There's a war a bruin-And there shouldn't be one! (DC vs DCC)

[Paul3]

jasperofzeal,
I agree that DCC has a lot of offer for any model railroader, no matter the size of the layout.  However, there are even more benefits to DCC in multi-train/operator layouts than in the one-train/operator layouts (for example, running two trains in opposite directions on the same track really doesn't mean much to a guy who only ever runs one train at a time).  For many modelers, those differences are enough to give them second thoughts about investing in DCC if they only have a one-train/operator layout.  That's why I said "probably not for you" rather than "definitely not for you".  But once one starts adding track blocks to their layout or another cab, then DCC becomes the best choice, IMHO.  Not the only choice, but the best one.

Sheldon,
I understand the "roll your own" idea.  With me, I'd rather be running my trains than building anything at all (models, circuits, scenery, etc.), but that's just me.  I do all this hobby work because I want to run trains, not because I want X-Acto scars, solder burns, or dried glue on my fingers.  YMMV.

FYI: I spend very little time programming decoders (both at home and at the club).  I spend more time installing Kadees in the loco than I do in programming non-sound locos.  With sound locos, I take my time with because there's certain things I like to hear more or less of, but I don't have to.  On soundless locos, I put in the 4-digit address and CV29 and I'm usually done with it for as long as I own it.  I may speed match them later, but I don't have to...and usually I don't.

Oh, and I perfectly understand the reluctance about the DT400.  I've instructed many newbies in it's operation at my club, so I've heard all the complaints.  And for the most part, I agree with them.  The numbers are small, the display is pretty cramped, and the learning curve can be steep.  However, once learned, the DT400 can be used for hours without tiring one's fingers.  That's something I can't say about the Artiso.  If they replaced those hard plastic buttons with nice soft ones...

The DT400 is not the only DCC throttle around.  The Zephyr's controls are very "MRC Thottlepack"-like, and the UT4 has a pot and a toggle rather than an encoder and a button.  The NCE throttles are easier on the eyes (and they also have a knob throttle available), and the Lenz throttles aren't that bad either.

That logging layout you mention...  With DCC friendly switches, in general terms if it works with DC it'll work with DCC.  If you see sparks flying with DC, then it's not going to work with DCC as one can't "power through a short" like one can with DC.  When we were doing experiments with switches at my club, the Walthers Code 83 No. 6 switches had problems with big steam and big electrics.  Somehow, I don't think that's going to be a problem on a logger layout as smaller equipment didn't short on the points. 

Installing DCC in small brass is a challenge, but not that bad.  I'd say it's easier than, say, an Athearn BB hardwire job.  But if your logger guy didn't want to do it, I can't argue with that.

BTW, you said the logger guy didn't choose DCC for two reasons: track and decoder installs.  But why did you close your post with "...happy not using a computer to program decoders"?  That sounds like someone who doesn't like DCC because it's solid state instead of vacuum tubes.    Computer programming of decoders just makes things easier and faster when programming complicated tasks like speed matching, ditch lights, rotary beacons, etc.  For a turn of the century logger layout, simple addess programming is all he'd need for most of what he'd be doing.  For example, I don't use a computer for my home layout because I model the NH (no special lighting effects for me).  Throwing the "happy to not use a computer" statement out there sounds like a guy being happy that he rides a horse over that new-fangled Rail Road they're building called the Baltimore & Ohio. 

Paul A. Cutler III
*******************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*******************

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

Paul,

Again I agree, and as for my friend I just repeating the concerns he expressed, and lack of interest in using computers, although I don't have much interest in using one for that aspect of modeling either.

I have a real tough time with laptops, the keyboards/mouse pads are just uncomfortable to me. Setting up a desktop in the layout room or work bench (not real close to each other in my case) would be both and expense and and a space problem. And, for me computer are tools, I use them if I need them, I have no use for them as a toy, my trains are my toys. This message board or ebay are the most advanced things I do on a computer. Not because I can't, I just don't want to and don't have to.

Maybe his track would have been fine, but he was afraid it would not after what he has seen and heard from others. The decoders in the shays, etc, was by far his biggest factor.

