# Internet Model Railroad



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Hi!
I just joined. Check out my internet controllable model railroad at www.internetmodelrailroad.com

Atlas Locomotives - my own internet connected DCC system.


----------



## DavefromMD (Jul 25, 2013)

Could not see a picture.


----------



## johnfl68 (Feb 1, 2015)

Worked fine for me, neat idea.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

DavefromMD said:


> Could not see a picture.


The video does not work on some devices. It works on a PC (my Windows 7 32 bit example - to be exact) in IE, Chrome, and Firefox. It works on a Kindle using Chrome. It works on my current Android phone but not my old one. It is basically intended for a PC.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

johnfl68 said:


> Worked fine for me, neat idea.


Thanks!


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Fascinating Vernon

Am I understanding that the locos are equipped with
NMRA standard decoders, and your system provides
the track voltage and controls in lieu of commercial DCC controllers?

Your system screen shows controls for two locomotives. I
have 9 DCC locos on my layout. I assume there is
some way that you can 'address' each loco on the
layout.

Are you using NMRA DCC decoders to power the turnouts?

Can the system operate 2 or more trains automatically
using the Camera system to detect proximity of other
trains? There was a totally computer controlled layout
video here on the Forum a year or so ago. It had the
capability of stopping trains, for example, where two
tracks crossed, to avoid a crash. Can your system
do this?

What are your plans for the
system?

Don


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

*Am I understanding that the locos are equipped with
NMRA standard decoders, and your system provides
the track voltage and controls in lieu of commercial DCC controllers?*

Yes. The system supplies DCC power/signal to the track. The locomotives are standard, off the shelf, Atlas DCC units. The Netburner, Freescale MOD5270 processor generates the DCC signal. An Ebay L298 H bridge module provides the necessary power level at up to 4 AMPS. 

*Your system screen shows controls for two locomotives. I
have 9 DCC locos on my layout. I assume there is
some way that you can 'address' each loco on the
layout. *

The system could be programmed to address more locomotives. Since my original idea was to have two it only addresses two locomotives at this point. Locomotive A is at address 3 (the default) and Locomotive B is at address 4. The system is capable of programming the address CV to either of these addresses. So if I buy another locomotive I can make it 3 or 4 at will. With code changes more addresses could be added. 

*Are you using NMRA DCC decoders to power the turnouts?*

No. The turnouts are operated by relays - the relays supply 12VDC (the track power supply) for 200 milliseconds to switch the turnouts. The system does have spare relays and more could be added. It is also capable of PWM (variable) building lighting and so on. 

*Can the system operate 2 or more trains automatically
using the Camera system to detect proximity of other
trains? There was a totally computer controlled layout
video here on the Forum a year or so ago. It had the
capability of stopping trains, for example, where two
tracks crossed, to avoid a crash. Can your system
do this?*

Only one locomotive (B) is equipped with the necessary IR LED - so it will do the automatic trip while controlling just that locomotive. It does not know where A is and A must be parked near the house. The machine vision system is cheap and it uses a "small" microprocessor that does not have the memory to process a full bitmap. A sync separator and video comparator find the location of that one IR bright spot. The next step would be to replace a headlight with an IR LED on both locomotives so the system could turn on one at a time and therefore "know" the location of each. That would facilitate collision avoidance - but it does not do that now. Beyond that - given the ability to get a full video frame, locomotives could be identified by color. 

*What are your plans for the
system?*

Still thinking - I may go to a more complex layout that would allow a more interesting trip. Open to suggestion.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Vernon said:


> The video does not work on some devices. It works on a PC (my Windows 7 32 bit example - to be exact) in IE, Chrome, and Firefox. It works on a Kindle using Chrome. It works on my current Android phone but not my old one. It is basically intended for a PC.


It worked for me using Safari on a Mac.


