This whole idea that everythign has to be touch screen and graphical - NO NO NO
WHy? I can see it in Europe where loco numbers are consistently 5 and 6 digits, so you can;t simply say "use the cab number" In the US and Canada, 4 digits is plenty. What do I need on the display? The loco I am operating, some indication of direction, maybe my speed. I don;t need a photo of my loco, it's right there in front of me. I'd rather press a maximum of 6 buttons than scroll through pictures, or even recall stacks for that matter. It's less effort and easier.
There's ONE thign wrong with the ESU throttle - that's carried over from their older systems as well - typical German overengineering. The knob is a potentiometer. Great until you switch from one loco to another, that's going a different speed. Other systems simply adjust the loco speed to the throttle position, not always desirable. ESU has a MOTOR under that knob that moves the knob! Me, I prefer encoders, no physical stops, no marks on the knob. No need for anythign to adjust when switching from one runnign train to another. Finer control because your 128 speed steps aren;t confined to 270 degrees of motion. Which is why I don;t have any Digitrax utility throttles, the only one they make is a potentiometer. If I used NCE, I'd run my trains with the Cab06e and not carry around the big hammerhead. Digitrax USED to have an encoder utility throttle.
But really - even with sound, a knob for speed, some sort of direction switch, and a button to blow the horn. No need to repurpose a device not made for it (using a phone as a throttle - or worse, a tablet - if an NCE or Digitrax throttle is too big, what do you call a tablet? If you want realistic, there's the Proto Throttle.
DCC manufactures need to step up their game? Why, because we the people using these things need a whoel lot of completely unecessary bells and whistles to control our trains? My phone is great as a phone, handy to look stuff up when away from a computer, but it doesn't replace my computer, nor does it replace a 'model railroad controller. I don't need a graphical LCD to operate trains. It provides complexity for the sake of complexity, not any real tangible benefit. I like to build electronics - you'd think I'd go right in for one of the several DIY DCC systems, or at least something like the Pi-SPROG. But I don't want touch screen or computer throttles. So no.
Even some of the other stuff coming. There's a REASON I'm doign my signalling and detection with my own DIY CMRI tyoe of system - the protocol is easy, the whole thing is easy to udnerstand. DCC, Loconet, and even new LCC are all complex protocols for the sake of adding exactly WHAT to my operation? Speed is not important, even for far larger layouts than the one I have planned. Compatibility? It's not like I'm pulling my signal components and want to use them at a friend's house. It's just complex for the sake of being complex. Same hardware, different stream of bits on the wire and I have DMX, for lighting control. It's insanely simple to understand - yet is used in theater and show lighting up to the professional level. It's simple, robust, and easy to understand. No crazy complications in the protocol to build up various packet types or stuff like that. You can use everything from free PC software all the way up to multi thousands of dollars controls to run it.
I've stopped myself on some projects - instead of putting a graphical LCD or OLED display on things, a simpel text LCD was plenty, the 2x20 or 4x20 type. No need to create some sort of graphical interface in a microcontroller just because "GUIs are cool". The cool looking fancy graphical product soon becomes a pain when you want to modify it.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Doughless ATLANTIC CENTRAL The point being that very serious change is usually required to "obsolete" the best products. And model railroaders are notorious for not changing easily. It has taken over 20 years for DCC to reach a status of "majority" and that is still only true in HO and N scale. We can only hope some truely better throttles appear, but if I went DCC, I would still buy this: http://www.cvpusa.com/easydcc_system.php Sheldon I'm going to refer to my previous post where complexity of the layout makes DCC or DC more complex than a simple layout. I think that also applies to throttles. With so many features, so much "power" to do so many things, its hard not to have a bunch of buttons on a throttle. Where is the line between the amount of features we want and comfortable/convenient ergonomics? The Aristo throttle is simpler because its designed to do less than a DCC throttle (which also has to account for onboard sound). So as long as modelers demand a bunch of capabilities and features, I don't know how the throttle is going to ever be very simple or convenient. Whether DCC throttles are in the form of a dedicated device or an iphone is just a matter of preference, IMO
ATLANTIC CENTRAL The point being that very serious change is usually required to "obsolete" the best products. And model railroaders are notorious for not changing easily. It has taken over 20 years for DCC to reach a status of "majority" and that is still only true in HO and N scale. We can only hope some truely better throttles appear, but if I went DCC, I would still buy this: http://www.cvpusa.com/easydcc_system.php Sheldon
And model railroaders are notorious for not changing easily.
