Interesting thoughts, Bob! Which system replicates the real thing? It can't be NCE - my throttles have no Johnson Bar, brake, reverse OR throttle levers! It's certainly missing the plethora of valves in a real steamer! No diesel controller levers as well! If you know of a system that is realistic (not just pushing buttons or turning knobs / thumbwheels), I'd sure like to know!!!
Actually, I wrote a conceptual article (essay, really) about a system that WOULD replicate the real thing with a high degree of fidelity. It was published in Model Railroader in March 1992. It was based on a combination of virtual reality and in-loco cameras, using a computer to composite the two together to immerse the operator in the cab (visually and aurally, and someday maybe even olfactorally). With what's been done with VR and the increasing power of the PC, the first such systems may only be fifteen years or so off.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
What really gets me is when some modelers speak of being so prototypical (sound has to match the exact engine, cars detailed exact, etc.) but when you have a system that replicates the real thing WELL THAT IS DIFFERENT - Do you just jump out of the real engine and jump into another with out setting the brakes and tieing it down, releasing control, etc (dispatching - Digitracks word - not mine but still doing the releasing of the engine).
OH! wait a minute that isn't the way it works in the models just jump from engine to engine. Why try and be prototypical! Pick up the engine on the fly it don't matter if it isn't prototypical unless the one doing it says so!
Yep, sure is one sided isn't it!
Most of you have no idea how a real engine is run! Now I said most not all!!!!
BOB H - Clarion, PA
cmrproducts wrote: BUT what would really keep this issue from happening is that the operator of the engine would just dispatch the unit out and the problem goes away. Couldn't be simpler! BOB H - Clarion, PA
Digitrax has a good product line. I just don't like the sometimes arcane (to me) user interface. That's one reason why I finally chose NCE over Digitrax. I won't go into the other main reason - it would start another discussion I'd rather not start.
I wasn't intending to get into a head-butting contest of some sort. I like to hear about genuine issues if someone has them, because that may help me avoid them at some point in the future. If my earlier reply to Stevert was a little strong, I'm sorry - just a little bit. Defense through attack and misrepresentation (which is the way his comment to me read to me - see my earlier reply to him as to why) don't sit well, and I tend to come back strong when it's pointed at me.
cmrproducts wrote: ChipNow that I have had some surgery done (couldn't stand for long periods of time) I may be able to host an OPs session.Seems like everywhere I go everyone is asking when the next OPTUD is going to happen!Soon!BOB H - Clarion, PA
Chip
Now that I have had some surgery done (couldn't stand for long periods of time) I may be able to host an OPs session.
Seems like everywhere I go everyone is asking when the next OPTUD is going to happen!
Soon!
Glad to hear it. And I'm glad to hear you're better, althoug I didn't know you were having a problem.
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
cmrproducts wrote: BUT what would really keep this issue from happening is that the operator of the engine would just dispatch the unit out and the problem goes away. Couldn't be simpler!BOB H – Clarion, PA
BUT what would really keep this issue from happening is that the operator of the engine would just dispatch the unit out and the problem goes away. Couldn't be simpler!
BOB H – Clarion, PA
That's easy for you to say. I notice the members of our club have not been invited back since the last time we came. I sure do miss those op sessions.
We don't want to get into a P***** match here as I have been downloading some of the so called NON problems of NCE for a while. I have over 450 K worth of files of these non problems.
And all of them are surrounding the so called NON radio problem ( and that is not the latest problem of swamping the Digitrax system) that NCE supposedly doesn't have so don't get carried away as this would swamp the system if I uploaded them all at once.
While every system works, some may be easier than others. What the real problem is that so few modelers don't get the right information about correcting a problem and then when they ask on the forums they get so many different (conflicting) answers they usually don't know what to believe.
I just have to shake my head at times due to the wild answers to a simple problem that are given out but as with most things they are worth just what you pay for them!!!
It is really strange how I can show someone in less than a minute how to run a Digitrax system that everyone states is so hard to use.
And as for controlling the slots issue just use the OP switch 36 to clear out the engines left in the system before you get into the Operating session for the night. BUT what would really keep this issue from happening is that the operator of the engine would just dispatch the unit out and the problem goes away. Couldn't be simpler!
I think the wireless interference between vendors' systems can be spun if you want to make it sound bad ... Digitrax's bad boy wireless hosed our NCE wireless.
