...didn't know that Bachmann had previously made one.  ...Is that motor strong enough to do that? Would you have to build some type of tower with weight on the pivot end to help it along?

Good questions all.  I'll try to answer since at this point in time, it's only a concept.  Bachmann's Bascale Bridge is too small.  I was looking at the Walters Bascale bridge.   Is the motor strong enough to handle that?  Don't know at this point.  But I do have a motor that is geared and could provide the power.  The Bridge building would have to be enlarged to accommodate the gearing and that motor.  The design would definitely have to have additional weight at the pivot end.  I've got some heavy weights that will work.  The question I have is, will the pivots of the bridge, being made of plastic support the operation of the bridge and not wear out quickly?  In my experience two pieces of plastic rubbing or rolling along each other don't last long.

That concern for alignment of the rails is, of course, not easy, but very doable.  Everyone does it everyday, for example plugging in the coffee pot.  The electrical connections meet up and provide the AC through a tight connection. The rails would be no different.  That is, connecting the bridge section to the permanent portion of the rails.  Actually the hard part is getting the bridge out of the connection like the AC plug when you pull it out of the socket.  I've never hear of Ntrak.   That- I'll go research, maybe get some additional ideas.   Thanks for commenting your concern, which I'll keep most heartily in mind.   

To Mr T:
I don't have a website,  and haven't ventured unto U-tube or other places where I can let others know how to upload/download images. Actually, that will be my third faze in building my model railroad.  But that's way off in the future....   Hope that helps.

To Mr. W:
If you can remember the old transformers where all you had was an on/off, forward/reverse switch and a throttle.  Well, that's where I'm at.  I like those simple controls.  The new sophisticated versions, like the current ones you're thinking about don't provide that simpleness.  I guess I'm kinda weird in that way, cause I want the simple to operate the complicated.    Having to move from DC to DCC, to me was a good move, but I also want to keep that simple on/off - throttle setting simple.   As I work on my layout , now that my wife allowed me to have a full figured room (i.e. bonus room) my dream of having a complicated layout but with the simplest of controls is what I'm striving for.  When I visited some of the Railroad clubs, they have some of the most orderly, high stakes controls.  I've been there (probably why I haven't joined a club) and although realistic operations, the controls are not so simple...in my book.  Also, what keeps me really busy is how to get the layout to conform to the simpleness of the controls...that's the complicated part.  For instance, check out my idea for a bascule bridge (separate topic).   I like block switches being part of the layout, where it will work with separate DCC controllers again that's the complicated part that I like designing for.   Hope this helps understand my ideas that'll keep me busy in retirement.

Has anyone tried to extend the length of a bascule bridge?

I have a doorway that I want my train line to cross.  I've seen the different designs where:
1)    Place a section piece of wood that can be pickup and moved out of the doorway path.
2)    Where a section of wood has been hinged on one side of the doorway and the other side swings into and out of place.
3)    Another similar section of wood (holding the train track) that is hinged and lifts up or down to allow passage to and from the doorway.
4)   Where a section of wood and track crosses the door pathway and you just have to bend underneath it to get to and from the train layout.

Well, (hope noone steals my idea) and places it on U-tube before I do. 
But here it is in a nutshell.   

I want to take a bascule bridge (motorized version) and lengthened it to accommodate the Bachmann (HO 99415) 36 inch EZ track.   I have noticed that this track is pretty sturdy in its own right, and adding the support structure that lengthens the bridge could enhance my doorway path where entering and exiting can be much more fun and enjoyable.   I understand that the added weight of the extra length of the bridge- I would have to counter weight at the ballast of the bridge.  Basically equalize the weight of the track and the weight so the bridge motor only sees equalized forces going up or down.

The biggest issue I will have is stopping the train before it enters the bridge if someone wants to open the bridge, and prevent someone from opening the bridge if the train is already on the bridge or approaching it.   I am a novice in train signaling and motion delays so any advice would be helpful at this point in time.  I have knowledge of time delays but trains run at different speeds and a time delay could timeout and cause a train accident.

And Yes. If I get it to work I'll venture onto U-tube and start a new experience.      

Thanks.  You saved me a nasty headache.  Friend was going to give me that model for free.

Funny, I have been reading all of General Discussion pages of the general discussion and came across this old post, so I thought my design might help others who, ... like me, like the simple Bachmann controllers over the more sophisticated power controllers.
Don't mean to beat a possible dead horse on this post, but this design of a crossover can support two EZ command controllers and not interact with each other.  It works for me. 

