How Do You Number Your B Units?

[garethashenden]

For those of you who run B units in consists, do you have a system for assigning the decoder address?

I've recently brought out two AB sets of Intermountain FTs and I had to reset all the decoders. I gave the A units the road number, but the B units got the road number in reverse order. That works in this case, but I'm not sure its the best idea overall. For example, FT 4208 is 4208 & 8024 consisted together.

[C855B]

Fortunately, nearly all the B-units on my railroad have "base" numbers with two or three digits. So 727B = 7278, and 60B=608.

I have two with four-digit numbers, but - thank goodness - they're unique and don't overlap with their A-unit brethren.

[Chris333]

Erie was 722A 722B 722C 722D and EL changed them to 7221 7222 7223 7224.

[garethashenden]

A compelling reason to abandon 30 years of modeling the B&M!!

JMRI does make it much easier as I can put 4208B as the ID. The FTs are fairly simple as they always ran as AB sets. If I run something from the '60s though GP9-GP9-GP18-F7B-RS3 is a valid consist. I think my system will work though. There's potential overlap with some steam engines, but not specific locomotives I intend to model.

[Chris333]

Steam don't have B units.   

[robert3985]

I've gone through the numbers on the engines I'll be using on my UP 1947 thru 1956 time era on my layout, and during that time span UP renumbered a lot of their diesel engines as the number of diesels kept drastically increasing, most numbers starting out as three-digit numbers, then in 1953-1955 many were re-numbered with four digit numbers...meaning, for instance, F3A was purchased in 1948 with the number 905 and a corresponding F3B units were purchased at the same time with numbers 905B and 905C.

Having a three-digit number isn't a problem, and I program the A unit as merely the engine number (905), but, the B and C units, I also number them as their engine numbers...which are the same as the A unit, but I add a 2 for 905B and a 3 for 905C...making their numbers respectively 9052 and 9053.  This works well for me, although if I intended to run them in the very same motive power lashup all the time, I could just number all of them 905...but, I like to be able to address each locomotive separately, and run them in any combination.

HOWEVER, in my layout's time era, (1947 thru 1956) in 1953, UP re-numbered 905 to 1456...and the two B units to 1456B and 1456C, so, since DCC only accepts a maximum of four (4) digits for loco addresses, so I can't add a 2 and a 3 to the end of a four digit address.

What I've settled on, is IF I want to include the later number on a booster engine, I'll substitute the first number with a 2 or a 3...making 1456B as address 2456 and 1456C as address 3456...and so on.

To keep things more simple, I generally have a numbering cut-off date of 1952, so I don't worry about re-numbering engines to their later four digit numbers.

I'll only include the later four digit numbers (post 1954) if a particular engine was only available with the later four digit numbers, which is only problematic if it has accompanying B and C units, like a lot of F7's.

Works for me.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[peteski]

If the A-B units always stay together then you could just use a basic address-based consist. Simply use the samee address (usually of the A unit) for both locos. The KISS principle.

[learmoia]

 

If the A-B units always stay together then you could just use a basic address-based consist. Simply use the samee address (usually of the A unit) for both locos. The KISS principle.

This ^^^^^  I've got an ABBA set of ATSF Fs and One AB Set is 300 and the other is 301.. If your worried about B Units in reverse order from the A, there is an Option in CV29 to set normal direction of travel.

https://drupal.tcsdcc.com/CV29Calc

~Ian

[Curtis Kyger]

Is there some reason you aren't wanting to number them the same as the real railroad did?

[Mark5]

Is there some reason you aren't wanting to number them the same as the real railroad did?

DCC addresses cannot include letters (last time I checked).

[Curtis Kyger]

A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4... etc.

[peteski]

A=1, B=2, C=3, D=4... etc.

Well, unlike you mentioned earlier, that is not quite the actual nomenclature the railroad used. I guess it is a system which could work for someone.  I still think that with permanently paired units the KISS principle works well. DCC consisting creates another level of (IMO unneeded) complexity.

[robert3985]

...although if I intended to run them in the very same motive power lashup all the time, I could just number all of them 905...but, I like to be able to address each locomotive separately, and run them in any combination...

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

@peteski - Yes Peter, numbering all of the units in a consist to the same address is one way of doing it (which I mentioned seven replies ago), and it's called BASIC CONSISTING by Digitrax...maybe something different by other manufacturers.

BUT, it's not as simple as you're not explaining for anything but running basic trains for basic operations.

There are distinct disadvantages to consisting using BASIC CONSISTING.  it almost necessitates a record-keeping regimen of some sort since the locomotives aren't addressed with the same number as is plainly visible on the sides of the locomotives, and if you want to run one or more individual locomotives separately, which are already in your BASIC CONSIST having identical addresses, in a different consist doing something different...such as engines in an A-B-B-A BASIC CONSIST lashup, the actual visible numbers on the models being 903-903B-905B-905...all running with a programmed address of 903 initially, you have to re-program as many as you want to run separately to another address (logically programming the address 905 into engine 905 and 905B)...which breaks up the previous A-B-B-A BASIC CONSIST lashup (running on address 903) into two (2) A-B BASIC CONSISTS running separately on addresses 903 and 905. This isn't either the easiest or quickest way to fiddle with MU'd locomotives, especially if you have a lot of them and like to run them in different configurations on your layout.  BUT, if you don't want to fiddle, or have no need to ever break up a lashup of consisted engines, it works.