Or, NCE's lousey wireless system toasted our Digitrax wireless!
I think multiple systems from the same vendor will also get interference issues if you get enough layouts all together. How about two dozen layouts at the National Train Show, all using Digitrax wireless? Now who's system you going to blame?
It's like two guys trying to get through the door at the same time and both got there at the same time. Who's the bad guy in that situation? Neither ... it's just the laws of physics. The unlicensed band used by DCC devices means you will get interference by similar devices in close proximity to each other. It's not a bug, it's a feature -- you don't need an FCC license to use your DCC wireless. But also don't operate within 100 yards of another DCC wireless system or you could have problems.
No need to place blame, we just need to be aware of the issue and come up with creative solutions.
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
Brunton wrote: Stevert wrote: Brunton wrote: Radio issues? What radio issues? Take a look at the NCE Yahoo! group. There is a discussion there about isolating an NCE layout in a Faraday Cage to reduce interference, the cost involved, and whether foil or copper mesh is the better choice. And search on "repeater", "rb02", or "radio fix" in that same group and see how many hits you get.SteveSteve, Besides, if you read the entire thread, you know that the real problem is apparently a Digitrax wireless that's spilling junk signals way over into NCE's bandwidth (1 1/2 MHz away). Why didn't you mention that? But then I guess it's probably NCE's fault for having a sensitive receiver, isn't it?
Stevert wrote: Brunton wrote: Radio issues? What radio issues? Take a look at the NCE Yahoo! group. There is a discussion there about isolating an NCE layout in a Faraday Cage to reduce interference, the cost involved, and whether foil or copper mesh is the better choice. And search on "repeater", "rb02", or "radio fix" in that same group and see how many hits you get.Steve
Brunton wrote: Radio issues? What radio issues?
Take a look at the NCE Yahoo! group. There is a discussion there about isolating an NCE layout in a Faraday Cage to reduce interference, the cost involved, and whether foil or copper mesh is the better choice.
And search on "repeater", "rb02", or "radio fix" in that same group and see how many hits you get.
Steve
Besides, if you read the entire thread, you know that the real problem is apparently a Digitrax wireless that's spilling junk signals way over into NCE's bandwidth (1 1/2 MHz away). Why didn't you mention that? But then I guess it's probably NCE's fault for having a sensitive receiver, isn't it?
Is it really that the Digitrax is spilling junk signals? Don't FCC regulations prevent you from marketing something that does that? Maybe the problem is that the NCE receiver, besides being sensitive, lacks selectivity.
By the way, did you search on those keywords and look at those threads? How much is Digitrax involved in "causing" those NCE radio issues?
Anyway, the point of my post was that just because you don't have problems with your NCE wireless, doesn't mean that it can't or doesn't happen.
Well, if the point is to convince everyone to all move to one system, then yes, we will never agree and the exercise is pointless.
But if the point is to discuss pros and cons of systems and why the given poster likes or dislikes a given system, then that's very useful. People can be made aware of each system's strengths and weaknesses that way.
As long as people don't take the discussion of system shortcomings personally, talking about weaknesses in the various DCC systems is very helpful -- especially if it's based on personal experience. There's nothing like picking a given system with both eyes open, knowing exactly what the good, bad, and ugly is for your system choice.
Reality is, there is no flawless system that's the clear *best* for everyone. There's only the best system for you.
We are heading into a the vain discussion "My system is better than yours because.......".
I am a DCC user since 2000 and latelay I came to the conclusion that all systems are very good at doing what they were built to do, that is running trains and nowadays all are very easy to use. Every systems have their strong points and not so strong ones. Digitrax used to have a steep learning curve, not so anymore. NCE used to have poor radio reception, not so anymore. I can't comment on Easy DCC and Lenz because no one is using these in my region.
I am a Digitrax user Super Chief at the club Zephyr home, I also run train occasionnally on 3 other NCE club's layouts, I like both systems and to me they are equal as to ease of running trains. I have to say that I never program or set consist with the NCE cab just run trains and have lots of fun.
Jack W.
Guys,
LOL!
Other than being thoroughly entertaining, is there a point to this discussion? There are Ford people and there are Chevy people (and a few Yugo people), and usually they are not going to flip loyalties. So lets get to a discussion that can be resolved.