There are two diagrams (that I wanted to attach).  The first diagram shows EZ command controller no 1 powers the crossover.  The 6 pole double throw switch in the diagram shows the wiring for this crossover.  The EZ command controller no 2 shown in the second diagram shows the wiring from the 6 pole double throw switch that it energizes the crossover from the no 2 controller.

The EZ controller no 1 energizes the crossover and the train can move into the crossover.  The engine will come a stop at the far end in between the spacers if not manually brought to a stop before it reaches the second spacer for controller no 2. (third spacer if you're counting spacers).

This probably is the most important, the track in between the spacers must be long enough to stop a train engine at full speed before it reaches the second spacer*.  That second spacer (third if your counting) is deenergized at the opposite end and the engine looses power from the EZ command power no 1. 

The track section in the middle can be short to support only the train engine or can be long enough to support the entire train length.  But again the track in between the spacers must be long enough to stop the train before it crosses the second spacer section.

This works in reverse, that is the EZ controller no 2 energizes the crossover and the train can move into the crossover.  The engine will come a stop at the far end when it passes that first spacer due to no power in between the spacers section of track.

I used a five pole switch trying to establish a common between the two controllers but kept getting intermittent or stalling of the train engines.  I couldn't figure out why, after many variations of the wiring, and I gave up and decided to separate and isolate both feeds from both controllers.  This worked.

I tried to upload the schematic but obtained this response from the web site:
"The upload folder is full. Please try a smaller file and/or contact an administrator."  The file I tried to upload is only 75KB. The max is 128KB

So since I can't seem to be able share my design schematic, I can and want to share it with those who have 2 EZ controllers where one train can access another controller without the expected shorts, shutdowns etc.  Just note that the best way to keep the trains from you losing them, both controllers will need to have the same address for the trains.  That is, if your BNSF engine is number 4 on Controller no. 1 then it should have the same number 4 on Controller no. 2.  They can have different assignments but it will become confusing. 

Bear with me... I'm still trying to figure out how to provide the schematics (drawings) to those interested.  The drawings are self explanatory.  But below a "typed diagram" of the crossover and 6 pole double throw switch.     Plus I'd love any feedback anyone may have.

EZ power controller no 1
---------------------------\---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Track 1---
>Train direction>           \
                                      x \  x    Track spacer (or air gap) 1
                                            \
                                               \               (This section must be long)*
                                                 \
                                                   x \ x     spacer 2
                                                         \ 
                                                            \
                                                               \                                                                       
                                                                  \  This track section can be any length
                                                                    \          (i.e track between all spacers)
                                                                        \ 
                                                                          \
                                                                              \
                                                                               x \ x   Spacer 2
                                                                                     \
                                                                                        \       (This section must be long)*
                                                                                           \ 
                                                                                            x \  x  spacer 1
                                                                                                  \
----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------\--------------------------Track 2-------
EZ power controller no 2                                                       Frog

                                                       ~~~~1~~~~ To Rail 2 (Controller no 1)
Rail 2 between spacers    ~~3~~~~~|   
Cntrl 1                                              ~~~~15~~~
                                                       ~~~~5~~~~ To Rail 1 (Controller no 1)
Rail 1 between spacers    ~~7~~~~~|   
Cntrl 1                                              ~~~~17~~~
                                                        ~~~~9~~~~ To Rail 2 (Controller no 1)
Track  between all spacers   ~13~~~~|   
(Rail 2)                                              ~~~~10~~~
                                                         ~~~~11~~~To Rail 1 (Controller no 1)
Track  between all spacers   ~14~~~~|   
(Rail 1)                                               ~~~~12~~~ To Rail 1 (Controller no 2)
   
                                                       ~~~~18~~~
Rail 1 between spacers   ~~~4~~~~| 
Cntrl 2                                             ~~~~2~~~~ To Rail 1 (Controller no 2)
                                                       ~~~~16~~~
Rail 2 between spacers    ~~~8~~~~| 
Cntrl 2                                             ~~~~6~~~~ To Rail 2 (Controller no 2)

contacts 15, 17, 18 and 16 are open contacts                     


The above are the pinouts for the 6 pole double throw switch.

End of data

Oh!  I didn't buy it.   Some other uninformed person did.  I was able to get one earlier for $48.00, back in April.  Even that might have been too much.   But it works for me.

Update:  as of 5/25/2021 I found a Walk-around Controller Model no. 44907 on E-bay and it sold for $275.00.   So I'd expect that Bachmann or someone is trying to corner the market on their discontinued Walkaround.