It has taken over 20 years for DCC to reach a status of "majority" and that is still only true in HO and N scale.
We can only hope some truely better throttles appear, but if I went DCC, I would still buy this:
http://www.cvpusa.com/easydcc_system.php
Sheldon
I'm going to refer to my previous post where complexity of the layout makes DCC or DC more complex than a simple layout. I think that also applies to throttles.
With so many features, so much "power" to do so many things, its hard not to have a bunch of buttons on a throttle. Where is the line between the amount of features we want and comfortable/convenient ergonomics?
The Aristo throttle is simpler because its designed to do less than a DCC throttle (which also has to account for onboard sound).
So as long as modelers demand a bunch of capabilities and features, I don't know how the throttle is going to ever be very simple or convenient. Whether DCC throttles are in the form of a dedicated device or an iphone is just a matter of preference, IMO
I agree.
Controling lights, consisting, and controling sounds adds a lot of complexity to a throttle, all features I don't need or want.
- Douglas
gregc you should always be trying to obsolete your product ... because that's what the competition is doing.
you should always be trying to obsolete your product ... because that's what the competition is doing.
Well, with some types of product that might be true.
But I can think of several products/companies who designed really good products, produced them to a high quality standard, only made minor improvements and maintained backwards compatiblity and parts interchangeablity, and had 25 to 30 years runs (or much longer) making the same basic design.
A few examples:
The Checker Motors A8 thru A12 automobile - 1956 thru 1983
The GRAVELY two wheel tractor - 1936 thru 2003
The GRAVELY four wheel rear engine 800/8000/G series tractors - 1971 thru 2003
The small block Chevrolet V-8 - 1955 thru 2003
The Square D "QO" circuit breaker - 1955 thru present
The Kadee HO coupler - 1947 thru present
The point being that very serious change is usually required to "obsolete" the best products.
gregc tstage Eventually NCE will have to update their interface. why? i assume the components at the time they designed their products weren' cutting edge but not very expensive. At the time, there was high demand justifying the cost and price. Today, i assume, demand is less, but the cost of components is less and they can still make money. a new product from a different manufacturer would have to have significantly better features if they expect to get market share for new installations and even better features if they expect people to replace existing installations of NCE or Digitrax. NCE or Digitrax's may need to change if some component cost increases significantly or is no longer available. (I've heard NCE is considering replacing the RJ-12 with the more common RF-45 connector). an attage in product development is that you should always be trying to obsolete your product ... because that's what the competition is doing. But in this case, i don't see any competitors products obsoleting what's current available. Model railroad electronics economics are not the same as other electronics sold by the 10Ms. in many ways the arguments for DC are the same now for DCC, DCC can do whatever ____ can do.
tstage Eventually NCE will have to update their interface.
why?
i assume the components at the time they designed their products weren' cutting edge but not very expensive. At the time, there was high demand justifying the cost and price. Today, i assume, demand is less, but the cost of components is less and they can still make money.
a new product from a different manufacturer would have to have significantly better features if they expect to get market share for new installations and even better features if they expect people to replace existing installations of NCE or Digitrax.
NCE or Digitrax's may need to change if some component cost increases significantly or is no longer available. (I've heard NCE is considering replacing the RJ-12 with the more common RF-45 connector).
an attage in product development is that
But in this case, i don't see any competitors products obsoleting what's current available. Model railroad electronics economics are not the same as other electronics sold by the 10Ms.
in many ways the arguments for DC are the same now for DCC, DCC can do whatever ____ can do.
Sorry, Greg. Poor choice of wording on my part so I will try to elaborate. Once certain parts (e.g. LCD display or enclosure for the Power Cab/ProCab) dry up, NCE will need to look into alternatives for those parts in order to stay competitive.
Some components stay on the market for while because of their demand and the parts reliability. However, some become obsolete because a better or a less expensive way of making a similar part comes to market. Sometimes "trends" dictate what parts remain viable and which ones will fall to the wayside.