Do you think the Baptist's view of making a mountain out of a molehill holds up in light of Joseph Smith's revelations while he was still in Illinois?
ereimer wrote: andrechapelon wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: Joe, My first car was an Austin Healy Bug-eyed Sprite. When it ran, it ran so fine..., but most of the time it didn't. I think this Digitrax system meets my needs. That's because the Austin Healy had a Lucas electrical system. Well, it was supposed to be an electrical system. IIRC, the AH also used twin Skinner-Union sidedraft carburetors which were oh, so easy to keep synched up. Good luck with the Digitrax. Me, I'm going with something else.Andre please , no discussion of Lucas electrics in a DCC topic , the thought of a Lucas designed DCC system makes me scream in horror
andrechapelon wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: Joe, My first car was an Austin Healy Bug-eyed Sprite. When it ran, it ran so fine..., but most of the time it didn't. I think this Digitrax system meets my needs. That's because the Austin Healy had a Lucas electrical system. Well, it was supposed to be an electrical system. IIRC, the AH also used twin Skinner-Union sidedraft carburetors which were oh, so easy to keep synched up. Good luck with the Digitrax. Me, I'm going with something else.Andre
SpaceMouse wrote: Joe, My first car was an Austin Healy Bug-eyed Sprite. When it ran, it ran so fine..., but most of the time it didn't. I think this Digitrax system meets my needs.
Joe,
My first car was an Austin Healy Bug-eyed Sprite. When it ran, it ran so fine..., but most of the time it didn't.
I think this Digitrax system meets my needs.
That's because the Austin Healy had a Lucas electrical system. Well, it was supposed to be an electrical system. IIRC, the AH also used twin Skinner-Union sidedraft carburetors which were oh, so easy to keep synched up.
Good luck with the Digitrax. Me, I'm going with something else.
Andre
please , no discussion of Lucas electrics in a DCC topic , the thought of a Lucas designed DCC system makes me scream in horror
To be fair, there was nothing wrong with Lucas' design. It was the manufacturing that was awful!! Since these systems only had to last as long as it took for the British car to rust away they did not have to have a long life expectancy. The only problem with this idea was that once removed from the damp British climate the cars rotted more slowly and out-lived the electrical system. Since I currently own an Austin Healey and have previously enjoyed the challenge of living with various MG's and Minis I have some experience here.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
I've heard that a few people have had interference problems with their NCE wireless systems, but I've heard far louder complaints about some other systems' wireless offerings. I read the Faraday Cage discussion you mentioned. Talking about a Cage doesn't mean anyone is seriously considering it - just talking about what it would take, more in a theoretical vein than anything. Besides, if you read the entire thread, you know that the real problem is apparently a Digitrax wireless that's spilling junk signals way over into NCE's bandwidth (1 1/2 MHz away). Why didn't you mention that? But then I guess it's probably NCE's fault for having a sensitive receiver, isn't it?
With relatively complex systems, a few of them will almost always have problems. Know anybody who ever owned a lemon auto, while someone else with exact same make and model swears by it?
If you want to seriously discuss issues with various systems, I'm game - I'm sure I'll learn a lot. But I'm certainly not up for a bunch of insubstantial rhetoric.
The radio discussion on the NCE list actually has to do with multiple DCC layouts at shows and how to reduce wireless interference.
And it runs from the sublime to the ridiculous.
If the truth be known, as wireless DCC usage increases, this is going to become a real issue for all DCC-based clubs who display in public places because the unlicensed band DCC operates in is for short range wireless devices only and a lot of wireless DCC systems in close proximity will cause no end of havock. All wireless DCC systems are going to face this. Not only will multiple systems in close proximity from the same vendor, but systems from different vendors will probably cause interference as well.
The more sane voices in this discussion listed what I think is the solution in this case: get yourself a 12-20 ft chord and plug in. Now you can run trains with a decent amount of mobility, have NO interference from other wireless systems, and interact with the public as well.
