interesting. I installed one on the D&J Railroad about a year ago and it still works great.


----------



## lajrmdlr (Apr 25, 2014)

LateStarter said:


> The only single crossovers I'm aware of, are code 100, N-scale, or Bachman EZtrack.
> Or Fast Track templates.


Nothing says you have to buy everything ready made. Single Xovers can be made using any two switches put together w/ rail joiners. You may have to cut some rails to get them to whatever spacing you're using for parallel tracks. It's probably been discussed here or other MR forums.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

LateStarter said:


> The only single crossovers I'm aware of, are code 100, N-scale, or Bachman EZtrack.
> Or Fast Track templates.


I made my single crossover by taking two turnouts and configuring them so they make a single crossover.. so when approaching the turnouts you can go either straight or crossover to the next line.. but coming from the other direction... they can only go straight. 

I wanted to have it so I could have two way traffic.. but then connected my two mainlines wrong so no matter what you do the lines will crossover at some point. I can still do two way traffic but now I have to stop one train (like they do in real life) to wait for the other to pass. 
Poor planning on my part.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

Quick pic.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

Hey Pat, what are the guard rails for in between the two turnouts? I've only seen them used on bridges, didn't realize there might be other applications for them?


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

It is my version of a re-railer. When I was getting crazy derailings I built them to kind of pull the wheels back on track before they got to the turn out. They worked pretty well for the kind of derailings I was having an issue with (one front wheel being slightly off the track). They work MUCH better than those two black re-railers.. which have never actually re-railed anything since I installed them, but have derailed a few things in the past. I was going to make them longer and maybe do some type of outside guide to help them.. but then I ripped up (replaced) the track that was causing a problem and no longer get many de-railings. 

Honestly those Peco turnouts are the best re-railers I have ever seen.. they will actually pull the loco back on track and force the wheels to pop right back in place.. of course this causes a brief short circuit.. but they work great.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

Ah nice idea, and they look so much better than the black rerailers! I had those when I was a kid, and they barely ever worked for me either. I'll have to keep this idea in mind...


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Not many negative reports, reviews, or comments on the Walthers DCO since 2014.
Prior to that, many forum grumbles about bent ends that caused nightmarish mate-up issues.

I guess they got that problem solved.


----------



## dinwitty (Oct 29, 2015)

Can you use MSPaint and scratch us a rough drawing what you are doing?


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

dinwitty said:


> Can you use MSPaint and scratch us a rough drawing what you are doing?


No...
All I have is this phone.

It's a 3-track stretch of warehouse/loading dock sidings with the mainline between them... all spaced for DCO centerlines.

Track isn't laid yet -- benchwork is in early progress.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

Good idea Dinwitty.. or you can download SCARM and use that to plan out your layout and then we can all see it.

oops.. sorry I didn't see your comment on only having a phone.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

What about drawing a sketch on paper, taking a pic with your phone, and posting that here? You have a phone, we've sent people to the moon and back with much much less


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)




----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

Cool, now what about measurements of how much space you have to work with? Is there a reason why you have the two crossovers offset (other than working with pre-built track)? And what are your requirements for trains passing between the various lines?

It might help to set some parameters for the discussion. For example, if we label the top line as A, the middle as B, and the bottom as C, and then we label the left side as West and the right side as East, that gives us a common reference to discuss the possible traffic. Working within those parameters, I could tell you that an East-bound train in your sketch above can move from track C all the way to track A, but a West-bound train can only travel from C to B, and there is a similar restriction when starting from track A... 

As a quick reference, say you wanted something that allowed full movement between all three lines. Using some standard Peco pieces and 2" centers between lines, I came up with this sketch -- however it's pretty big, you still need at least 32 inches of straight track to implement this, and I know you said you were tight on space.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> As a quick reference, say you wanted something that allowed full movement between all three lines. Using some standard Peco pieces and 2" centers between lines, I came up with this sketch -- however it's pretty big, you still need at least 32 inches of straight track to implement this, and I know you said you were tight on space.


That's astounding!
I've never seen those. What are they called, "W's"?
That might work as well (or better) as/than DCO's.

A-B-C, and East/West works for me...
B (center) is the mainline... A is a warehouse shipping dock siding... C is a staging/queue track. [I know it'd be better to have the mainline outboard, but I wanted the effect of hauling a long slow drag between rows of cars].

It all runs on the front edge of a 10-foot wide layout, and easily works within a 3-foot length.

I believe DCO's are 3-inches center-to-center.
What is C.T.C. for those 'W's'?


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

I just now learned (after rifling through Google) that what you've drawn are called 3-way turnouts.
I feel kinda' stupid that I never knew about them.
They just might be a better choice for this situation.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

IT looks like to me.. the sections on the far left and the far right are three way whys.. or Wyes.. or however it is spelled. IN the middle is 4 normal turnouts. 

IT looks like you will need 8 turnout motors just for this one section? that is $200 right there if you are going with Tortoise motors plus another $200 for the turnouts (averaging $20 per turnout I think). Pretty sweet section of track though.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

pat_smith1969 said:


> IT looks like you will need 8 turnout motors just for this one section? that is $200 right there if you are going with Tortoise motors plus another $200 for the turnouts (averaging $20 per turnout I think). Pretty sweet section of track though.