Sometimes when demand is less and parts get fewer; prices go up and continual use of a component (or components) become price prohibitive and difficult to maintain in order to stay competitive. Since NCE isn't a mega-corporation, they have to be mindful of and somewhat clairyoyant to foresee how long a part will remain viable. That can be a pretty tricky proposition to get right all the time in the ever-changing world of electronics.
Maybe NCE invested heavily (bought up parts) on certain components because they were inexpensive at the time but they knew it would eventually dry up. And they can continue to build their product as long as those components are in stock. But, eventually, parts do dry up and then you have to reconsider how you are going to adjust your current circumstances to your current product line...or go out of business. That's the point I was trying to make.
Okay, now back to the OPs question - i.e. if we haven't beaten the proverbial dead horse yet...
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
One thing I constantly take away from these DC vs DCC discussions is that the difference between operating systems is not the deciding factor as to whether operating a layout is simple or complex. Its the design of the layout and its operating scheme that matters, IMO.
A complex layout with numerous trains, locos, different consists makes for complex operations. Complex operations are not really made simpler by DCC, IMO. To me, its still complex, but in a different way.
My three loco shortline an one loco at a time movement is simple either in DC or DCC. The operating scheme makes it simple, not the operating system.
I choose DCC for onboard sound. I run silent using DC with AristoCraft wireless throttles because so many "silent" DCC decoders actually put off an annoying BEMF buzz in order to get them to move as smoothly and slowly as the Aristo throttle does.
swisstrain I agree that if someone already has 70 DC engines, and a 24'x70' DC layout with block control and CTC, that is a different consideration. But the original question was from someone who wants to know the difference between DC and DCC. He surely doesn't have a 24'x70' DC layout with block control and CTC.
I agree that if someone already has 70 DC engines, and a 24'x70' DC layout with block control and CTC, that is a different consideration.
But the original question was from someone who wants to know the difference between DC and DCC. He surely doesn't have a 24'x70' DC layout with block control and CTC.
Rich
Alton Junction
Ok, after all this, I am sure we have sufficiently confused the newbie.
Even after reading it all, I would still say that if someone is starting new (for anything but an oval around the Christmas Tree), invest in DCC and forget DC.
Instead of researching differences between DC and DCC, spend that time in understanding how to select, set up and wire your DCC system. I agree that if someone already has 70 DC engines, and a 24'x70' DC layout with block control and CTC, that is a different consideration.
I can only speak for the NCE PH-Pro. I bought it 15 years ago, and I have loved it every day since then. I can think of no shortcomings, and I have no complaints.
tstageEventually NCE will have to update their interface.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Touch screens - no thank you, especially not for the speed control itself. I would crash trains for sure.
I'm a Roco z21 fan.
You can do it small (on a phone-sized handheld):
... Or you can do it big (dual controls running on a Samsung s2 tablet):
tstageEventually NCE will have to update their interface. In the meantime, they still make a terrific product and I'd choose them again if I were starting out in DCC.
Tom, I agree with that statement! I'd have no qualms about recommending NCE to anyone changing to DCC or anyone new to model railroading.
York1 John
I asked my doctor if I gave up delicious food and all alcohol, would I live longer? He said, "No, but it will seem longer."
York1 ROBERT PETRICK My laptop, which cost about the same as my Digitrax Evolution, has literally ten thousand times the computing power compared to what Digitrax puts in that little clunky NEMA box, and even my wrist watch has more computing power and has a much higher resolution display than that DCC dot matrix display. I won't get into the little mini-marshmallow push buttons. Robert, I agree completely. I started my first layout a little over a year ago. I am happy with my NCE system. However, I was surprised by the digital display being so primitive. I am surprised that certain controls and functions were so difficult to get access to and to learn.
ROBERT PETRICK My laptop, which cost about the same as my Digitrax Evolution, has literally ten thousand times the computing power compared to what Digitrax puts in that little clunky NEMA box, and even my wrist watch has more computing power and has a much higher resolution display than that DCC dot matrix display. I won't get into the little mini-marshmallow push buttons.
Robert, I agree completely. I started my first layout a little over a year ago.
I am happy with my NCE system.
However, I was surprised by the digital display being so primitive. I am surprised that certain controls and functions were so difficult to get access to and to learn.
John,
I'm a NCE Power Cab user and have gotten used to the older display. Yea, some of the commands are nested but you learn where they are the more you use them. And the manual covers the others that you don't frequent quite as often.
I think the use of the older technology is because outfits like NCE are small cottage businesses and they have to find a way to create a viable product yet minimize costs. Electronics nowadays is often a very fast-paced and volatile environment. Unless you are purchasing or churning out product in the 100s of 1000s then you have to identify enclosures and components that aren't going to be discontinued in the near future.
Eventually NCE will have to update their interface. In the meantime, they still make a terrific product and I'd choose them again if I were starting out in DCC.
ROBERT PETRICKMy laptop, which cost about the same as my Digitrax Evolution, has literally ten thousand times the computing power compared to what Digitrax puts in that little clunky NEMA box, and even my wrist watch has more computing power and has a much higher resolution display than that DCC dot matrix display. I won't get into the little mini-marshmallow push buttons.
carl425 ATLANTIC CENTRAL And so how do I tell apart my 8 ATLANTIC CENTRAL GP7's looking at little pictures You would have to repaint them all in different colors. Anybody else would just key in the loco's address. ATLANTIC CENTRAL I doubt this would work for me. It's not for you. It is for DCC users. ATLANTIC CENTRAL I have no motivation to change. But you seem sufficiently motivated to complain.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And so how do I tell apart my 8 ATLANTIC CENTRAL GP7's looking at little pictures
You would have to repaint them all in different colors. Anybody else would just key in the loco's address.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I doubt this would work for me.
It's not for you. It is for DCC users.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I have no motivation to change.
But you seem sufficiently motivated to complain.
Karl,
I'm not really complaining, other than to say that if a DCC throttle that good existed 10 or 15 years ago, I might have switched to DCC. While it still might not be "perfect" to me, I agree it looks much better than the rest.
Some people like constantly replacing things with new things, some people are happy with things that still work fine and meet their needs.
DCC could not add anything messurable to my desired goals 15 years ago, it is only slightly better now.
What I complain about is not DCC, but rather those who have no real experiance with DC telling people what is wrong with DC.
The only thing wrong with DCC is that the throttles could be better, seems some people are working on that.
The one other thing that makes DCC not for me is cost vs features gained, as I explained earlier in this thread. I will not "down size" my other modeling goals so I can have DCC, especially considering my lack of interest in onboard sound and the few additional features/capabilities it would add to my operation.
So once again it comes down to different solutions for different goals.
ROBERT PETRICKI'm aware there are other options, and I'm amenable to change if change makes sense.
I haven't tried it yet, or even fully researched it, but the Engine Driver app has been updated to support this throttle (it's an android) so you can use it on your layout with the Digitrax LnWi or JMRI.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd so how do I tell apart my 8 ATLANTIC CENTRAL GP7's looking at little pictures
ATLANTIC CENTRALI doubt this would work for me.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI have no motivation to change.
carl425 ROBERT PETRICK C'mon DCC manufacturers . . . step up your game. I like this one.
ROBERT PETRICK C'mon DCC manufacturers . . . step up your game.
I like this one.
Hey Carl-
That looks interesting. Thanks for the info. I did some minimal searching and found preliminary details about that model and manufacturer.
But that brings up another issue: all I know is all I know, and most of my knowledge comes from forums and groups such as this. I came into this hobby fairly late in life. I learned the ropes from two DCC clubs, and both clubs used 100% Digitrax equipment. So, so do I. So does almost everyone I know in this hobby in the 3D world. I did not let limited knowledge keep me from jumping in with both feet. I was never one to fiddle fart around and dither on decisions until paralysis by analysis set in.
I'm aware there are other options, and I'm amenable to change if change makes sense. As the days go by I am learning more and more and my horizons are expanding, and if the stars line up and something better comes along, then one day I might scrap my entire Digitrax system (including all the peripherals and add-ons) and go with ESU or NCE or XYZ or whatever. But in the meanwhile I'll continue to play with my Digitrax toys, as I have done these past ten years or so.
Only my opinion, of course.
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
And so how do I tell apart my 8 ATLANTIC CENTRAL GP7's looking at little pictures........and how long does it take to scroll thru 140 locos?
I can hardly use the much bigger touch screen on my Samsung Tablet, I doubt this would work for me.
But, I admit, I have no motivation to change.