Brunton wrote: simon1966 wrote: Look at all the grief that folks have had over the years with NCE radio systems. Radio issues? What radio issues? My NCE system has been wireless from the start. I have never had any radio issues. I can do every single function wireless that I can with the throttle plugged into the system. Is that an issue? Having to "plug in" to acquire a loco is just stupid (to me). But I guess that comes from a uni-directional wireless, right? NCE's wireless has been duplex from the start, and finally other vendors are starting to catch up. Care to explain some of the "grief" NCE wireless users have gone through (I'm not being snide. I'd like to know, since I've never heard much about it)? simon1966 wrote:So does it matter next week that it took a PowerCab user 10 more minutes to set the thing up compared to a Zephyr?It took me only fifteen minutes to hook up my PH Pro system, and that was mostly spent reading the installation instructions. Is NCE's entry-level system more difficult to install than their full-up system? I plugged in a couple of cables, hooked two wires to the track power cables, and plugged into the wall. I was off and running! A bit later I popped batteries into the throttle, screwed on the antenna, and plugged in the receiver. Again, off I went! The most time-consuming thing, again, was reading the manual to find out how to turn the throttle on and off. Is the PowerCab more difficult than this?
simon1966 wrote: Look at all the grief that folks have had over the years with NCE radio systems.
simon1966 wrote:So does it matter next week that it took a PowerCab user 10 more minutes to set the thing up compared to a Zephyr?
Thank you Mark, you illustrate my point perfectly. This is exactly how I feel when I see issues that have no impact on most users raised regarding a small feature of the Digitrax system. On threads like this these issues get drilled down as if they are incredibly significant to all. When in reality they are not an issue to the vast majority of users.
jfugate wrote: Many people praise Digitrax like loconet is some sort of holy grail. My attempt here is to balance the scales with some counter points about the most popular DCC vendor on the market and to pop the bubble of those who think Digitrax can do no wrong.
Many people praise Digitrax like loconet is some sort of holy grail. My attempt here is to balance the scales with some counter points about the most popular DCC vendor on the market and to pop the bubble of those who think Digitrax can do no wrong.
I think Loconet is a neat concept, but I would hazard a guess that 99% of Digitrax users don't derive any specific benefit from its existence. It has been said several times that it is only with very large installations, or on layouts that are really going to use PC control that Loconet comes into its own. For most normal mortals I doubt there is much to choose from in architecture terms between the systems that would have any impact on daily operations.
I doubt that there are many bubbles to be popped! I think that most Digitrax owners would openly concede that the manuals could be better (Zephyr manual is not too bad). I think most could rattle off a throttle model or two that were far from easy to use. I think most of us would like duplex radio when introduced if it worked as reliably as the current solution. In no way do I think Digitrax is perfect, and I am not sure I know any Digitrax users that would say the systems are perfect.
It is a decent system that is priced well and fulfills many modellers needs.
Simon:
All good points ... and yes, some DCC system manufacturers like NCE are notoriously slow in getting things to market.
I've owned Lenz, EasyDCC, and now NCE. I've never owned a Digitrax system, although I've considered it several times. Every time I re-download and reread their manuals, and I revisit playing with their system at a show and at my friend Charlie Comstock's layout, I've reinforced my sense that the Digitrax system is just not for me.
It has too many techno-geek quirks for my taste. I suspect many people would not notice all the little annoying interface design items, but they annoy me. I keep thinking how I would send a web designer back to their office to do it over if they came to me with something like that on a web page.
I'm thrilled when people love their Digitrax system -- I'm serious. DCC is the only way to go with your model railroad. And Digitrax has the significant advantage that when you do hit one of those quirks, there's probably a flesh-and-blood person who can answer your question since they've sold so many systems.
jfugate wrote: I've wondered why the Digitrax Yahoo group is the largest (by about double) of the DCC system support groups -- is it just because they have the largest market share -- or does the system really need that much after market support?
I've wondered why the Digitrax Yahoo group is the largest (by about double) of the DCC system support groups -- is it just because they have the largest market share -- or does the system really need that much after market support?
It is because no-one can be bothered to read the manual. No one has figured out how to select a loco when using wireless. People have keep asking how to create a consist because it is so difficult.
Or more likely the fact that Digitrax has far greater market share of DCC installations and offers a significantly greater range of options for detection, signalling and control and also happens to be one of the biggest makers of decoders including now sound decoders.
OK Joe, I think we get it, you don't like Digitrax.....
When things go wrong with any system they get ugly. Look at all the grief that folks have had over the years with NCE radio systems.
