Thanks for starting this one Allan.

A few asked, "Why DeadRail?  I don't really like that term".

It's actually a pretty appropriate term when you think of it.

Traditional model railroading uses the rails to carry electricity.  Like many terms in electric and electronic the term "dead" is meant to convey the idea that the electrical component is inactive or non-functional because it lacks electric power.

Dead Circuit
Bead Battery
Dead Wire
Dead Outlet
Dead Switch
Dead time (electronics)
Dead zone (wireless communication)

So it only makes sense that rails with no electricity would be DeadRail.

I've seen once other term, mostly local here called BPRC.  Battery Powered Remote Control.

Try googling BPRC.  You won't find anything close to its meaning.  And if it you google Battery Powered Remote Control you will get pages of things before you start seeing anything railroad related.

So DeadRail rail it is.  It's internationally known and used.  That is until enough people get together and try to change it.

Remember when this # used to be called the POUND sign and not the HASHTAG sign?  Who the heck was responsible for renaming that symbol anyway?  What was wrong with pound?

Have Fun!
Ron

Allan - Great to hear of your work adding "dead rail" and battery powered trains articles to the OGR Magazine. The articles previously published are very interesting and I am sure many more readers would like to learn more about it's application in O scale.

Ron045 has been a great contributor to the Forum on this topic with his posts and could be your "go to guy."

It will be interesting to see who is first to market with 2-rail track that is a direct replacement for any of the various 3-rail track systems. In other words, 2-rail O31 track that will fit perfectly in place of 3-rail O31 for those wanting to convert to dead rail.

In the next day or two we will ad a new category for this topic since we really don't have a good fit right now.  In the meantime, I am open to responses here as far as what to name the new category / subforum.  Should it be "Deadrail / battery power"?  OR ... ?

Ron made a pretty compelling case for the term Dead Rail.  I think your initial idea of "Deadrail / Battery Power" ought to catch the right eyeballs.

The title of this topic is good. Battery Power Remote Control . Right to the point.

As a deadicated 2 railer,    "Deadrail / Battery Power"   gets my vote,

ECI

How about:

"BPRC/Dead Rail" or

"Battery Powered Remote Control/ BPRC/ Dead Rail"

just my 2cents

Hallelujah!

What a timely, long-awaited "Treat" for this forum and the hobby!!!

And so it begins!

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!

I think this would be a great addition.  I keep playing with this, getting ready to convert my second loco.  I think the forum members who have been trailblazing have a lot to share. 

I believe this is common in outdoor G scale as it eliminates issue with dirty track and poor electrical continuity.

Great idea guys  !!!!    Wouldnt it behoove the manufacturers to sell new product with dead rail installed   Seems like they may be a little shortsighted on this   One of our members runs the yard with two dead rail engines and I love it.  Seems like its a little expensive as a DIY but would love to buy a brand spanking new engine that I can run across the floor

ALLAN and/or Alan - Is there a way to add previous posts and threads concerning the topic of dead rail and battery power into your new Forum category. There has been some great info already posted on this topic.

I'm guessing that in the long run, someone will figure out that charging through the track makes sense for lots of folks, so we'll have "Not Always Dead-Rail" .  Look forward to hearing more.

@OGR CEO-PUBLISHER

I vote for Dead Rail/ Battery Power. I've been following along with the various posts on the subject.

Since Blunami by Soundtraxx is gaining some traction around here, might be another new topic to consider.

Bob

Deadrail (or "DR", to abbreviate) is very appealing; the problem is it's too late for me. Too old to "throw away everything" (a figure of speech) and start over. Same thing happened to me with 3Rail Scale. Too many Big Couplers and their attendant footprint to convert everything. DR also has the advantage of center-rail elimination, which 3RS does not, by definition.

Seems to me if one could power your existing TMCC with AC from a battery/inverter in the unit, one could continue to use the TMCC system even on a DR layout. Still a single wire to the layout from the command base. Or have I over-simplified about signal planes and returns and other bits and pieces?

Those big tenders on many of my locos could certainly hold substantial batteries. Smaller locos? Not so sure DR is the answer at this point. But, I'm no battery-tech expert.

Deadrail is fine. Blunami could be Deadrail,  but at it's heart it is just a DCC decoder with Bluetooth.  Don't think Blunami needs it's own home just yet.

@D500 posted:

Deadrail (or "DR", to abbreviate) is very appealing; the problem is it's too late for me. Too old to "throw away everything" (a figure of speech) and start over. Same thing happened to me with 3Rail Scale. Too many Big Couplers and their attendant footprint to convert everything. DR also has the advantage of center-rail elimination, which 3RS does not, by definition.