ROBERT PETRICKC'mon DCC manufacturers . . . step up your game.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Poor ergonomics of most of the controllers - specific complaints - buttons too small and too close together, endless spinning encoder wheel controls, small, hard to read displays, multi button sequences to perform tasks. OR, from other brands, very large controller that only fixes half of the issues listed above......
Poor ergonomics of most of the controllers - specific complaints - buttons too small and too close together, endless spinning encoder wheel controls, small, hard to read displays, multi button sequences to perform tasks.
OR, from other brands, very large controller that only fixes half of the issues listed above......
This illustrates one of my basic complaints about the state of the hobby today. Not addressing DC vs DCC or addressing mobile decoders vs stationary decoders or addressing sound vs no sound; but addressing the current state of hardware, specifically electronic hardware, for layout control.
I use a Digitrax wireless duplex radio system, but I think the other DCC systems have similar issues. They are all using 1980s and 1990s technology. My laptop, which cost about the same as my Digitrax Evolution, has literally ten thousand times the computing power compared to what Digitrax puts in that little clunky NEMA box, and even my wrist watch has more computing power and has a much higher resolution display than that DCC dot matrix display. I won't get into the little mini-marshmallow push buttons.
C'mon DCC manufacturers . . . step up your game.
Ultimately, the use of DC or DCC comes down to choices.
Some people hate MTH for their development of their own proprietary DCS system, which is similar (but not the same as) DCC, however, seems to be intended for those of us who prefer "more simplistic" operation of sound equipped engines, smoke, etc. (of course as long as they are MTH engines!).
I have certainly been exposed to DCC on various layouts, but I have to say the MTH system and controller is imo the best I've ever used. I like their very simple speed dial that allows you to control speed in essentially 1 mph increments by just flicking the dial. I liked what was offered in DCS, and their stuff actually does work and do what they say it will do.
Other people don't like the MTH talking crew sounds built into the system, and apparently many people just plain hate MTH for their attempts to bring "tinplate train" features from O "scale" to HO, or for not otherwise doing things "the HO way" (and of course the long running legal battles with certain other manufacturers where no party is truly innocent).
I reject the notion that things have to be somehow "more complex" to be better. I find the simplicity of both plain DC and even DCS more worthwhile for me personally.
Also, I have a son, now almost 13, who has his own YouTube channel, and he will likely want all the features of DCC, so we did pre-order two of the Athearn Genesis 2.0 Union Pacific SD90MAC-H engines, fully featured, because in a year or so he may want to go that direction...At that time we will have to re-evaluate if it is worthwhile to switch to DCC.
I do not look forward to trying to convert a couple Overland Models brass diesels over to DCC operation, and would probably need to setup the layout to toggle between DC and DCC operation.
Currently it has just worked out that almost all our diesels recently acquired happen to be plain DC. Sometimes that is what was available, period. However, everything is DCC "ready" except a couple brass locos.
BigDaddy I think I've seen this drive by movie before, except the thread title was so vague, we skipped the usual DC-DCC fist fights.
I think I've seen this drive by movie before, except the thread title was so vague, we skipped the usual DC-DCC fist fights.
Henry,
Everyone is very well behaved these days, you should have seen some of these conversations 10 years ago......
Like many on here, I have been at this hobby a long time. And I have worked in this hobby.
I seriously considered converting to DCC on three different occasions. What held me back? After using DCC on the large and medium sized layouts of several friends, I found I disliked the following:
Another killer for me was the understanding that because of my desire for detection, signaling and CTC, layout wiring was not going to be reduced, just changed a bit.
Cost - my layout goals and concept have been unchanged for over 25 years. My new layout being planned now will retain that same concept as the previous one. The advent of DCC did nothing to change how I want model, or operate my model railroad.
And as noted repeatedly - I have tried DCC, I don't need to be told "try it you'll love it, and never go back".
So when I look at my goals:
30 staged trains, typically 35-50 cars requiring between two and four powered units each.
Detection, signaling and CTC on a 300' double track mainline, with eight to ten wireless throttles.
Virtually all industries away from the mainline and serviced by a seperate belt line only tied to the main at the primary freight yard.
And, control of mainline turnouts at the CTC panel and at local tower panels.
It became clear that the cost of the necessary DCC equipment would be both a major investment and a major list of additional tasks, and would only add a few minor features and benefits.