Looks like 4 motors.
Walthers 3-ways are $55/$60.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

There is a lot of gee-whiz about this hobby, and single, double slips, and three-way turnouts are among those that qualify.

Just be warned:

They don't work well with all rolling stock wheels. There's nothing wrong with them...don't get me wrong...but you may find that the odd item of rolling stock has wide enough metal tires that any one tire will bridge two rails very close to each other at the same time, but of opposite phase/polarity. When that happens, your base controller "should" cut power to the tracks immediately and beep. "Should" IF you have strong 15 volts running throughout your rails. When you go cheap and power long lengths of nickel-silver rails with only one set of feeders, the voltage can drop enough that your short detection circuitry can't actually do its job.

Be prepared to have to fiddle in this hobby. Be prepared to have to trouble-shoot, to observe many repetition, back and forth, in the same place, where one or more items causes a derailment or a short. Sorry, there are sometimes no shortcuts.

You will have to learn to figure out why power doesn't run in some small lengths of rail, as I found out with my three-way. I had to unwind small braided steel wire to get a single strand and then to solder that bowed strand across a sloppy joiner midway along my three-way. I also had to use clear nail polish to paint the bearing surface a short distance on the top of one rail near a frog. I also learned to gap all three of the exits after the wye, and to wire all three leads after the gaps so that the could get power if their serving Peco #6 Insulfrogs didn't feed them properly.

I'm not trying to impress you or to make you fearful, just hoping to issue a caveat that the more complicated your track system the more complicated are both the wiring and the resultant problems. Meaning less fun, higher blood pressure, more sour faces from your best friend upstairs who knows you better than you do.

This ends the Public Service Announcement. Now, back to our regular programming.


----------



## pat_smith1969 (Aug 21, 2016)

LateStarter said:


> Looks like 4 motors.
> Walthers 3-ways are $55/$60.
> 
> View attachment 243577


2 motors per 3-way (he has two speced out).. the one for each normal turnout (he has 4 of these in his diagram). So 8...

(2) 3-way = $110
(4) turnouts = $80
(8) tortois motors = $200

so that little piece of track is $390 before tax. Not saying he should/should not do it.. just saying that that is a lot of bread invested in 36" or so inches of track.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

Yeah it's definitely pricey, and I can imagine the 3-way turnouts will add a lot of extra troubleshooting to get that section rolling smoothly... but if you have a limited area to work with and you just absolutely have to have full access across all of the lines, then that's probably the smallest way to make it happen.

There was another setup that I saw awhile back which was even more impressive. If I remember right, it was four mainlines with five double-slips and four turnouts, permitting all traffic from either direction to move from any line to any other line.

(Some time passes...) Hmm I tried to draw it out, but it's not laying out the way I remembered it. Ah well, here's a 5-line crossover that requires 64 inches to fit in, five double-slips, and six turnouts (again all Peco parts). The cost for this would be "if you have to ask, you can't afford it."


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> ... and you just absolutely have to have full access across all of the lines, then that's probably the smallest way to make it happen.


Thanks for the help and the input.
Track switching has always been my Achilles heel. Never could make sense out of it, so my old layout never worked like I wanted. I want this one to be right.
I know railroading -- but I don't know much about _model_ railroading.

I've been watching tutorial vids of SCARM. I don't have a PC, so I guess it won't work for me.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> Yeah it's definitely pricey, and I can imagine the 3-way turnouts will add a lot of extra troubleshooting to get that section rolling smoothly...


I knew it'd be pricey going in...
But price doesn't scare me so much any more -- I'm good at saving up for what I need or want -- the nine diesels I have took me two years to save up for.
At least the 3-ways are somewhat less expensive than the DCO's.

Troubleshooting though -- different animal.
But I know I'll get lots of help here with that.
Thankyou.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> ... I came up with this sketch...


Ok, I count four turnouts and two 3-way's in your drawing.
Assuming the turnouts to be #6's, what would center-to-center track distance be?


----------



## lajrmdlr (Apr 25, 2014)

In Shdwdrgn's drawing in blue there's 2 LH & @ RH on the outside tracks & 5 double slip switches between the middle tracks but no 3 way switches at all.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

lajrmdlr said:


> In Shdwdrgn's drawing in blue there's 2 LH & @ RH on the outside tracks & 5 double slip switches between the middle tracks but no 3 way switches at all.


No...
Post #25.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

That was drawn in xtrkcad using Peco parts that were loaded into the system. In this case the turnouts are marked as "small", which is close to but not quite a #4. I only had a single option for the three-way in my library, but since it matches the other turnouts, I would assume it is also a 'small'. The parts are supposed to be accurate, but since I have no Peco parts for comparison I make no promises.


----------



## thedoc (Oct 15, 2015)

The real RR's had one thing that model RR's don't have, and that is distance. They could start out miles to get the train on the correct track, where modelers usually have only a few feet. Real RR's didn't use double crossovers if they didn't need to, and usually they didn't need to. Modelers have developed all sorts of space saving track arrangements that the real RR's didn't need to use.


----------



## jlc41 (Feb 16, 2016)

This looks and sounds interesting, looking forward to see what you come up with.


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

As you've all probably noticed... I'm 'switchingly' challenged.
I know about the railroad I model... But I'm not a complete model railroader.


----------