----------



## johnfl68 (Feb 1, 2015)

With JMRI and a computer interface, you can do a lot more automation even with a simple computer like a Raspberry Pi 3. There is even a app you can have people connect with to control your layout online. Engine Driver is the Android app, there is a Apple app as well. I'm sitting at the airport right now, so it's not easy for me to post more on that right now, but take a look at JMRI. http://jmri.sourceforge.net


Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

johnfl68 said:


> With JMRI and a computer interface, you can do a lot more automation even with a simple computer like a Raspberry Pi 3. There is even a app you can have people connect with to control your layout online. Engine Driver is the Android app, there is a Apple app as well. I'm sitting at the airport right now, so it's not easy for me to post more on that right now, but take a look at JMRI. http://jmri.sourceforge.net
> 
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


That is great for the individual who owns the model railroad. 

First - I wanted to do my own. I am retired, have lots of time, so I actually wanted to create an entire system from scratch. I need something to do. 

Second - the idea was to allow a casual surfer, anyone with a browser, to able to control a model railroad as entertainment. Such a person does not want to download, install, and learn JMRI. I have never seen a website that would allow me to surf in and operate a JMRI train. Does one exist? 

Third - JMRI requires purchase of a rather pricey commercial DCC system to actually power and run the system. Microprocessors are comparatively cheap and the H bridge that drives my track is $2.25 on Ebay. The computer and Kindle human interfaces are already on hand. You know - no social security raise this year means I have to get creative.

Fourth - The system does not go through my PC or require it to be on. My PC remains firewalled and the hackers are blocked. They might be able to brick the model RR but that is it. It can be on the internet 24/7.


----------



## johnfl68 (Feb 1, 2015)

Only you have to download JMRI. I believe there are some web based control options as well, besides the apps.

I also recall some Arduino DCC base controller options as well if you want a cheaper do it yourself option.

You can do a lot with JMRI and it is Free and Open Source.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## johnfl68 (Feb 1, 2015)

Also, sorry my mistake, I thought I saw you were using DCC.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

johnfl68 said:


> Only you have to download JMRI. I believe there are some web based control options as well, besides the apps.
> 
> I also recall some Arduino DCC base controller options as well if you want a cheaper do it yourself option.
> 
> ...


The control systems that talk to your PC are expensive. I just priced an entry level Digitrax "starter set". They wanted $455! I don't do Arduino because it is basically a lot of pre-written code. If your hobby is building birdhouses you don't go buy a plastic one at Wal Mart where you just have to attach the stand. You get some wood and build a birdhouse. Likewise, I get a processor, design a circuit board and build something. 

This started from a desire to join the "internet of things". I didn't know anything about model trains but had the idea that it would be something good to control over the internet under camera observation. I looked on Ebay for a used locomotive and some track and found there was a thing called DCC that would let me run two (or more) locomotives. I decided that would be more interesting than running something in a circle so I downloaded the DCC spec and went that route. I will note that my system will also control all kinds of stuff around the house from a space heater to lights to the irrigation system. It is more than just a model RR controller. I had the circuit board made in China (you can just send them the CAD files) and total cost to build is around $100. I think that the cheapest Bachman DCC controller is $130 and it just does locomotives - no switches, accessories, machine vision, internet connection - or anything like that.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

johnfl68 said:


> Also, sorry my mistake, I thought I saw you were using DCC.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


Yes - the two locomotives are DCC. The turnouts and other devices are not and are wired separately to relays.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Used parts from the old robot arm to make camera 2 on the model railroad at www.internetmodelrailroad.com both pan and tilt. It can now observe the entire layout. The servos were not powerful enough for the robot arm, it wouldn't even pick itself up when fully extended without stripping gears - but they are great for this application.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Cool internet controllable railroad. Very clever. Nice.

Welcome to the forum.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Lee Willis said:


> Cool internet controllable railroad. Very clever. Nice.
> 
> Welcome to the forum.


Thank you!