However, if a modeler wants to be able to easily break up an MU'd consist and run previously MU'd engines in a different consist, or separately, at the same time as the other engines in the previous consist, or doesn't want to have to refer to a document or notebook to find out what a locomotive's address is (rather than just looking at the side of the actual locomotive) there's an easier way of doing this not-so-advanced (not-so-complicated) bit of operation.

Using UNIVERSAL CONSISTING (What Digitrax calls it) and with the A-B-B-A consist with addresses corresponding to the actual engine numbers on the models of, for instance, 903, 9032, 9052, 905 (the extra *2* on the end representing *B*)...all running under the designated "TOP" locomotive number of 903 (selected on the RIGHT throttle on one of Digitrax's Master Throttles), they can easily be broken apart into their separate/different actual engine addresses by selecting the engine number (for example 905) as the LEFT locomotive, pressing MU, then pressing the N key.  Control of that locomotive immediately is transferred to the left throttle knob and it can go on its way, OR you can then select its B unit (address 9052) again with the LEFT throttle, and identically de-consist it the same way, then select 905 on the RIGHT throttle (as the "TOP" locomotive in the consist you're creating), select 9052 with the LEFT throttle, press MU then the Y button, to form a new consist of the 905 and 9052 engines. Then, using the RIGHT throttle with address 905 selected, move the new 905 consist away from the idling 903 consist they've been previously MU'd with to park or couple up with another train. 

Although this might seem complicated, it's not...and goes very quickly.  However, using BASIC CONSISTING, new addresses would have to be programmed into the 905 and 905B units (logically both being 905) and then moved away from what's left of the 903 consist...slightly more complicated, with additional 0-5-0'ing, slower...and frankly, less logical.

Also, if I wanted to individually control things like engine sound, horn, bell, lights, no sound, etc.,  I can do that using UNIVERSAL CONSISTING on each individually numbered engine while they're consisted and while they're actually in motion on the layout. But, using BASIC CONSISTING, modifying those features with all four engines with identical addresses would affect ALL of them at the same time...unless I had turned those features off or on in each individual engine while on the programming track, isolating each engine from the other engines with identical addresses.

UNIVERSAL CONSISTING allows the engines in a consist to run together using the TOP loco's address (actual number on the model), while still being able to access individual lighting/sound features in the MU'd locos...which BASIC CONSISTING will not allow, since all of the engines with the same address are considered to be the same loco by the command station and any fiddling with sound/lights affects ALL OF THEM SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Maybe you already know this, but, I am sure others reading this thread may not be aware that MU'd locos, using UNIVERSAL CONSISTING can be individually addressed and certain features changed while running MU'd, which BASIC CONSISTING does not allow.

I can't speak for other manufacturer's throttles or command stations other than Digitrax, but DCC standards should allow common features across the board at least using a brand's Master Throttle.

Sooo...the KISS principle (supposedly) of using BASIC CONSISTING (making all the addresses in a consists the same) really isn't the most simple way for even just a little more advanced operation.  I highly recommend UNIVERSAL CONSISTING because it is, in the end, the less complicated procedure.

Then, there's ADVANCED CONSISTING...which I won't get into since I don't take my engines to run on other layouts or modular setups running different brands of DCC.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore



 

[peteski]

Bob, thank you for such a thorough explanation of DCC consisting, but I'm already familiar with all those types, plus nested consists, and the unusual hybrid type of consist used by NCE.

Universal consisting is Digitrax name for consists which exist in the command station's memory. Nowadays the advanced consisting (using CV19) is usually a better choice.

The thing is that we don't really know how the OP is planning on using their A-B units. Unless the layout owner's runs very advanced Ops sessions and has a layout with extensive number of locomotives, A-B type consists are usually permanent, and that is why (you and) I suggested using the Keep It Simple Stupid method of using address-based (aka. basic) consist.  That's how I would do it, and it really is the simplest and easiest to use.

As for extensive  record keeping when using the basic consist, all  you have to do it take a small square of masking tape, write the DCC address on ti and stick it on the bottom of model's fuel tank. Easy as pie.   

[robert3985]

Bob, thank you for such a thorough explanation of DCC consisting, but I'm already familiar with all those types, plus nested consists, and the unusual hybrid type of consist used by NCE.

Universal consisting is Digitrax name for consists which exist in the command station's memory. Nowadays the advanced consisting (using CV19) is usually a better choice.

The thing is that we don't really know how the OP is planning on using their A-B units. Unless the layout owner's runs very advanced Ops sessions and has a layout with extensive number of locomotives, A-B type consists are usually permanent, and that is why (you and) I suggested using the Keep It Simple Stupid method of using address-based (aka. basic) consist.  That's how I would do it, and it really is the simplest and easiest to use.

As for extensive  record keeping when using the basic consist, all  you have to do it take a small square of masking tape, write the DCC address on ti and stick it on the bottom of model's fuel tank. Easy as pie.   

I agree that how the OP plans to use their consisted units is the ultimate parameter.

However, I still prefer Universal Consisting over Advanced Consisting since I've got a 120 slot memory in my command station, I don't operate on other DCC layouts either visiting or at shows, and I do break up the consists since I'm modeling UP and often enough I like to mimic their weird transition era consists on my layout.

Photo (1) Odd UP Consist #1


Photo (2) Odd UP Consists #2


I did the masking tape trick in the past before I settled on a methodology for addressing my B and C units when I was messing with Basic Consisting.  Now, none of my engines have masking tape on their fuel tanks.

Universal Consisting does the trick for me.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore