Sheldon
You take yourself and this stuff way too seriously. Although I do admit I find it entertaining, I'm really not concerned what goes on in Sheldon's world.
As far as you finding me condescending to Lion, that's your problem. I merely stated that his layout control system is designed for him, and may not be the best approach for other modelers and clubs. Lion sent me a very humorous PM, that we both enjoyed. Lion can take care of himself (he is a lion after all)
Relax Sheldon, no one will kick your door down and steal your DC.
Cheers
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
Main, Zone, Local - pretty much describes the hierarchy of the control elements and the way they are used. To explain it all and how it's wired needs an article, or rather, several articles. The issues of MR where Ed Ravenscroft wrote about it are the best source - since they ARE the source. Some older articles with prior forms of cab control might be helpful as background, because things evolved to MZL, it wasn't just created out of a vacuum.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Joe Staten Island West
Geared Steam LOL Sheldon posted in "Electronics and DCC" I wonder if his PC caught on fire.
LOL
Sheldon posted in "Electronics and DCC" I wonder if his PC caught on fire.
Good to see that you know the name of this sub forum - Electronics AND dcc - because there where electronics running model trains LONG before there was DCC, and lots of non DCC electronics still run model trains and do other things on model train layouts.
Having had the pleasure to program and install some of the first Programmable Logic Controllers used back in the early 1980's for industrial controls, I have just a little experience with "electronics".
It is that experience with electronics, and many years of industrial control design and installation experience that allow me to "roll my own" control system rather than buy high priced "plug and play" DCC.
Don't confuse me with those who might be "afraid" of technology, rather I am one who understands it well enough to know when I do and don't need or want it.
My PC was cutting edge when I bought it 10 years ago - that's why I'm still using it - it's almost time for an upgrade.
My house has a carrier signal based whole house automation for a number of features, a system designed and installed by me.
I drive a car with in dash navigation, hands free bluetooth to my phone, voice command controls, backup camera, and I use all its features.
I have fiber optic cable, Internet, and land line phone, a big flat screen TV, two DVR's, Blue Ray player, killer sounding surround sound/Hi Fi speakers I designed and built my self and very nice digital camera.
I have a cell phone, but I don't take pictures with it or send "text messages".
BUT, I don't have a smart phone, Ipod, Ipad, tablet, programable thermostat, laptop (well my wife has one), or DCC - because I don't NEED or WANT them.
My trains run on pulse width modulated wireless radio throttles, I use solid state current detectors for my signal system, but I don't have my CTC panel on a computer screen - I like old fashioned clicky buttons and switches for that stuff.
My little trains don't need sound - because two 1" speakers can only make noise, anoying noise actually, not the sound of a train. Maybe one day I will do sound under the layout with real speakers.
My little trains don't need brains, because I used mine to plan a control system that meets my needs and wants - not what someone else says I should want.
Oh, and did I mention that I operate a lot of DCC layouts that belong to others? Well I do.
Shoulda known, Rich. If it were going to be anyone, you'd be the culprit...
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage ATLANTIC CENTRAL LION, I have always followed your posts about you layout and find what you have done to be most interesting. Thank you again for sharing your experiences. Do not be discouraged by those who would dismis or ridicule your efforts. Did I miss something??? I don't believe anyone here on this thread either dismissed or ridiculed Lion for doing what he's done. Tom
ATLANTIC CENTRAL LION, I have always followed your posts about you layout and find what you have done to be most interesting. Thank you again for sharing your experiences. Do not be discouraged by those who would dismis or ridicule your efforts.
LION, I have always followed your posts about you layout and find what you have done to be most interesting. Thank you again for sharing your experiences.
Do not be discouraged by those who would dismis or ridicule your efforts.
Did I miss something??? I don't believe anyone here on this thread either dismissed or ridiculed Lion for doing what he's done.
Tom, it was me. The LION hungered for a wildebeest and I suggested an antelope instead.
Rich
Alton Junction
BroadwayLion It is as you have said: An Original Post. It was for the information of persons who might be interested in what and how others have built something. Just that, and nothing more. Now please pass the wildebeest!
It is as you have said: An Original Post.
It was for the information of persons who might be interested in what and how others have built something.
Just that, and nothing more.
Now please pass the wildebeest!
"That's fine for the subway layout owner, who has very limited goals in terms of train movement, speed, and direction control that are unlikely to suit anyone else. It's certainly not true signalling nor CTC, which was the claim that was made by Sheldon."
Not at all what I said.
"Bottom line, true signalling and true CTC add about the same complexity to DC and to DCC layouts."
I did say basically this same thing, that DCC provides no advantage to installing signals or CTC.
"And most modelers don't need either, by the way."
?????? These are model trains, we don't "need" anything about them. Why don't most modelers need signals or CTC? I don't need onboard sound but I know a long list of modelers who feel they "need" onboard sound - I need signals, others needs will vary. Who made you grand arbiter of what other modelers need or don't need?
"(Note that the MZL-type progressive cab systems bandied about by a few are not "simple" DC in any way and have their own significant complexities.)"
First, MZL is not a progressive cab control system, second I never said or implied it was simple or easy to build - BUT, it is easy to use! In fact, in other threads on this topic I have clearly stated it is rather complex - so is DCC with decoder controlled turnouts, multiple power districts for a large layout, multiple reverse loops, signals and/or CTC - Advanced Cab Control has built in solutions for all those issues - that generally do not involve expensive "black boxes".
"I'll end my participation in this thread by noting that while it's true that many people run DC today (and that's great), surprisingly few of them have wired their layouts for independent control of two or more trains on the same trackage."
And you know this to be true by what super telopathic powers? You have no idea how many advanced cab control layouts are out there. Neither do I, but, in all my 40 years in the hobby, I have only known a few modelers who only had their DC layouts set up for one loco - and that goes back some 40 years - long before DCC.
Yes, Advanced Cab Control is complex, but MZL and similar forms of Advanced Cab Control are generally inexpensive to build and can provide signaling and CTC features as an integrated system, lowering costs even more. Anyone with the Model Railroader DVD collection should look up Ed Ravenscrofts articles on his MZL system beginning in the Feb 1974 issue.
Then you can read what Paul Mallery had to say about Advanced Cab Control in his Electrical Handbook, then I will be happy to send anyone interested the schematics of the basic circuits I use for turnout controls, cab control and signaling.
BroadwayLion Now please pass the wildebeest!
Yikes, watch out, LION, wildebeests have a mean kick. Wouldn't you prefer a young, tender antelope?
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Hi...........
I've read this thread, put in my thoughts, and reread the string one more time, and there is something that escapes me - that being, "What motivated the OP to write his initial post"?
It is obviously defending his choice of layout wiring and so forth, but "who brought that up?"
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
MisterBeasleyEach of us creates a layout to do what we want it to do
Indeed. Which is why I said:
cuyamaThat's perfectly fine for him ...
And then went on to say:
cuyama ... but let's not overstate the case.
That's fine for the subway layout owner, who has very limited goals in terms of train movement, speed, and direction control that are unlikely to suit anyone else. It's certainly not true signalling nor CTC, which was the claim that was made by Sheldon.
My purpose in posting was to point out the hyperbole of a few, who make incorrect statements about what is possible with each technology. There are newcomers to the hobby reading these threads, and exaggerated claims for any technology are not helpful.
Bottom line, true signalling and true CTC add about the same complexity to DC and to DCC layouts. And most modelers don't need either, by the way.
(Note that the MZL-type progressive cab systems bandied about by a few are not "simple" DC in any way and have their own significant complexities.)
I'll end my participation in this thread by noting that while it's true that many people run DC today (and that's great), surprisingly few of them have wired their layouts for independent control of two or more trains on the same trackage. By contrast, all DCC installations are capable of multiple independent train operation from the beginning.
DC is fine, DCC is fine. I'm suggesting that it would help newcomers if the claims for each were kept in the realm of reality.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Hey guys,
Its a HOBBY! We all make decisions that suit us. In example, will I choose HO or N or ? Will I model modern or past times? Will I actually have a layout (with trains that move of course)? And of course, there is the "DC or DCC" decision to be made.
I would certainly suggest resolutions to all those questions, but I would never tell someone what to do in that regard. Nor would I be receptive to anyone telling me what to do regarding my hobby (or anything else).
BUT, I would be very receptive to listening to someones educated ideas on the subject.
Newbies (and not so newbies) post here all the time asking for help and opinions on the subjects above, and we will usually respond with our preferences and advice - hopefully based on personal experience and knowledge.
In short, my point is, if you are trying to make a decision - get all the info you can, digest it, and make the choice.
I like the way the Lion's layout runs. A subway is not a switching layout, nor does it support random freight traffic. The real New York City subway system would be proud to have its trains running so well and so autonomously.
Each of us creates a layout to do what we want it to do, and we use the resources we have to do this. I'm fortunate enough to have the finances to buy the DCC toys I want, so I'm blessed with simplified wiring and I can concentrate instead on scenery. (And, I don't have to ask the Abbot for anything, although I still sneak things in to avoid the gaze of SWMBO.) The Lion has designed and built an elaborate control system that runs a bunch of trains without intervention. Watch the videos over on Layouts and Layout Building. Those trains are running on their own, stopping and starting at the stations.
I, for one, am ready to give that layout a hearty "ROAR!"
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
richhotrain I cannot quite decipher the LION's message regarding DCC. Is he opposed to DCC even if he had the funds to convert? Or, is there a sublimal message being put out here that he would jump to DCC in a heartbeat if he had the funds? I, too, admire the LION's layout on a shoestring budget and, in fact, I have always been a little more than surprised that the Abbot even permits the LION to maintain the layout. As far as DC versus DCC goes, I have only been operating an HO scale layout for 10 years, having grown up with an AC powered American Flyer layout. I started out my HO scale layout with DC power, but quickly moved to DCC. It has always struck me that anyone who grew up modeling in DC is likely to remain with DC whereas modelers new to the hobby are much more likely to start with, or convert to, DCC. I have to wonder how many guys out there who have operated in DC for many years have actually converted to DCC? Rich
I cannot quite decipher the LION's message regarding DCC. Is he opposed to DCC even if he had the funds to convert? Or, is there a sublimal message being put out here that he would jump to DCC in a heartbeat if he had the funds?
I, too, admire the LION's layout on a shoestring budget and, in fact, I have always been a little more than surprised that the Abbot even permits the LION to maintain the layout.
As far as DC versus DCC goes, I have only been operating an HO scale layout for 10 years, having grown up with an AC powered American Flyer layout. I started out my HO scale layout with DC power, but quickly moved to DCC. It has always struck me that anyone who grew up modeling in DC is likely to remain with DC whereas modelers new to the hobby are much more likely to start with, or convert to, DCC. I have to wonder how many guys out there who have operated in DC for many years have actually converted to DCC?
Rich,
I know many long time modelers, some in the hobby longer than my 40 years, who have gone to DCC and like it very much.
And I know others like my self who see no need to change.
My point has always been that control system choice should be be based on your particular layout plan and goals, budget, skills, interests, etc.
Were I building a different sort of layout, I might choose DCC, but for my goals as they stand now, it is too complex in areas where I don't need complexity and offers no features to make the complex portions of my goals easier.
It would simply ad lots of cost, work and complexity with a very low return in additional features. I say low return of addtional features because the features it would add are not important to MY goals.
Others goals, and the priority of the goals will be different.
cuyama ATLANTIC CENTRALwho would suggest that those of us still using DC should convert Nobody on this thread said that. In fact, I can't remember any thread were anyone insisted that "everyone" using DC should convert. I guess it's fun for some to play the part of a persecuted minority -- I just don't get that. I've seen plenty of DCC layouts with signals, and DCC layouts with CTC. DC isn't any better or worse for those than DCC. In any case, CTC shouldn't have any connection with power to the trains -- that's not the way it works on the real railroad. Engineers start and stop their trains completely independently based on signal indications in CTC in real life. The Dispatcher in Omaha can't reach out and shut down the power on a train in Texas. By the way, DCC is less complex than MZL for all but a handful of enthusiasts, mainly because DCC is commercially supported. And yes, I've operated on MZL-type layouts (and seen the things that occasionally go wrong, as with any complex system). DC is fine, DCC is fine. Maybe it's just me, but the drama and persecution complexes grow tedious.
ATLANTIC CENTRALwho would suggest that those of us still using DC should convert
Nobody on this thread said that.
In fact, I can't remember any thread were anyone insisted that "everyone" using DC should convert. I guess it's fun for some to play the part of a persecuted minority -- I just don't get that.
I've seen plenty of DCC layouts with signals, and DCC layouts with CTC. DC isn't any better or worse for those than DCC.