There are very many Digitrax users, more than any other system by all accounts, that quite happily run their trains with one hand on the throttle, the other hand empty with no manual in sight. They go about their simple task of running a loco, making consists, breaking consists and other routine activities without a care. Perhaps it took them 5 more minutes to figure out? Maybe they read the instructions twice instead of once, but none the less the system does the job reliably and well.
You write with great gravitas with tremendous credibility on your side being a professional web designer and expert modeler and all. Perhaps you are right that an NCE system is a faster study and has a more friendly interface? Like many, I chose my DCC system based on a series of needs. I plan on keeping my DCC system and expanding it for many years. After a day, a week, a year with a system, does it really matter that it took 5 more minutes when I got the system to learn how to get a consist running? To some, sure it does. To most of us not at all, and certainly not after a day or so.
DCC systems are not all created equal. DCC manufacturers have different priorities. One thing I like and respect about Digitrax is that they are real innovators. Look how the Zephyr created the market for an expandable entry level DCC system. It took NCE what more 3 years to come out with a competitive system. (Speaking of simplicity and speed of setup the 5 min extra it took me to learn to consist on the Zephyr was more than compensated for in the far simpler initial installation of the device). I also like the fact that Digitrax has always tried very hard to allow any user to expand their system without making things redundant. My 2.5A Zephyr booster is still in use even after adding my 5A booster. Add the 3A booster to a PowerCab and you lose the 1.7A booster the system came with. You know what, the Power Cab and the NCE range are darned good systems. I'm splitting hairs hear to make a point. Constant drilling down on a relatively minor issue to many users can give the impression that something is unusable, when in reality that is not the case. So does it matter next week that it took a PowerCab user 10 more minutes to set the thing up compared to a Zephyr?
Steve:
Good points.
Just to set the record straight, Digitrax makes a good system and many people are quite happy with it. Digitrax has the lion's share of the DCC system market because their system has good price points and lots of expansion options.
And I also agree every DCC system has its quirks.
But it does appear to me that when people have an issue with some Digitrax quirk, it can be a real doozy. I've wondered why the Digitrax Yahoo group is the largest (by about double) of the DCC system support groups -- is it just because they have the largest market share -- or does the system really need that much after market support?
P.S.
Of course you've never had an issue with slots with a system that doesn't use slots ...
My guess is because the Digitrax system memory defaults are too small (you can change the defaults to be larger -- but why be so stingy with the defaults?), where Lenz and EasyDCC provided more than enough loco assignment memory -- and their loco memory management algorithms do a better job of keeping that loco assignment memory available for use than do the Digitrax memory management algorithms.
jfugate wrote:On the Digitrax slots thing ... let me see if I have this right.
On the Digitrax slots thing ... let me see if I have this right.
C'mon Joe, give me a break! Randy's suggestion to post instructions was obviously made in the context of the situation (club mindset) that SpaceMouse is trying to address, and could equally apply to just about anything that should be, or that someone even thinks should be, done a certain way.
Either way, even with the Lenz or EasyDCC you have to take these actions, right? And in the order you listed them? Doesn't that make those actions part of the "proper procedures", whether they're communicated in written or verbal form?
And as far as never having slot issues, well, you're trying to make a no-brainer look like some sort of great revelation. OF COURSE you'll never have slot issues with a system that doesn't use slots. And as has been stated by Digitrax users many times, most Digitrax users will never encounter slot issues, either.
Let's face it, every system design has it's unique "features", and folks have different opinions about them. That point has been made time and time again.
The next time an EasyDCC user posts that they encountered a problem because they forgot to set, or inadvertantly reset a throttle address and had a duplicate, should we all beat up on EasyDCC for it's "feature" that requires that your throttles all have unique addresses?
<sarcasm>
After all, I've never had to set a throttle address, and no throttle address issues with my Super Chief. EVER.
But EasyDCC makes you set unique throttle addresses, and only certain ones can be used for radio throttles? WHY? Because they designed it to be more complicated, that's why.
</sarcasm>
All in all, the whole issue [regarding loco slots in Digitrax] is blown way out of proportion. Most people never see it.
I guess I've been pretty sensitive to the Digitrax slots thing because my friend Charlie Comstock (who is an Electrical Engineer) has fought with it in every op session he's had on his new basement empire layout. He finally solved it recently by getting JMRI installed and then being able to actually see the content of the slots and manage them on his Digitrax system.