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

I would object to the idea that all arduinos are pre-written code. I've been playing with arduinos to control my own locos, and am now in the process of switching to an ESP822-12 which is a full arduino-like computer with a lot more flash storage and an onboard wifi, and I'm going to add a micro-SD card socket for more storage. All of my test code for controlling my train so far has been written entirely from scratch, including a web server for controlling the loco via wifi. Once I have time to build the new ESP control module, the next step will be basic collision avoidance followed by some method of automatically determining where the loco is at on the layout.

Don't short-change the arduinos, they can be pretty powerful little devices, and they're dirt-cheap.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> I would object to the idea that all arduinos are pre-written code. I've been playing with arduinos to control my own locos, and am now in the process of switching to an ESP822-12 which is a full arduino-like computer with a lot more flash storage and an onboard wifi, and I'm going to add a micro-SD card socket for more storage. All of my test code for controlling my train so far has been written entirely from scratch, including a web server for controlling the loco via wifi. Once I have time to build the new ESP control module, the next step will be basic collision avoidance followed by some method of automatically determining where the loco is at on the layout.
> 
> Don't short-change the arduinos, they can be pretty powerful little devices, and they're dirt-cheap.


I stand corrected. I had thought Arduino was about downloading a "sketch" and flashing an LED or doing whatever. For that reason I never bothered with an Arduino processor but I do use Arduino IO modules of various types. I use a 68HS12 and write in assembler for some projects and the previous version of the model RR that I just replaced used an HS12 to generate DCC and drive the track (taking commands from the Netburner via RS-232). I also use a FriendlyARM Mini2440 (C compiler) and have a few "bare metal" projects I did with that - including a web server controlling a lamp and heater (It has an awesome touch screen). The Netburner TCP/IP functions (Eclipse C compiler) are better than my 2440 stuff however - so I mostly use it now. With this latest project I wanted to eliminate the HS12 and make the unit cheaper and more suited to possible production. Using a tablet and PC as a human interface - DCC under $100 is possible. 

Your project is interesting - WiFi is another thing I never got into and I basically have an Ethernet cable to everything. I need to learn more about WiFi.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

The 'sketch' is just their catch-phrase word, basically it just means the source code for a program. There is a huge number of example programs available to perform different tasks though, which you incorporate into your own overall program. I think I've even run across examples of communicating with DCC, although I'm not certain. You mentioned ARM processors, I think most of the arduinos are based on Atmel chipsets. Basically the IDE compiles C code for the specific chip, then flashes it over USB. The wifi device I'm working with is a little more complicated, requiring a USB-to-serial device for programming, however it also has the possibility of updating its own code via wifi, so future updates could be done wirelessly.

If you simply want a loco to pick up the basic DCC signals from the track, a basic arduino would likely do the trick. For my project, I want to try and develop 'smart' locos which not only can be controlled from a web page (avoiding the need to download a specialized app), but can also be given a number of tasks which they each perform autonomously. For this reason, I need more horsepower than your typical arduino, thus my reason for changing over to the ESP. It still gets programmed from the arduino IDE and can use the same code, however it also has a complete library to handle the wifi procedures. This chip also has 4MB of flash (compared to 28K on the arduino), and an 80Mhz cpu (compared to 8Mhz or 16Mhz). Add in flash storage for data and the possibility of each loco acting as it's own web server, and you have quite a powerhouse for under $10 that will easily fit into my HO standard and narrow gauge steam locos.

A wifi connection is programmatically almost identical to an ethernet connection. With wifi you need to provide the SSID of the network you wish to connect to, then the device gets its IP via DHCP and you're all set to go. What I did was create a port listener in PHP on one of my servers. I created my own command set for talking, and the listener reports the information to the web page, where the values such as speed and direction can be changed.

One last major piece of hardware I intend to add is a camera. I have seen cell phone cameras only 1/4" square that can interface with an arduino. If I could get a low-res video (say 320x240) sent to the web page controlling each loco, it shouldn't be too hard on bandwidth and would give an excellent sense of really driving the loco.