In any case, CTC shouldn't have any connection with power to the trains -- that's not the way it works on the real railroad. Engineers start and stop their trains completely independently based on signal indications in CTC in real life. The Dispatcher in Omaha can't reach out and shut down the power on a train in Texas.
By the way, DCC is less complex than MZL for all but a handful of enthusiasts, mainly because DCC is commercially supported. And yes, I've operated on MZL-type layouts (and seen the things that occasionally go wrong, as with any complex system).
DC is fine, DCC is fine. Maybe it's just me, but the drama and persecution complexes grow tedious.
Actually, the comments from Geared Steam were very condescending toward the Lion, and yes that set me off.
I operate on a lot DCC layouts, even helped wire/install several of them. I see all the problems they have. No better than DC from what I see.
And yes DCC layouts can and do have signals, at considerable more work and expense in total than my MZL based system for a layout of my size and complexity.
I have route controlled turnouts that can be controlled at local towers, or on the CTC panel. Done with a $3 relay, a lighted pushbutton for each location and some cat5 cable - way cheaper than any stationary decoders and CTC software. Routes through each interlocking are selected with the push of one button and identified by the lights on the buttons.
I don't like CTC panels on computer screens, I don't like most of the DCC throttles on the market.
I'm not in the cab of the loco, so I do want some Automatic Train Control features - yes in some cases in the prototype the signals or dispatcher does stop the train.
I looked long and hard at DCC several times, benefits not worth the money and install time for my particular modeling goals.
And like Rich said, DC operators are still likely the majority.
This is a great discussion of your background, LION, and highly informative.
I am sure that the other forum members will appreciate it as much as I do.
You should post this as your biography under your screen name in the Profile section.
Thanks for sharing.
richhotrain I, too, admire the LION's layout on a shoestring budget and, in fact, I have always been a little more than surprised that the Abbot even permits the LION to maintain the layout. Rich
Monks are encouraged to have hobbies. Some go golfing or fishing (far more expensive than model railroading once you include the use of an automobile) others make rosaries, soap or stained glass.
When the LION first took vows way back wen he asked the Abbot (two abbots ago) if he might set up some trains. Perhaps the abbot had in mind a loop of track on a table in the basement, but once a LION gets in through the door, well, you already know who model railroaders look at rooms.
The Prior said we had some old ping-pong tables as if I might take one of them. I took two of them. He also said that there was space in a basement room which was set aside for hobbies, so that avoided the issue of going to the senior council to ask for space somewhere.
Many years later word came from on high that this basement room was to be rebuilt and no, a train layout, or any other hobby for that matter, was no contemplated. I located a room on the third floor of the library building (some call it the second floor, but that is an issue apart. Never mind that the room was being used by the archives department, I negotiated with them, and moved their stuff to a different room (him now being most thankful not having to climb two flights of steps to get up there), and moved in. The Abbot told me that I could use only half of the room, but it was a big room, and much later I morphed into the rest of the room.
This is the third layout that I have built since I have been here. I did not say I was against DCC, but only that it offered me no benefits since I still have only one LION and eight trains with 23 stations. Automation was the only way that I could run all of the trains at once, and that is what is needed to make a subway layout look credible. Besides the run from 242nd street to South Ferry and back is just as boring in 1:87 as it is in 1:1.
I do not have CTC or anything of the sort, what I built was a GRS model-5 interlocking tower, and while it does control the entire layout instead of just one discrete interlocking plant, it sure looks great. If give that big 1:1 guy some thing to do while the LIONS watch the trains go round and round.
ROAR
cuyama ATLANTIC CENTRALwho would suggest that those of us still using DC should convert Nobody on this thread said that. In fact, I can't remember any thread were anyone insisted that "everyone" using DC should convert. I guess it's fun for some to play the part of a persecuted minority -- I just don't get that. DC is fine, DCC is fine. Maybe it's just me, but the drama and persecution complexes grow tedious.
I think that you are reading something into Sheldon's message which is not at all there. He used the word "suggest" not "insist".
As far as the "persecuted minority" goes. I doubt that Sheldon feels persecuted, and is he really in the minority? Although I operate in DCC, I suspect that the majority of scale modelers operate in DC.