And keep in mind, DCC was much more expensive "per component" 15 or 20 years ago when I first considered it.
Sound - many people like it, I'm happy for them.
I bought one sound equiped loco to check it out, I listened to hundreds on other peoples layouts........mostly it gives me a headache.
And I agree and understand that for most people DCC is the best choice.
But I still don't think one size fits all goals, so I will speak up and correct misconceptions about DC, like were posted here regarding voltage, headlight features, consisting, "toggle flipping" and more.
And Byron was right to point out that I was behind the curve on a few DCC issues...
But again, I can walk around my layout with a radio throttle that only requires 5 buttons to control the train, and only push two buttons at each interlocking tower to operate my train.
How is that measurably different than walking around with a DCC wireless throttle and pushing a turnout button or two, or worse five buttons to set a route from a Digitrax throttle?
In fact it's not really any different, I just got there a different way. And got signals and CTC in the deal for less cost.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
richhotrainbut he was never heard from again.
Possibly that was his way of managing.
SeeYou190 drcook What is the difference between DC and DCC?. I think we have left this poor newcomer's original question far behind in the rear view mirror of this discussion.. I think he was looking for a simple response.
drcook What is the difference between DC and DCC?.
I think we have left this poor newcomer's original question far behind in the rear view mirror of this discussion..
I think he was looking for a simple response.
wjstixIt's possible someone might own a number of engines that all run at the same speed on DC right out of the box, but it wouldn't be common....
Well, if you're just running multiple locomotives together for show, similar speeds might help, but as Sheldon has mentioned, starting voltage is perhaps equally or even more important.When I ran this re-motored brass Mogul with the IHC Mogul behind it...
...the 34 moved as soon as the throttle knob moved, and it simply towed the 37 and the trailing train (usually not all that long) until the motor in the second loco was getting enough juice to begin turning. At normal track speed, about 25/30mph (HO), they ran perfectly well together. I later remotored the 37, and now they start in unison.
I have four of these Athearn Genesis Mikados in-service...
....and they all run well whether coupled together, or split-up, with some on the front of a train, at mid-train, and/or as pushers.I also have five of these Bachmann Consolidations in-service...
...and they run, as decribed above, equally well.
At the same time, I also had four of these re-motored Athearn switchers...
...and have four of these old Model Power FA-2s...
I can select any combinations from these locos, whether two, four, seven, whatever, and put them on a train, or dispersed throughout a train, and they will run, in harmony. I couldn't tell you if they would all run at the same speed if spaced-out on the same track, because that information is of no use to me. What is of use is that when a train requires multiple locomotives to move it, I am not limited in my choices. I can pick any combination of locomotives, and put them in the train wherever I wish.And, had there been any great disparities in their speeds, putting them together on a train that needed multiple locomotives just to get up the grades would have evened-out their performance quite nicely.
Because there are so many grades on my layout, I did tests in order to assign tonnage ratings to each class of locomotives. This allows me to ensure that trains leaving the staging yards will usually have enough power to get to their destination.
I think that the speed-matching and starting current adjustments afforded by DCC would be especially useful for those folks who have older locomotives which may vary greatly in speed or in the current needed to get them moving, but from what I've seen, most use fairly recent motive power. If a train has extra locos, but doesn't really need them to move it, speed differences may cause problems.
One of the main reasons I've stayed with DC operation is its simplicity for wiring: basically two wires to supply the power to the tracks, and add a little more wire and a toggle switch if you have a place where you need to occasionally shut down a section of track. Operating alone allows me to run the trains I want, in whatever sequence suits me best, and at whatever pace I choose.If the train makes it only to the first town along the line in an operating session, well, perhaps it will get to the next town on the next session....or perhaps another train will start from the same place as the first one did, but pass it and go on to the next stop.
Oh, and the reason that sound isn't all that appealing to me is twofold: the sound of model steam locomotives is not, to my ears, all that similar to the real ones. I am, however, quite impressed by the diesel sounds available - not all that useful on my '30s-era layout though.The other reason is that I spent almost four decades in a steel mill - I have had enough sound to last several lifetimes.
Wayne
drcookWhat is the difference between DC and DCC?
.
I think we have left this poor newcomer's original question far behind in the rear view mirror of this discussion.
I would suggest he go to the getting started pages on the Model Railroader site.
-Kevin
Living the dream.