mreagantof a computer interface. As far as I can tell, such interface is stirctly used as a programming tool.
My question is: Why is that such a big consideration? Unless I'm totally missing something, all of the top shelf systems appear to be able to program from the cab. Also, it would seem that once a loco is set-up, there wouldn't be many, if any, reasons to mess around with the programming.
It can best be represented by an analogy. Civilized society did just fine with hand pumps and outhouses, but the once optional indoor plumbing certainly made things quicker, more comfortable, and more eeh .. um.. manageable.
Mike,
I will give you a real life example of why a cmputer interface is so helpful:
About a month ago, a friend was having trouble witha pair of P1K F units that had run for 'years' with older decoders. Changing some of the normal CV's did not fix the issue. We wound up do a 'reset' on the decoders and reprogrammed them(using the Decoder Pro interface at the club). Later that week, the same guy called me and had an interesting story. He has over 200 decoder equipped locomotives that had DCC installed up to 10 years ago. He was using Decoder Pro at home to 'look' at the CV settings on various engines, and found a lot of CV's 'flipped' for no apparent reason. He did a 'reset' and reprogrammed them. It appears that either a mis-key mistake back in the days of throttle programming, or maybe noise in the DCC system had flipped those CV's. He is currently reprogramming every locomotive he has using Decoder Pro, and documenting what has been changed. I remember the 'early' days of programming engines with a DT100 throttle and some this worked, some did not work the first time. Eventually I got things to work and stopped before I messed up something. I suspect I left 'something' flipped in an unknown state a few times myself. I have been going through my 30+ engines and doing a 'reset', then programming them via Decoder Pro.
For me, this alone is a good reason to have a computer interface. We had a guy stop at our club last month for the open house and I talked to him about problems he was having with some P2K sound engines. About an hour later he showed up with the engines and we programmed them right there on the computer, and test ran them to make sure they were running as he wanted them. We might have picked up a new club member out of it!
You can program the 'address' into most engines with the throttle, but setting up other options really is rather hard using a throttle. The computer interface really makes thing easy with the 'panels' in Decoder Pro.
Jim
Modeling BNSF and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin
David is absolutely right about how much easier a computer interface makes CV programming. To add a little bit to that, the JMRI software (and probably other software as well) "remembers" the CV settings you made to any given loco.
That makes it easy to put a decoder back how you painstakingly set it up, should it ever lose it's mind (they do, occasionally). And if you have more than one of the same loco/decoder combination, such as a pair of F-units, it makes copying the CV settings from one to the other a breeze.
The thing that David didn't mention was layout animation. Not "automation" as in having the computer run the trains (although you can certainly do that), but animation where specific sounds and/or actions, apart from the trains, are triggered by specific events that occur on the layout. It's easy to do that kind of stuff if you have a computer interface.
I think in your case, it's a matter of you not being able to miss something you've never experienced. Personally, having used a computer interface (and I have just scratched the surface of what I know to be possible), I'd probably give up the hobby altogether if I had to give up the interface between my computer and my DCC system.
Steve
HI MIKE; DAVID IS RIGHT IN HIS ASSESSMENT OF NEWER DECODERS. WHERE I DISAGREE WITH HIM IS WITH BEGINNERS TO DCC. COMPUTOR INTERFACE IS NICE TO HAVE BUT NOT A NECESSITY. ITS SOMETHING TO ADD ON AFTER YOU BECOME COMFORTABLE WITH USING DCC. START OUT WITH A BASIC SYSTEM, SUCH AS AN NCE OR DIGITRAX ZEPHER. AS YOU GROW WITH YOUR SYSTEM YOU CAN ADD THE "TOYS" THAT EXPERIENCED MODELLERS HAVE COME TO ENJOY. EVERY MANUFACTURER AND A LOT OF AFTERMARKET COMPANIES MAKE GREAT ADD-ONS TO UPGRADE YOUR BASIC SYSTEM AND MOST OF THE PRICES ARE QUITE REASONABLE. SO, MY 2 CENTS WORTH IS, START WITH A BASIC SYSTEM AND HAVE FUN. ADD TO IT WHEN YOU'RE READY.
JOHN
In reading the almost daily posts about which DCC system is best, either in general or for some specific set of circumstances, it seems that answers often come down to the availability/cost/etc. of a computer interface. As far as I can tell, such interface is stirctly used as a programming tool.
Since I'm still using an MRC Command 2000, you can see that I'm asking the question with little more than rudimentary experience with DCC.
Mike