Sheldon doesn't need me to defend his viewpoint, but i just see his response reply as a reaction to the LION's post, supporting the concept of DC power for operating a layout.
tomikawaTT DCC requires me to accept on faith that a little electronic thingy will actually provide appropriate power to traction motor(s) and lights in response to an input from something resembling a TV remote. Sorry, but I don't trust anything where I can't follow the electron flow through clear connections between discrete, easily identified components.
DCC requires me to accept on faith that a little electronic thingy will actually provide appropriate power to traction motor(s) and lights in response to an input from something resembling a TV remote. Sorry, but I don't trust anything where I can't follow the electron flow through clear connections between discrete, easily identified components.
Wow, this statement renders me speechless.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI would suggest that unless you have signals and/or CTC, you have no understanding of why the Lion has his system
That guy who speaks of himself in the third person has a simulation of a signal system and does not have CTC, as he himself notes.
BroadwayLionIt looks like the signals are really working when actually they are all fake, and are simply responding to a time clock.
That's perfectly fine for him, but let's not overstate the case.
True signalling and CTC are completely independent of the choice of DCC or DC.
A few random thoughts on the subject:
The Lion developed his control system based on his operational needs, which his system meets very well, proving once again "one size does NOT fit all".
Of those of you with DCC, who would suggest that those of us still using DC should convert, and that we would be "happier", how many of you have working signals or any kind of Centralized Traffic Control on your layouts? I would suggest that unless you have signals and/or CTC, you have no understanding of why the Lion has his system, or why I use my MZL based DC control system, or why Chuck uses MZL. So until you build a signal system, your opinion on control systems is not on my radar.
For me, signaling/CTC is a top requirement and sound is not wanted. For less than basic DCC on my layout I have wireless throttles, signals, CTC, working interlockings, one button route control of turnouts, collision avoidance - all intergated into one system.
I don't need consisting, my four unit MU's and double/tripple headed steam all run just fine with no decoders, speed matching or other similar extra work. Each of the eight throttles has its own 5 amp power supply.
My pulse width modulated wireless throttles provide DCC like speed control, parked locos with full brighness headlights, and easy to use push button throttles with only 5 simple command buttons.
And my layout is designed for multiple trains and operators. In fact, with a dispatcher on duty, it is just like DCC, engineers pick up the wireless throttle and run their train - period. In addition to "operating sessions", I do like/want/require good display running features and good single person operation. While I do not have the kind of automation as the Lion, my system does have a number of semi automatic features and my track plan has a number of "display loops" hidden within it - again with working signals.
What? Your DCC system is not wireless but my DC system is? What would be the point of DCC if it is not wireless?
I don't have 250 locos, only about half that, But decoders alone would cost about what my whole train control, turnout control and signal system cost in materials.
If one does like and want onboard sound, with the current products available, one does need DCC - no question.
DCC does also shine on small layouts with multiple operators - my layout is not small.
DCC can and does get very expensive and very complex on many large layouts - two wires - NOT.
With DCC, signaling still requires ALL the extra infrastructure that it does with DC.
One size does not fit all - not everyone has the same needs, wants or goals.
And not all of us are "social" in the same ways or to the same degree.
With over 250 plus locos i will stay DC and just like the Lion i am a one man operation.
Russell
Despite the third person conversation, I do think the Lion has built a quite impressive layout. Very much in the spirit of earlier modelers, from a time when we couldn;t just buy every little detail part we wanted, regardless of finances. While subways and rapid transit aren't my cup of tea, it's still an impressive layout that looks far nicer than you might expect given the source of many of the details. The whole is way beyond the sum of the parts.
As for DCC, well, if I didn;t already have DCC, and I was building a layout that opeerated like the Lion's layout does, I don't think I'd bother. On the other side of things, since I DO now have DCC, if I downsized to a small 1x6 ISL I'd STILL run it with DCC, instead of breaking out my DC power pack and using that.
I'm with the Lion, but for a slightly different reason.
My system is a bit more complex than Lion's, because my trains DO sometimes operate in reverse (even my EMU - surface-running rapid transit cars.) However, it's not DCC, and I have neither the temptation nor any incentive to change.
Others might find DCC the answer to their dreams. I just consider it another, unnecessary, complication. I WILL promise not to try to convert the world to analog DC and the MZL system, and will appreciate it if the DCC faithful will refrain from trying to convert me...
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - analog DC, MZL)