Can you run 2 ho scale dc locos in tandem and or on the same track is it safe for them and the controller or will it cook something?
Provided that the locomotives are in good working order you can run two on the same track. The problem comes in the fact that speed matching them can be tricky. A faster engine in the rear will try to derail the lead engine, a faster engine in front tries to drag the rear, giving it a workout. Try putting both engines on the track with a foot distance between them and see how close they are.
The powerpack shouldn’t have a problem, they typically can power many engines at a time. As noted the problem comes with the engines themselves. They need to be at least close to the same speed, at least within say 5-10% of each other.
In other words, if you have two engines that at 50% power from the powerpack both run at around 30 (scale) MPH or so, they should be find running together. If one runs at 30 and the other at 50, they’re going to cause problems running together. You may need to add resistors to the fast one to slow it down, or remove the lightboard from the slower one to speed it up.
I’ve found Atlas engines tend to be pretty close to each other in speed so work well together, but for other companies it can very hit-or-miss. In the long term, the only way to really speed-match engines is to go to DCC.
2 locomotives on DC?..We did it for years using a 2 power pack cab control and block wiring. Again… 2 locomotives on DC ? …Time to switch to DCC…Once it’s in, you’ll never go back to DC…chuck
The answer is yes, IF you’ve got two locos that match each other in speed control. I have a fairly large fleet of brass steamers, and among them are quite a few locos that match each other very well, so double-heading is seldom a problem. I’m strictly DC (far too many locos to convert), and I have a mountain railroad mainline with fairly steady grades, so double-heading is often a necessity, if not for actual pulling power, at least for prototypical ‘looks’.
Granted, DCC makes it much easier to double-head, or use helpers mid-train or in front of the cabooose, but with careful planning, the same thing can be done in DC. I do it all the time.
Tom [:)]
On my original HO layout I ran an ABBA set of Varney FA and FB diesels. I set all four on the track spaced about a foot apart. I mixed them until they all ran together, i.e. the fastest ones were pushing the slowest one. Problems came when dead track was encountered leaving the lead engine stoppped and the pushers spinning their wheels. I solved this by running flexible wiring between all four units so that no matter what track problems they incountered all four kept chugging along. I also ran an AA set of Athearn PAs using the same method.
I made small hooks and loops in the wiring between units so I could remove any unit for servicing.
That is one of the reasons that I have no need to convert to DCC.
Well, except that in DCC there wouldn’t be a ‘faster one’ or ‘slower one’, by adjusting a few CV’s, they’d all be running at the same speed. [swg]
How about 3 in tandem and no DCC required?
Bah, humbug!
2 steam locos (non-identical) doubleheading the same train? Do it all the time.
DMU and EMU trains with two (or more) powered cars? A couple of dozen every scale-time ‘day.’
Catenary locos with two separate motors in parallel? Four running, more to be reactivated as track capacity increases.
All done on good old analog DC - and many of them have been going strong since long before DCC was anything but a science fiction concept. So has the operating scheme, which has been set in stone since 1964.
To Brother Clark and others who have drunk deep at the well of DCC - it isn’t the only game in town. In my case, it isn’t even the best game. If you would rather use it to run your train(s,) fine. I’d rather use my MZL system to run my entire railroad - all 146 scheduled trains per ‘day.’
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - analog DC, MZL system)
Chuck, I was a real naysayer and holdout for years about DCC. Now that I’ve been using it for about 8 years there’s no way to ever go back. To make or break consist, yard operations, mixed ops plus all the goodies that go w/ DCC I’m sold. I know that all your equipment would be a bear to convert and you seem happy with what you run.
I know that it may not be nec for everyone. Most home layouts that were built w/ intricate blocking and cabs work fine. The old club ran block control in 2 divisions and had 8 cabs. This was done from 1953 to early 90s. I had fun, of coarse it was the only game in town.
My main line loop is has long drags and requires 2 powered units to pull them all, sometimes I use 3 units depending on how many cars. I am pretty sure there is close to 60ft of running track with some feeder wires in several locations. I use an MRC 9500 pack and it works fine. The one thing you can’t do in DC as far as speed matching is running different loco’s from different makes that don’t match speed. Do like others said and match up your loco’s as far as speed.