I do bring up sound because I think there is one important point - If you like sound, than those features of DCC ARE important. If you like sound, I think you almost need DCC, at least right now. Not caring for onboard sound eliminates any need for that set of features. But more work is still being done!

I know and agree about the throttles and other brands, I can say this for sure, if I did use DCC on any layout of any scale or type, it would not be Digitrax (Plugging it to aquire the loco - I don't even have that with my old time DC system - usually just push one button that is on a panel where the loco is).

I like all aspects of the hobby, fairly equally I suspect. But I have yet to develope an interest in this intense "be the Engineer" role with the lights and sounds and such. DCC is really good for that, but if I'm not into that?

Sheldon

 

[rrinker]

 I'm very much a roll your own person too, which is another reason I went with Digitrax over other DCC systems. My computer interface - built it myself. My I/O boards? Build them myself. When I get to the point where I can build "the bigone", there will be a CTC panel for dispatcher operations as well as local panels for when I don't have a crew around, or if I want to try TT/TO operations. The CTC panel interface to the layout? a single 6-wire phone cord. Each local panel's interface to the layout? A single 6 wire phone cord. The I/O boards will handle the panel switches/buttons and send out Loconet signals that will operate the switch machines. I've seen plenty of circuits for block detection and so forth as well - most of the DIY stuff is for Digitrax Loconet. However, it's hard to beat Dick Bronson's preassembled bits - the detectors themselves are transformer type so the sensing circuit it totally isolated from the track current and there's no voltage drop.

 All in all, there's a LOT more DIY to DCC than you might think - there's even DIY decoders, and even entire systems -throttles, command stations, boosters. Even with a basis of a commercial Digitrax system, if I so choose I can, rather than use circuit breakers for power districts, build up a whole bunch of 1.5 or 3A boosters so each segment has a dedicated boster. DIY stuff, not buying some commercial boosters. There's even a dedicated mailing list group on Yahoo for Digitrax Loconet experimenters, called Loconet Hackers. The people on there have come up with some really amazing projects - the latest is a version of the computer interface that uses Bluetoth t talk to your computer insteadof a serial or USB port.

 You can DIY as much or as little as you like with DCC, just like DC.

 

                                   --Randy

 

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

David,

What took them so long? CVP has had wireless aquiring for years.

Randy,

I agree about detection. With my DC I use the Dallee detectors for the same reason, sensing by induction coils (I could build them, but they do make a very nice product at Dallee) with no voltage drop.

To all,

One thing that maybe sets me apart from others is this. I have built several layouts, of various sizes and degrees of completion. BUT, unlike many modelers, I always had a complete plan and deviated from that plan very little as construction progressed. I am not comfortable in any project with an open ended "we will just see how or where it goes" approach.

So for me, planning hard wired signal logic or control logic (which may need some changes at some point) is not a problem or limitation. To me planning is important, and part of the fun.

Sheldon 

[CSX Robert]

ATLANTIC CENTRAL

...What took them so long? CVP has had wireless aquiring for years...

It just hasn't been at the top of their list. The wireless system they have works great and having to plug in to acquire an engine is not that big of a deal for most people, so Digitrax has been busy developing mobile, stationary, and sound decoders, and signaling hardware instead.

[modelmaker51]

Sheldon, you seem to have put together what maybe the pinnacle of DC control and my hat's off to you, but to keep bringing up the so-called need for a computer to program locomotives is misleading. I would venture a guess that most DCC owners don't use a computer for that including myself. I just program the engine number and make sure the lights are working and that's it, it takes nearly a minute.

As far as speed matching goes (this one's for the pro-DCC guys), I just put the faster loco in the lead when consisting, just like I did in my DC days. Granted, I spend my time doing what's need to make them run smooth and fairly equal, again, as I always did in the DC days, so no need for speed curves, etc. Signaling is also a low priority and is complicated whether DC or DCC.

I don't like the DT400 for all the aforementioned reasons, so I went with NCE, the ProCab was very easy to learn and use and the utility throttles I like even better with their big knobs and they feel a lot like my old home-built DC throttles.

