Dear all,
As far as I could understand the Blue Box are sound locomotives aimed at DC operation. Conversion to DCC requires a conventional, no sound, DCC decoder. Either versions (DC/DCC) is compatible with any DC (I.e. DC power supply) and NMRA DCC devices. Is this correct, or do they need special BLI accessories to operate the sound?
Thanks in advance.
Walid
BLI BlueLine have sound but no DCC. You can plug in a decoder and get DCC/Sound. The sounds are controlled via DCC functions when running on DCC. You need the accessory to operate the sounds on DC.
Past evidence is that they are quite finicky - as are most locos using 2 decoders. That concept had all but gone the way of the dodo until BLI introduced the BlueLine locos. BLI had some specifically recommended decoders to use. This issues with dual decoders is usually in programming. Some things need to be set at the same time, liek the address, or else the motor portion will have one address and allow control of the movement, but the sound decoder would have a different address to control the sounds. Then there are other CVs that may overlap between the chosen motor decoder and the sound decoder, where the value you need for one is not the same as the value you need for the same VC in the other decoder. Using one of the BLI recommended motor decoders should avoid this.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Thanks, Randy for the reply. It seems a troublesome concept to use, and better to avoid completely.
Regards
khier Thanks, Randy for the reply. It seems a troublesome concept to use, and better to avoid completely.
Decoders have a Lock feature which allow the user to lock the decoder so that it cannot be programmed. The idea is to program the CVs in one decoder separately from the other decoder with the same address. Given my experience with multiple decoders, avoid the Lock feature at all costs.
One way to solve the problem without locking is to give each of the two decoders a different address, but that comes with its own problems. Consisting is another issue when multiple decoders in each locomotive are involved. The consisting problems mainly affect the light and sound features. I finally gave up on Advanced Consisting in such situations. With my Blueline locomotives, I now use the same address on all the decoders involved in the consist, and I use Basic Consisting, what NCE calls "Old Style" consisting.
Is it better to avoid the two decoder setup completely? Maybe.
If your budget allows you to replace the Blueline sound decoder with a high quality sound/motor decoder, that may be the way to go. If you are on a tight budget, then you can simply add an inexpensive motor decoder like the NCE N14IP.
It just takes a bit more patience and a complete understanding of how the dual decoder concept works in practice.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrain If your budget allows you to replace the Blueline sound decoder with a high quality sound/motor decoder, that may be the way to go. If you are on a tight budget, then you can simply add an inexpensive motor decoder like the NCE N14IP.
Rich,
It is just I came across these locomotives on Ebay. They looked nice except for a minor paint chipping that can be easily corrected with an airbrush. The sound feature is certainly a plus. With only conventional decoders added, they would be an attractive bargain. That is why I considered them for purchase. But if they will need new sound decoders then they are not worth the headache. I would better go for a brand new, or a lower class like a Bachmann and spend a bit in detailing than going the dual decoder route.
However, I am curious why the decoders cannot be programmed separately in two different locomotvies? By this way no conflict can arise in setting the CVs. At the same time, both decoders can get one and the same adress.
khier richhotrain If your budget allows you to replace the Blueline sound decoder with a high quality sound/motor decoder, that may be the way to go. If you are on a tight budget, then you can simply add an inexpensive motor decoder like the NCE N14IP. Rich, It is just I came across these locomotives on Ebay. They looked nice except for a minor paint chipping that can be easily corrected with an airbrush. The sound feature is certainly a plus. With only conventional decoders added, they would be an attractive bargain. That is why I considered them for purchase. But if they will need new sound decoders then they are not worth the headache. I would better go for a brand new, or a lower class like a Bachmann and spend a bit in detailing than going the dual decoder route. Regards Walid
One positive thing that I can say about the Blueline is that the shell is high quality and the motor performs quite nicely. In other words, there is no quality issue associated with the Blueline.
khier However, I am curious why the decoders cannot be programmed separately in two different locomotvies? By this way no conflict can arise in setting the CVs. At the same time, both decoders can get one and the same adress.
What I was referring in that regard was consisting.
For example, if you have two Blueline locos in a consist, you now have four decoders to program, two sound and two motor. If you have four Blueline locos in a consist, say and F7ABBA, you now have eight decoders to program, four sound and four motor.
If you choose to use different addresses for each locomotive, Advanced Consisting can be an issue. I have an NCE 5 amp PH-Pro, and Advanced Consisting can be a challenge with a Blueline consist. So, I just program all of the Blueline locos in a consist with the same address as if there is no consisting.
Who wants to run a consist with all engines behaving like one?
I think I got the point, that is, proper consisting is not only tedious, but not possible with Blue Line decoders. Why? I did not got the point until now, however, I beleive you. I think I will understand the details only when I do it myself.
khier Rich, Who wants to run a consist with all engines behaving like one? I think I got the point, that is, proper consisting is not only tedious, but not possible with Blue Line decoders. Why? I did not got the point until now, however, I beleive you. I think I will understand the details only when I do it myself. Regards Walid
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/744/t/202111.aspx
Thanks for the link, Rich. What I read in the link is more than enough for me to forget about the Blue Line completely.
Thanks
khier Thanks for the link, Rich. What I read in the link is more than enough for me to forget about the Blue Line completely. Thanks Walid
The more I read about the Blue Line the more I realize how ridiculous this system is. Who on earth install two decoders in a single locomotive without clear definition of the functionalities and proper sharing of them among the decoders? If it were up to me I would have let the sound decoder generate the diesel sound, according to speed of course, and have left the light and the remaining sound features to the motor decoder to pass through its function pins to the sound decoder. By this way I would have avoided all the problem that may arise from overlapping of the CVs.
Perhaps I should learn programming a bit more and make my own decoder.
I do agree that it is ridiculous to have two decoders in a single loco.
When Blueline first came to market, I wanted a set of four F7 Santa Fe Warbonnet passenger locos (F7ABBA) with sound, so I bought the consist and added the motor decoders. I really do like the locos, so the only problem is Advanced Consisting.