My Layout is half DC and the other half is DCC. I’m happy both ways, it would break the bank for me if I had to convert all my loco’s to DCC.
Well, except that in DCC there wouldn’t be a ‘faster one’ or ‘slower one’, by adjusting a few CV’s, they’d all be running at the same speed. 
The question was about DC operation not DCC. If he wanted to know abot DCC I am sure that he would have asked about it. Incidently, my first HO layout was built in 1949, fifty years ago and those lashups were still going strong in 1984 when I packed them up to move to Sunny Scottsdale, Arizona.
Like Chuck said, Bah Humbug!
On my DC powered layout:
My Proto 2-8-8-2’s run just fine with my Bachmann 2-6-6-2’s and with 50 hoppers behind them on 1.8% grades it does not matter one bit which one is a little faster.
And Three Bachmann 2-8-0’s can do a similar job, just like they did on the Western Maryland.
And 3 and 4 unit sets of Alco FA’s or EMD F units run smoothly at all speeds. Not to mention the GP7’s that assist those hood units from time to time.
OK, I don’t run any PA1’s with a 2-10-2, but I think we would be hard pressed to find that prototype photo anyway.
Every time a question like this is asked, the DCC sales people come out like used car salesman.
Did the OP say DCC? All those who critized my comparisons of advanced DC systems to DCC should consider that a two way street.
Sheldon
Um…didnt you say that your layout is under construction? Still making things up?
Here is a little quote…found at this thread…http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/148946.aspx?PageIndex=3
[quote]
David,
My layout, and its control system are still under construction, BUT you are quite welcome to come to Bel Air, MD and see the other layout on which the system has been installed. It is a layout which has been on the NMRA national convention tour and is on open house tours numerious times through out the year. If you are ever in the Baltimore or Philly area, let me
Why would we be threatened? If I wanted to switch to DCC all I have to do is go to Digitrax. The Zephyr can use the DC throttle and be upgrade with other items that just swap out. The technologically advanced digit control of the Zephry almost makes it so my “dinosaur” analogue DC controller will never be inferior. No only if computers where like that.
Just because its under costruction doesn’t mean nothing is running, it does fill an 800 sq ft room after all.
Sheldon
Actually, the book will first be offered to RMC or MR as a series of articles so everyone can have it for free.
Sheldon
Nope, you said your control system was under construction…stop trying to back track.
David B
Sheldon,
Your offerings and ideas seem old shcool. But you seem to know what your talking about far as DC controlling goes. My current layout is “under construction” and is half DC and half DCC. More or less the DCC section is the yard I have and one loop that is short. My system is an older DCC system, not going to say what make it is because it will draw some fire. I have been using block controls for years with no troubles at all, and still like my DC control. Double heading and speed matching is not really an issue with the way its wired up and choice of loco’s, I try and keep the same manufacture when double heading.
Yes, I know us DC Neanderthals are a product of old school thinking, but hey. We do what we can with what we got. I like the way My DCC section operates, it was easy to set up and get running and cuts down on allot of the wire issues you have with DC operation. Decoders are fair in price, but I just can’t bring myself to dropping tons of money into decoders to convert all my fleet. So I split the difference between the 2 systems, Yes it would be nice to grab whatever I want out of the display cabinet that is in DCC, and put them on the track and double head what ever I want, but again, cost is going to be a factor.
Now the original post was asking about running loco’s in tandem in “DC”? There was allot of quick reply’s with go to DCC, and thats fine. If thats what you can afford and what loco’s you own, they might be older ones that would need allot of mods made, or even brass. I like my DCC, it does what I want and runns the way I want. I have several people I know that have all DCC loco’s, RTR right out of the box, just drop one in and your off. This is fine for the MR people that have small roster of engines and extra money. I catch all kinds of static for for not converting everything over to DCC from them, and I always point to my cabinet full of engines and the ones that are in their boxes, and then hold out my other hand expecting some coin to be dropped
“UNDER CONSTRUCTION” Does not necessarily mean INOPERABLE either, how many layouts are still under construction, and are run frequently, it can be true for a control system as well. Just because it is not finnished doesn’t make it unusable.
Doug