I have the knowledge and skills to do a lot of the electronics myself, but my hobby is not electronics, my hobby is modelling trains. The electronics, DC or DCC are only a means to an end; moving the trains. I'll admit I did get tired of maintaining the old DC APB block system and was intrigued with the "train control" versus "track control" of DCC.

This whole discussion is rather pointless, people are going to chose whatever they feel most comfortable with. Both DC & DCC can be as simple or as complicated as you want to make it. For younger newbees DCC may in fact be easier to start with as they have grown up digital and have not had much exposure to "older" DC technology. For us older guys, the new technolgy can be a bit mysterious and intimidating.

Before I switched to DCC, I read everything I could, spent a little time running a couple of trains on a local club layout and most  of info and technology went over my head, (and I'm an electronics techie), it wasn't until I bit the bullit and bought a system, unpacked it, hooked it up to my ol' DC layout in 5 mins and had a train running 5 minutes later and 3 of them running simultaneously a few minutes after that, that I realized it wasn't as mysterious or complicated as all the reading and info out there made me believe.

We had a saying in the A/V biz, "there is no BEST system", only what's best for you and that's a completely personal choice.

[locoworks]

it's horses for courses.   many of the anti's don't have the desire or even see the need for DCC as they only want to operate a few loco's in certain sections and are 'happy' with the limitations and cost factor of their layout ( which may be the perfect/ultimate model for them? )  along comes a new system of control offering many enhancements? to a model railway.  sound, multiple loco control on ONE section of track, the abillity to call up bankers/helpers on inclines, light control etc.just like full size?? suddenly their perfect little layout becomes a mud hut by the side of the empire state buildng and they have effectively been downgraded..   some will be jeleous of the enhacements they don't have and deem them pointless ( maybe a different view if they had it?? ) others are just stuck in their ways.  not every one moves on with technology, many folks with still have a CRT TV or PC monitor ( if they have either and they are not further behind the times. clockwork?? )  then some will have LCD and/or plasma, ( we'll call that DCC )  and others will have LCD or plasma HD!! ( thats DCC with sound ). for peoople that can't afford the HD LCD TV, they swear that an LCD is ok, and those with CRT's say they are ok with no need to upgrade.   so in short, some of it is jeleously, some of it is cost factors, and some of it is just not having the need or desire. we don't all drive the same car or live in urban semi's, but we all live on the same planet and should get along in our own way without stuffing our oppinions down someones throat like some ancient historic crusade.

[modelmaker51]

Hey, I take offense at that CRT TV & PC remark! Wait a minute while I wind up my computer.......

[simon1966]

Personally, I don;t care what anyone uses, it is a personal decision and if you are happy with what you have then great.  I note that for some reason this thread has its fair share of Digitrax bashing going on again.  With all the aforementioned criticism of the DT400, I don't think I could live without mine.  The dual throttle in the hand is an incredibly useful feature.  I use it all the time.  The ability to run 2 locos from one throttle without switching back and forth is worth any perceived shortcomings IMO. and that is all it is, it is my opinion and I am very happy with my system.  I have now run on most of the others NCE, MRC and Lenz and would not change.  MRC is without doubt the simplest to just pick up and use, but there are other issues that come into a decision that would eliminate it from contention where I in the market now.  Each to their own and lets all be happy.

[ATLANTIC CENTRAL]

Jay and locoworks,

I don't know how much of this you have followed or if you read any of the deleted post that started all this. I had no intention of "bashing" DCC or starting all this controversy. I simply want to share my ideas and work with others who have not choosen DCC.

I may have said some things that where taken wrong, and many don't accept my reasons for not wanting DCC. But my intention was not to start all this. I am a very technically informed person, with a strong electrical, electronics, mechanical, architectural and structural background. I am a retired electrican/electrical designer and am self employed as a residential designer and historic restoration consultant.

I do patently reject the idea that just because a technology exists, that we all should need or want it. I don't own a camera cell phone, i-pod, programable thermostat, or a lap top. I do have a LCD HD TV and an all wheel drive car with antilock brakes, roll stablity control and GPS. I can afford most anything I want, I choose not to afford a lot things I simply don't need.