An example of my web screen can be seen here (needs a fairly recent browser to view). This has a sample image of 200x400 pixels. The speed slider when operational shows both the speed you have selected, and the actual current speed of the loco, and the screen also shows the track location and an occupancy signal. In addition I would also include switches for other options such as cab lights.

Putting together the hardware and software is fairly easy, the real challenge is finding the time to actually DO it!


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> The 'sketch' is just their catch-phrase word, basically it just means the source code for a program. There is a huge number of example programs available to perform different tasks though, which you incorporate into your own overall program. I think I've even run across examples of communicating with DCC, although I'm not certain. You mentioned ARM processors, I think most of the arduinos are based on Atmel chipsets. Basically the IDE compiles C code for the specific chip, then flashes it over USB. The wifi device I'm working with is a little more complicated, requiring a USB-to-serial device for programming, however it also has the possibility of updating its own code via wifi, so future updates could be done wirelessly.
> 
> If you simply want a loco to pick up the basic DCC signals from the track, a basic arduino would likely do the trick. For my project, I want to try and develop 'smart' locos which not only can be controlled from a web page (avoiding the need to download a specialized app), but can also be given a number of tasks which they each perform autonomously. For this reason, I need more horsepower than your typical arduino, thus my reason for changing over to the ESP. It still gets programmed from the arduino IDE and can use the same code, however it also has a complete library to handle the wifi procedures. This chip also has 4MB of flash (compared to 28K on the arduino), and an 80Mhz cpu (compared to 8Mhz or 16Mhz). Add in flash storage for data and the possibility of each loco acting as it's own web server, and you have quite a powerhouse for under $10 that will easily fit into my HO standard and narrow gauge steam locos.
> 
> ...


The ESP fits in an HO scale train? Wow! One problem with N scale is the small size. I would like to mount a camera (a 2.4GHZ "spy cam") on a car but don't have a convenient way to get power from the track. The ability to carry the camera is also kind of marginal - N scale is small. I have a G scale (not set up) that carries a camera and is controlled by the same electronics using a different web page. When it was running the camera simply replaced camera 3 on my web interface. This was DC and very simple. It had a start - stop and reversing relay and ran backwards and forwards at one speed. But you could watch as it circled on the patio. Took it down due to weather and ect. As you can see (picture in the right column of my website) my electronic box is rather large and the circuit board is designed for multiple tasks. It ain't ready to fit in a train of any size.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Somebody should make a car with track power - then have an optional wireless video camera. I would but I can't work with really small stuff.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

The ESP8266-12E that I am working with is 16x24mm, and only 3mm thick. The power supply I put together (see my thread under the technical section) is 12x21x10mm. I finally got in the new capacitors tonight, so I'll have two 47uF caps on the input side for buffering, without adding any addition size to the existing dimensions. I also have a 14-pin chip for controlling the motor. My plan is to fit the power pack and motor chip into the loco, and the computer into the tender, although it might be easier to put everything inside the tender. I'll have to count wires before I decide which way makes more sense.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> The ESP8266-12E that I am working with is 16x24mm, and only 3mm thick. The power supply I put together (see my thread under the technical section) is 12x21x10mm. I finally got in the new capacitors tonight, so I'll have two 47uF caps on the input side for buffering, without adding any addition size to the existing dimensions. I also have a 14-pin chip for controlling the motor. My plan is to fit the power pack and motor chip into the loco, and the computer into the tender, although it might be easier to put everything inside the tender. I'll have to count wires before I decide which way makes more sense.


I used an SN754410, a 14 pin DIP H-bridge, to drive the track in my old (just removed) HS12 board (picture). It is the chip with the surrounding copper heat sink area near the top of the picture. The ground trace is the heat sink. That was cheap and enough to run two locomotives. I just decided I needed to get away from two separate processors and have the MOD5270 do it all. I will find some other use for the HS12 (I use them in a digital propane fuel injection for small generators). That board also did a 4x20 display, a few GPIO and 8 relays (Ebay "arduino" relays). The MOD5370 was the internet connection and talked to this board via RS232. I could never do anything small enough to go in a locomotive - I am just glad the decoders are already there and I just have to drive the track.


----------



## geekchris (Jun 23, 2015)

This is very impressive! I remember awhile back seeing that someone in the Army set something like this up for his DCC layout, so he could run it while he was deployed. Once this technology comes to fruition, you could have entire operating sessions remotely!
Very impressive, thanks for sharing
-Chris


----------



## Gramps (Feb 28, 2016)

This is way over my pay grade. You guys lost me at post #7.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Pretty cute, I ran them around a bit, but I was chicken to select the switch options. I wasn't sure I wouldn't be causing a crash.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Pretty cute, I ran them around a bit, but I was chicken to select the switch options. I wasn't sure I wouldn't be causing a crash.


Ah come on! How will OP ever improve his setup if you don't break a few eggs?


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

I was tempted, but I thought better of it.  I do wonder if he has collision avoidance...


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

There is no collision avoidance yet! 

But they have been crashed before without much damage and while crashing should of course be avoided it has not been a problem. If you leave A where it is - you can try both switches with B without much chance of any issues.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

And - if you just press "TRIP GO" B will make it's own tour and you can just watch the switches and so on ....


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

I was curious about collision avoidance, I didn't see how I could avoid it if I screwed up.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

So here's an interesting item I found... an IR range detector that works with a 4-30cm range (also found on ebay for under $6). Consider the option of slowing your speed based on the proximity of a detected object?

You would need to have a sensor with a wide enough vision to see another train coming around your sharpest curve. My theory is that if a building is detected from the side of the track, it would disappear from the sensor before it got within critical range, while another train on the tracks would just continue to get closer.

A good test of using range detection to control the loco speed would be to have two trains following each other, with the rear train set to a faster speed. Ideally if the rear train gets too close to the front train, it should slow down. A finely-tune system would keep the two trains exactly a few inches apart, never varying. If the rear train can successfully continue following without ever running into the lead train, then the system is working perfectly. In the event of two trains meeting head-to-head, they should each come to a fairly abrupt stop within a few inches of each other.

Of course all of this depends on having a computer onboard each loco, and doesn't address the problem of a train backing into another object, but it's a start.

[EDIT] Note that these sensors are available in a number of ranges. There's a version on ebay for $4.34 that detects between 10-80cm. That would certainly be too large for N, but might be usable for HO. Its all highly subjective to the scale being worked with.

[Another EDIT] Based on the ideas from this article, I ordered these IR emitter/receiver pairs to experiment with. I'm not sure what the exact range will be with them, but I discovered that the module above is over 1.5 inches wide, way too large to use in smaller scale trains. The article makes range detection appear to be a simple process, and I can control the 'view' with a bit of tubing around the receiver. Plus these are MUCH cheaper, I just need to calculate the proper resistors to go with them.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

I would be concerned that it wouldn't have a narrow enough beam and would just return the closest object. If it was on the lead train looking back - it might pick up some random reflection as it went around a curve and slow the following train for no reason. A video camera is more accurate - you get precise co-ordinates and it is harder to spoof. 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RF-Radio-Wi...690111?hash=item4ab7b544ff:g:p5wAAMXQb2JSEEyS

Take the above wireless data transmitter. Put an inverter on the output of a receiver in a car on train A and don't invert train B. Transmit a 1 from the machine vision processor on alternate video frames (zero on the other frame). In one frame the LED on train A is on and you obtain and store the location of A. In the next B - and so on. You have accurate positioning on both trains with very little extra hardware. 

