Dynatrol - A Command Control Alternative to DCC

[Anonymous]

Greetings, gang.....
First off, please excuse the cross-posting, but I though tthis might be a more approproate venue for this topic........

I was wondering if anyone out there still operates their layout with a non-DCC control system, specifically Dynatrol, which is one of the first really successful command control systems from the 1980's, one of the bigger systems used before the advent of DCC.
Due to it's analog carrier control system as opposed to digital, it is considered passe' by many today, but is a reliable and proven system, it can be made to operate with infrared technology, and even has a DCC version! Surprisingly the product is still supported, currently by a new owner who is constantly "bringing it up to spec" electrically and improving it, and for those of us who want (or need) a simple command control system, this is it, especially if you're on a budget and can't afford a DCC system (like me), but want to move beyond the DC power pack (not that there isn't anything wrong with that!)
Dynatrol was used by some of the "big Names" in the hobby before they took down or rebuilt their current layouts, like Tony Koester's Midland Road, and Lee Nicholas' UC&W, Chuck Hitchcock's Santa Fe, and RPI's NEB&W. One of the hobby's better kept secrets (and that I happen to operate on), Harold Werthwein's large Erie layout, STILL uses Dynatrol in a big way, 20 years and running!
If you are interested to see what makes up Classic Dynatrol, the website to see all the component parts is at -
http://www.classicdynatrol.dynu.com
If you happen to be one of those "closet" Dynatrol users, and were wondering, "does anybody out there still use this stuff?", the answer is YES!
I have recently taken over moderating a discussion group dedicated to Classic Dynatrol on Yahoo Groups at -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dynatrol/
I have no affiliation with Classic Dynatrol other than as a satisfied customer.
Our group's motto is, "Just because it's not DCC doesn't mean it's not worth using!!!"

Thanks,

Ralph Heiss
S. Plainfield, NJ

[SteelMonsters]

Not worth using... for me at least.

[claycts]

Tryed the ZERO ONE system from Hornby, Gave it away to much trouble.

[dknelson]

I have operated on two Milwaukee area layouts that still use Dynatrol. It works well. The drawback is the need to have the plugs in the controllers, and of course you are limited in the number of engines by the number of plugs (is it 17 or 18?) If you are in a separate room and need the plugs this is a major annoyance (one modeler created a swinging stick with holes to hold the plus, and the stick would be swung so the hidden staging yard operator could get or send needed plugs to the other yard.
Dave Nelson

[Anonymous]

Hi Dave.....

Yeah, I'd have to say the only two drawbacks of Dynatrol are the channel plugs requirement, and of course the limited # of channels. However, the new owner of Classic Dynatrol has/is working on expanding the system to 20, up from the original 18, and has hope that with further tweaking, can get 5 more channels out of the technology. My personal experience shows that Dynatrol is perfect for a small to medium layout, due both in part to the less channels used the better the signal strength is, and of course avoiding the need to creatively juggle the engine consists to avoid 2 channels being out on the road at the same time.
However, big layouts like Tony K.'s AM and HArold Werthwein's Erie used/use Dynatrol on a big scale quite effectively. I guess it's just a matter of how much trouble you want to go to to figure it all out!

Ralph Heiss