This has happend before, when I propose this idea that everyone might not need or want DCC, most just say OK fine, but when I suggest that my (or some other) Advanced DC Cab Control may be a good choice for some modelers, there is always a group of DCC people who feel their owneship of the future is threatened. DCC is a good system, is it the best system? That is subjective in my view.

There are also those who assume everyone wants the same things from their layout as they do. That's arrogant and condesending in opinion. I've been building model trains for 40 years, seen and heard a lot, I know what I like and don't like, I know what I want. Here's a little story for you. Long before DCC, I thought it would be great to be able to throw turnouts from a teathered walk around throttle. I designed several circuits to do that. I even submitted one to MR as part a layout for a Small Room Layout Planning Contest years ago. Fast forward to now, several of my friends used Digitrax and have all there turnouts decoder controlled. It takes more button pushes to that, than my old idea, but in any event, now that I've used it, I don't like it. With or without DCC, I like local control panels. 

Just wanting to share with those interested, not argure with those who are not.

Sheldon 

[locoworks]

no i didn't follow the thread or read any deleted posts, or many others, but DC V DCC war was where is was coming from. i agree that because technology exists we don't all have to upgrade to it, and i hope i didn't come over that way. what i think i'm trying to say with the horses for courses opening line was that there is no right or wrong way, just different ones to suit different people in different situations. i was reading into the title that some DC users are slagging DCC as unnecessary to the hobby, and some DCC users are calling DC obsolete. there is plenty of room for all systems each with its merits and limits, but i still personally think DCC is at the minute the muts nuts in control options.  and the DT400 is great to, i dont like hammer heads ( unless the DT500 is going to be one??  :-)  ) like every other aspect of the hobby there are different manufacturers and designs for everything, we use what we like.

[tomikawaTT]

Having just scanned all the way through the posts to this thread, I dare say that if there's a war coming on, it's between the people who want to dictate how EVERYBODY will do things THEIR way, and the laid-back types who are content to let everybody do their own things in whatever ways they wish.

Yes, DCC is the greatest thing since steam supplanted sail - if you want to cross the North Atlantic.  Yes, analog DC is adequate for many people with simple needs who only put a single piece of motive power on the head end of each train and can live without all the bells, whistles, coupler clash and turbogenerator whine.  Neither is right for 100.000...% of everybody.

As for needing a computer to program a DCC locomotive - what do you think that gadget in your hand has at its heart?  These days, almost everything more complex than a table lamp has a computer chip (or several) built in.

As for availability of things to make analog DC control system components - unless it becomes impossible to acquire discrete resistors, rotary switches and low-voltage transformers, we'll do fine, thank you.

So, I will continue to go my way, and each of you are welcome to go yours.  If anyone not wearing your shoes tries to tell you what YOU should be doing, remind that person of the golden rule:

          He who puts up the gold, makes the rules.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - my way)

[blownout cylinder]

Ah--I'd just assume it was a bad case of indigestion on the part of someone who could be seen as a DC or DCC fundamentalist. Marking behaviour is quite strongly imprinted in these fellows---

[jwils1]

Paul3

Oh, and I perfectly understand the reluctance about the DT400.  I've instructed many newbies in it's operation at my club, so I've heard all the complaints.  And for the most part, I agree with them.  The numbers are small, the display is pretty cramped, and the learning curve can be steep.  However, once learned, the DT400 can be used for hours without tiring one's fingers.

Maybe I'm taking this a bit off topic but this subject alway puzzles me.  Maybe "newbie" is the key word though.  For me, I love the DT400.  It's my favorite.  At age 76, with arthritis setting in and wearing trifocals, I have no problem whatsoever with this cab.

I like the size and spacing of the buttons, and they have very positive feel when pressed.  I also like the NCE Power Cab but do find the number buttons to have a slightly more mushy feel to them and I have to be more careful to get a positive "push".

The DT400 size is perfect.  I hold it in my left hand and push buttons with my right thumb, and they are spaced nicely so you don't have to reach very far.  The display gives a lot of info and doesn't take long to learn, if its your system.  If you're handing it to a newbie though I can see where they might not take to it very quickly, but that's what the UT4 is for, simplicity itself.