The problem - there is no room in the locomotive, I would have to mount it on top and that would be kind of ugly (the LED that is there now is bad enough) so this would first require a freight car with track electrical pickups. That is the hold up. If somebody would make a car with two #24 wires with track power - that would be awesome. The LED would then be "visible" through a small hole on top of the car.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

I believe those Sharp devices work by triangulation and a lens. So you would have to provide all that for the IR transmitter and receiver. The Sharp receiver is basically a one line CMOS camera and it resolves the illuminated pixel and outputs a proportional voltage. It would take some very fast logic to do time of flight. 100MHZ gives you 3 meter resolution.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

http://www.sbs4dcc.com/nscalewheelwipers.html

It looks like N scale electrical pickups are a thing. I just have to get the right car and the right pickup.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

I think you're over-thinking the Sharp device. From what I've seen of other projects, the diode receiver is simply an analog input: the stronger the IR that it sees, the stronger your voltage. Basically these devices rely on a given room lighting and can be 'blinded' by direct sunlight. You shine an IR LED in front of you and shield the receiver from directly getting light, so it can only pick up reflected light.

For what it's worth, you can do roughly the same thing with two visible LEDs of the same color. Use one as a transmitter and the other as the receiver. It's not pretty, but it's enough to send data.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Shdwdrgn said:


> I think you're over-thinking the Sharp device. From what I've seen of other projects, the diode receiver is simply an analog input: the stronger the IR that it sees, the stronger your voltage. Basically these devices rely on a given room lighting and can be 'blinded' by direct sunlight. You shine an IR LED in front of you and shield the receiver from directly getting light, so it can only pick up reflected light.
> 
> For what it's worth, you can do roughly the same thing with two visible LEDs of the same color. Use one as a transmitter and the other as the receiver. It's not pretty, but it's enough to send data.


https://acroname.com/articles/sharp-infrared-ranger-comparison

The above article describes how it works.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Those IR rangers all look too big for an N-scale rig.


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Those IR rangers all look too big for an N-scale rig.


Yeah that's why I just ordered the base LED and photodiode detectors. It's a lot easier to drill some 3mm holes rather than trying to fit in a unit that is wider than the car.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

I now have day and night lighting effects! The worlds only internet model railroad is even better with selectable day and night lighting - and the machine vision works in both modes. Press the night button and the ambient light falls to moonlight level and the building lights come on. Press day and you have the full previous illumination.


----------



## feldon30 (Dec 30, 2012)

Vernon said:


> I now have day and night lighting effects! The worlds only internet model railroad is even better with selectable day and night lighting - and the machine vision works in both modes. Press the night button and the ambient light falls to moonlight level and the building lights come on. Press day and you have the full previous illumination.


What an impressive project! I just ran the trains around for a bit and it was a lot of fun. And yes I threw the turnouts and drove train B into the siding and back out, and for a time had both A and B on the same track. Thank you for setting this up and sharing it with us!!



Vernon said:


> The control systems that talk to your PC are expensive. I just priced an entry level Digitrax "starter set". They wanted $455!


So just FYI, the Digitrax Zephyr Xtra starter station is $160 and a LocoBuffer USB from RR-Cirkits is $58. These plus JMRI gives you everything to run up to 10 trains, including the ability to setup internet control if you wanted. Still not cheap but not $455.


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Thanks! Glad you liked it!


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

Camera 2 now tracks the train when using the automatic trip! Horizontal only has two postions because the camera can't be mounted high enough to see the curves - but it works well and vertical is great. 

This is the only currently operating internet model railroad in the entire world. And it is the only DCC internet model railroad with machine vision and a tracking camera in human history. Making model railroading great again!


----------



## BrokeCurmudgeon (Feb 8, 2016)

Thanks! Very nice. I am sorry that I ran Loco 1 into the back of Loco 2's train. I forgot to throw the siding switch before I threw the crossover. My apologies!


----------



## Vernon (May 13, 2016)

BrokeCurmudgeon said:


> Thanks! Very nice. I am sorry that I ran Loco 1 into the back of Loco 2's train. I forgot to throw the siding switch before I threw the crossover. My apologies!



No problem. Thanks for running it!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

BrokeCurmudgeon said:


> Thanks! Very nice. I am sorry that I ran Loco 1 into the back of Loco 2's train. I forgot to throw the siding switch before I threw the crossover. My apologies!


That's the fun of running someone else's railroad!


----------