Hopefully someone can answer this DCC question, since I don't have any specs on either system...yet.
Can anyone one tell me if the Bachmann 44932 DCC controller (or the 44902) work with MRC AD491 Walk Around Handheld controller?

I've had previous luck in dissecting the DCC controllers and obtaining valuable information, although not in my favor in this forum.  Hopefully I can get support in this question, which entertains mixing two different manufacturers components.   Since Bachmann discontinued its walkaround 44907, I'm still working on reverse engineering their simple DCC controller to create my own walkaround controller, when I came across the MRC AD491 controller.   
Any information that you can provide regarding the above question will be greatly appreciated. 

Interesting post.  I'm working with both old flex track and going to include the E-Z track.  The way I'm working these two is to have a transition.  That is, all the Yard track is E-Z track and all the Flex track is everything else.  The transition is drainage truss bridge from the main lines to the yard lines.  then there is a girder bridge from the yard lines to the main lines, an so forth and so on.  The bridge will provide the millimeter change from flex to E-Z and back again. 

Hope this helps.   

Great, my curves are less than optimum.  I don't remember if I told you that I was using old flex track from my 40 year old train collection, and working on moving to the E-Z track.  What I learned is that there are two versions of the E-Z track 18" and 21".  If there are other radius, I haven't heard of it.  I'm glad that you responded, since the information you gave provides me with reduced investment in continuing with the F-7 versions. That is, trying to swap shells, that's out now.  I'll work with my budget and in the process increase the radius of the current curve radius of my current and present plans. 

I believe I have sufficient room to increase my layout.  After this pandemic is behind us, my wife has agreed that our bonus room (13 by 20 ft) is mine to do with.  With 40 years of models in 3 boxes, the new models just purchased, the kids (soon to be gone), myself soon to be retired, the layout will definitely be one that will support both DC, DCC and my battery operated models.  All HO scale, and the only thing in the way moving forward is priorities from other than the train set.

Welcome back to model railroading, Unlike you I didn't get rid of my old model railroads, track, engines, and train cars.  I lugged them around in 2 large boxes for 40 years, after moving away from home, made a family, and my kids when they were young tilted toward computer stuff, weren't interested in model trains and so I packed my trains (and theirs) back into 3 boxes.  Like you, I'm working on retiring and this will be my return to being a kid again.  Maybe, if I ever have grandkids, hopefully they'll be as interested in model trains as I was.

So with that, my advice is it doesn't matter whether you go with DC or DCC, I'm working with both presently and you'd have to make that choice.  But you have already headed in the right direction by being on this discussion forum.  I'm not advocating this message board, but I will tell you that the advice I've been given is very very good.  It has shown me issues that I had, and I am now correcting them to get up to speed on the operation, sizing, models, and other little known problems that are brought to light in this message forum.

Hope this helps.

Wow! I don't know why Bachmann doesn't emphasize the difference in the curve radius.  You 've got me thinking that the reason that the F-7's I have work so much better is because I have the 18 inch or shorter curves.  This may be why the AHM and the Ahearn's I tried didn't work so well on my layout. 
Now that I believe the reason for the better F-7 operation on my layout, I'm convinced that there is no changeability with other diesel shells for the F-7's. Therefore, on the second note, I'll rid myself of the F-7's and change the curve radius on my layout to support the larger engines that I really like much better.  Maybe I'll keep one or two for switching yard.
I'll keep you posted on my changes...  I'm still in the process of trying to retire...so these changes won't be immediate...     Happy Holidays to ya, and Thanks!

Let me get this straight, are you saying that the F-7 and F-7A frame and motor (not the shell) will fit in the shell of the GP40, GP38-2 or SD40-2?  When I measure the wheel carriage of the two, the GP40, GP38-2  wheel(carriage) base is longer than the F-7 wheel base.
And Yes, I'd prefer the more common freight trains, I'm trying to look more modern, up-to date, on my layout and in this case the engines too.

P.S.  Thanks for replying so rapidly, I really appreciate this.

I'm more of a freight type engine guy.  The F-7 and F-7a really look like the Superman stopping train,  (from the 1960's TV show) and I really have low interest in this model engine.  Bachmann's engines in this model perform very well on my layout, I've had friends use their AHM and Ahearn models and they didn't do very well on my layout. I'm looking to buy a different Bachmann diesel, DCC of course, but I believe that the length of the engine, it's wheel carriage, is the factor that reduces the performance of the engine on my layout.