Seems to me if one could power your existing TMCC with AC from a battery/inverter in the unit, one could continue to use the TMCC system even on a DR layout. Still a single wire to the layout from the command base. Or have I over-simplified about signal planes and returns and other bits and pieces?

Those big tenders on many of my locos could certainly hold substantial batteries. Smaller locos? Not so sure DR is the answer at this point. But, I'm no battery-tech expert.

No need to "Throw away everything". You can dabble in battery and still run track power.

My son and I run trains together via track power and battery power all of the time.

Did you throw away your TMCC engines when DCS came around?  Did you through away your DCS engines when Legacy came around?

There's room for all of the fun.  Try one... No need to convert the entire fleet.

Ron

@RSJB18 posted:

@OGR CEO-PUBLISHER

I vote for Dead Rail/ Battery Power. I've been following along with the various posts on the subject.

Since Blunami by Soundtraxx is gaining some traction around here, might be another new topic to consider.

Bob

Bob i would think that topic would fit nicely in with the existing BPRC / Deadraill fourm . I run with Railpro so I hope to be able to share information with those who do also. All of that tech stuff would be part of BPRC / DEADRAIL  forum .

I have converted 8 engines to Deadrail / Battery Power.  Four engines use the RailPro system, 3 use CVP products, and 1 is Blunami.  Three engines were converted because I bought them without any command control.  The other 5 are MTH engines because I could never get the DCS system to work reliability.  (Have you ever seen the dreaded "Engine Not Found" message?)  

I used RailPro for the engines without factory command control.  I thought that it was the best system at the time - five years ago.  Railpro is very good and I just bought another decoder for a coming conversion.  

I use CVP for MTH PS-3 engines because it can be connected to the DCC part of the DCS system.  This makes the conversion slightly less costly.

I used Blunami as an experiment in a MTH PS-2 engine that does not have DCC capability.  Blunami is also excellent.  The major advantage is that you can control the engine using your cell phone.  

The hardest part is trying to fit batteries into engines such as narrow body diesels (SD-70s, GPs, etc.).  Batteries eat a lot of space.  Steam is easier because of the tenders.  I have put batteries in dummy diesels because of lack of space inside the powered unit.

I look forward the the DeadRail article.  NH Joe

@Bill Grafmiller posted:

Bob i would think that topic would fit nicely in with the existing BPRC / Deadraill fourm . I run with Railpro so I hope to be able to share information with those who do also. All of that tech stuff would be part of BPRC / DEADRAIL  forum .

Where is the existing forum?

I vote for a “Blunami” sub-category in BPRC/DEADRAIL. I’m installing my first Blunami board now and have to jump all over the forum for info. If the info was easy to find I think you would see more interest. Just my 2 cents.

As a 2 railer, I think battery power is the future. I look forward to learning more.

Let's be careful how we go about this.  While some (self included) use battery for Blunami and RailPro, they are not restricted to battery only.

If you want to get technical about it RailPro and Blunami (as a Bluetooth system) are Control systems and would in reality be better suited to be sub forums in the Control system forum along side DCS, DCC, Legacy, TMCC, etc.

Ron

I am fascinated by the idea of Battery Power Remote Control and appreciate that there will be a dedicated column in the near future. But what to call it? Eventually, Lionel must get onboard or it will fail to gain widespread use. We can't call it battery because Lionel's really cheap G gauge plastic trains have given battery trains a bad name, kind of like the old wind-up trains. How about "Rehargable Power Remote Control"? Everybody knows that to be rechargable it means there is a battery, but by not specifying battery we are suggesting it is upscale.

I have two blumami boards that will be installed in something this winter.  Both installs will be battery powered.  My first and to date only battery powered loco was accomplished using an off the shelf very inexpensive wireless controlled for led lights.  The pair was less than $20, the 11.8 v battery equally inexpensive.  Loco was a very inexpensive entry level lionel rs3, single truck mounted motor.  Nothing fancy, one direction only but it pulls my track cleaning car just fine with not a care it might stall in some inaccessible location.  The blunami boards will provide more control.  Adding something like this to the magazine or forum will get me moving.

Alan,

Deadrail / Battery Power:  I believe is a good term to use as a topic header as it is to the point and self defining.

You can always change topic title latter to something else if it doesn't work after a period of time.

@Bill Grafmiller posted:

Bob i would think that topic would fit nicely in with the existing BPRC / Deadraill fourm . I run with Railpro so I hope to be able to share information with those who do also. All of that tech stuff would be part of BPRC / DEADRAIL  forum .

Just spit-balling Bill. I'm intrigued by these new(er) systems for us 3 rail guys. I've done 2 ERR upgrades with a 2 more in the pipeline, and a PS32 stacker board install. Since ERR doesn't make the mini commander anymore, the Blunami 2200 would fill the bill for a few projects I had planned to do. The rectifier is an issue to still run on live rails.

I like the DR, just need smaller batteries. But the RC world has been doing this forever.

So many options......😃😃😃😃

Maybe I should clear the 3 current projects off my bench first..👍👍

@Ron045 posted:

Let's be careful how we go about this.  While some (self included) use battery for Blunami and RailPro, they are not restricted to battery only.

If you want to get technical about it RailPro and Blunami (as a Bluetooth system) are Control systems and would in reality be better suited to be sub forums in the Control system forum along side DCS, DCC, Legacy, TMCC, etc.

Ron

No matter what battery system is chosen, people will need a control system.  I don't know anyone who puts a rechargeable battery in a locomotive and uses a simple on/off switch to control the locomotive.  The whole point of battery onboard is to run and control trains without the hassle and complication of cleaning track, wiring, reverse loop special wiring, signals through the track, ground planes, etc.  

Therefore discussing a control system in conjunction with a battery installation is natural and should be allowed.  People will want to know how to install a control system when they install a rechargeable battery.  To me the battery and control system installations are one and the same.  NH Joe

The Deadrail Heads Forum  

John

Might consider Power on Board (POB), as recommended by Joe Fugate on the Model Railroad Hobbyist site? His reasoning is that some track power may be necessary/useful even if one is operating "dead rail" for the most part (meaning batteries powering the locomotives). For example, even the prototype uses electricity through the rails to power signal systems. He also is a proponent of 'trickle powering' locomotives via the track, which would not require a more hands-on method of battery charging.

Dead Rail is a topic I am interested in. Both my locomotives are postwar, late 40's and early 50's. Had looked into this a few times, talked to the staff at Bluerail, determined the older style motors (cannot remember the technical name for them right now) pose a risk to drawing too many amps for newer control boards that would have to be incorporated.

@Allan Miller posted:

Might consider Power on Board (POB), as recommended by Joe Fugate on the Model Railroad Hobbyist site? His reasoning is that some track power may be necessary/useful even if one is operating "dead rail" for the most part (meaning batteries powering the locomotives). For example, even the prototype uses electricity through the rails to power signal systems. He also is a proponent of 'trickle powering' locomotives via the track, which would not require a more hands-on method of battery charging.

It would be wonderful to be able to charge batteries from track power.  I envision a layout having dedicated charging tracks.  They could be the leads to a turntable, etc.  I don't see wiring the entire layout to charge batteries.  This would negate the advantage of a no wiring layout.

Wiring 2-rail signals would be easier if the rails only carried a small current to activate the signals much like the prototype.  I believe that one of the late Jim Barrett's Back Shop videos shows how to light LEDs using a small amount of DC current on a 3-rail layout to indicate the position of trains.  NH Joe

@Ron045 posted:

No need to "Throw away everything". You can dabble in battery and still run track power.

My son and I run trains together via track power and battery power all of the time.

Did you throw away your TMCC engines when DCS came around?  Did you through away your DCS engines when Legacy came around?

There's room for all of the fun.  Try one... No need to convert the entire fleet.

Ron

I know - that's why I referred to "Throwing everything away" as a figure of speech.

To be honest, unless I intended to go DR (I do not; my age and equipment inventory and type eliminate its attraction), putting yet another layer of whiz-bang on my layout has no appeal. All the objectionable 3RO attributes would still be there - physically. And I'm not much for mix-n-match, anyway. I do TMCC, with a Remote Commander for DCS wired in, too, but seldom used. I have 3 - 4 Legacy locos, but only incidentally. No 2-rail anything (like On30) - it only makes the center rail look worse.

If I were younger and had only a modest "collection" (Y'know - a dozen locos and 50-60 cars), I'd probably investigate 2-rail DR/TMCC big time. I can see electronically re-configuring some Lionel/MTH/K-Line/etc large steamers, laying a new 2-rail layout with 3-rail 0-72 curve specs; Kadees. Yeah, but that ship hit port too late. Imagine 2RO that does not need barn-sized curves.

I was an early adapter to Battery Power Remote Control.  My late 1950s - 1960s scratch built Coast Guard Cutter has battery remote operated steering and speed control and lead acid battery operated electric Pittman Panther electric motor turning the prop.  All the remote control was by tubes and 67 volt dry cells!  They were later replaced with transistor powered units.  I did not have battery power remote control airplanes as I was into U-control planes with gas powered engines as they were faster for stunt and combat flying and never left the field where flown.

I can see dead rail battery power remote control for trains will give much better control of multiple trains on all the tracks.  But every system has its pluses and minus'.  Each engine will have to be charged as well as the remote controllers.  The cost of each of today's 18 volt engines and as well as the dead rail battery powered remote control ones are in the hundreds or more which will limit the number of engines for many.  The days of one having relatively inexpensive, 50 postwar engines is already over for many.

I wonder how the passenger cars will have lighted interiors (battery in each car or wires connecting several) and if there will be battery powered remote controlled operating cars like postwar.  Will some go for battery powered remote controlled track switches, even just to eliminate the control wiring and use the remote controller to operate them?

It will be interesting to see more progress in the model railroad hobby and there are lots of choices and room for all.

Charlie

@D500 posted:

I know - that's why I referred to "Throwing everything away" as a figure of speech.

If I were younger and had only a modest "collection" (Y'know - a dozen locos and 50-60 cars), I'd probably investigate 2-rail DR/TMCC big time. I can see electronically re-configuring some Lionel/MTH/K-Line/etc large steamers, laying a new 2-rail layout with 3-rail 0-72 curve specs; Kadees. Yeah, but that ship hit port too late. Imagine 2RO that does not need barn-sized curves.

I agree that 2-rail that does not need barn size curves would be wonderful.  This would certainly make 2-rail more attractive.  I have thought about pulling up the middle rail on my 3-rail layout and using battery to power the trains.  Just like most of us, however, I have too many 3-rail engines that run just fine.  It would be too hard and expensive to make this conversion at this late stage in my life.  

Another advantage of having a few battery engines is that they can be used to pull track cleaning cars.  I usually have trouble getting a track cleaning train to run when the layout has been idle for a month or two.

NH Joe

@Choo Choo Charlie posted:

I wonder how the passenger cars will have lighted interiors (battery in each car or wires connecting several) and if there will be battery powered remote controlled operating cars like postwar.  Will some go for battery powered remote controlled track switches, even just to eliminate the control wiring and use the remote controller to operate them?

It will interesting to see more progress in the model railroad hobby and there are lots of choices and room for all.

Charlie

I have found that 95% plus of all my train running is with the train room lights on.  Passenger car lights are not an issue for me most of the time.  I think that a simple AA battery with a on/off switch would meet my passenger car light needs.  Maybe a battery in a baggage car with wires connecting the rest of the train just like the prototype would work too.  Most of us connect a passenger train together and leave it sitting on a siding when it is not in use.  Therefore a rechargeable battery in a baggage car would not be a major problem - at least for me and my friends.

I would have to figure out how to light my Christmas trains.  They will most likely remain 3-rail since I only run them around the tree once a year.  NH Joe

NH Joe

Your quote "I usually have trouble getting a track cleaning train to run when the layout has been idle for a month or two."

Have you considered NO OX track treatment to improve slow train operation and eliminate track cleaning for ever?  Dec 2023 will be two years since I applied NO OX and have not cleaned any track on my 31 switch 027 conventional controlled layout and the trains can run slower than ever.  NO OX lasts forever and does not have to re applied.  NO OX was the best $10 I ever spent on the layout in 44 years.  Read about NO OX below and decide for yourself.

https://ogrforum.com/...7#159660139094824137

Charlie

@New Haven Joe posted:

No matter what battery system is chosen, people will need a control system.  I don't know anyone who puts a rechargeable battery in a locomotive and uses a simple on/off switch to control the locomotive.  The whole point of battery onboard is to run and control trains without the hassle and complication of cleaning track, wiring, reverse loop special wiring, signals through the track, ground planes, etc.  

Therefore discussing a control system in conjunction with a battery installation is natural and should be allowed.  People will want to know how to install a control system when they install a rechargeable battery.  To me the battery and control system installations are one and the same.  NH Joe

NH Joe.  Yes... You are right.  Most people will talk about the control system they use with battery power. 

But if you put in Blunami and RailPro as dedicated sub forums under DeadRail are you going to add all of the others?

LionChief is a great system for battery, especially for someone just wanting to test the waters.

Are we going to move LionChief from it's current home and put it under a DeadRail forum just because Deadrail is possible?

A control system is just what it says.  It controls the loco.  It does not care if the power is coming from the rails or a battery.

Ron