Then a whole discussion around slots develops with Chip and his club's use of their Digitrax system (or misuse of it, with them not being technically savvy).
So it surprises me the slots thing kept coming up with Digitrax and how you need some real technical know-how to solve it -- and I never saw any loco slots issues ever with Lenz and EasyDCC in 7 years of use with either of those systems.
Being a professional web designer, we spend months building mockups of our web pages and review them with users until we've removed as much confusion as possible out of the user interface. You can't expect people to read a manual first to use your web site -- and for the operators on my layout, I don't want them to need a manual and a bunch of written procedures either just to run trains.
Even though most Digitrax users never see the slots thing come up, I've seen it come up now several times and cause more grief with Digitrax than I would have expected. It's only reinforced my, shall we say, less-than-glowing impression of Digitrax's system interface. Good thing many people never see it or AJ would have a major revolt on his hands.
Every DCC system has its quirks, but when a Digitrax quirk rears its ugly head, brother ... is it ugly.
jfugate wrote:On the Digitrax slots thing ... let me see if I have this right.I need to "follow proper procedures to select the loco" and then I need to "follow proper procedures to de-select the loco" when I'm done, right? And these procedures need to be in writing somewhere, for all to read? Interesting ...I have no written procedures for my operators who used my Lenz knobby throttles, nor do I have any for my EasyDCC operators.There's gotta be procedures, you say? Okay, here goes:Lenz (not wireless)1. Plug in throttle2. Dial up last two digits on the cab with the number thumbwheels3. Run train4. When done, unplug throttleEasyDCC (wireless)1. Turn on throttle2. Dail up last two digits on the cab with the number thumbwheels3. Run train4. When done, turn off throttleThese procedures are so darn obvious all I have to say to a newbie is "use the last two digits on the cab to select the loco" and they're off. And there aren't any "deselect" procedures. And no "loco slot" issues. EVER. In 14 years of using DCC with 40+ locos on the layout and up to 8 trains in motion at a time (some locos with helpers, so two loco consists per train at times). So Digitrax needs more than this? WHY? Because they designed it to be more complicated, that's why. I'm hearing a "training program" with big signs full of procedures, etc may be needed if a club is using Digitrax.I never needed a training program for my operators with Lenz and EasyDCC.
I need to "follow proper procedures to select the loco" and then I need to "follow proper procedures to de-select the loco" when I'm done, right? And these procedures need to be in writing somewhere, for all to read?
Interesting ...
I have no written procedures for my operators who used my Lenz knobby throttles, nor do I have any for my EasyDCC operators.
There's gotta be procedures, you say? Okay, here goes:
Lenz (not wireless)1. Plug in throttle2. Dial up last two digits on the cab with the number thumbwheels3. Run train4. When done, unplug throttle
EasyDCC (wireless)1. Turn on throttle2. Dail up last two digits on the cab with the number thumbwheels3. Run train4. When done, turn off throttle
These procedures are so darn obvious all I have to say to a newbie is "use the last two digits on the cab to select the loco" and they're off. And there aren't any "deselect" procedures. And no "loco slot" issues. EVER. In 14 years of using DCC with 40+ locos on the layout and up to 8 trains in motion at a time (some locos with helpers, so two loco consists per train at times).
So Digitrax needs more than this? WHY? Because they designed it to be more complicated, that's why. I'm hearing a "training program" with big signs full of procedures, etc may be needed if a club is using Digitrax.
I never needed a training program for my operators with Lenz and EasyDCC.
Provided you stop your train first, that's all that is required of Digitrax. Hopefully you don't run a loco into the engine house and then leave it run pushing up against the wall. The difference compared to all other sysems (excepting Zimo, Uhlenbrock, and the new ESU system, since I don't know their internal architecture) is that the throttles in Digitrax only send commands tot he command station when you change something. And a periodic 'keep alive' ping. The command station manages all aspects of created and sending DCC packets to each running loco. That's what the 'slots' are for. Each slot store the address and function status for a given loco or consist. This is why the Digitrax radio system can operate in a simplex mode - the only time the throttle needs to hear from the command station is when a loco address is selected and it gets assigned to a slot. After that, the command station never needs send another bit of data to the throttle. The only data flow is the throttle sending new info such as speed, direction, or function. By default, the Digitrax comamnd station will clear an slot that has not been accessed past a timeout period, if the speed is 0. So you don't HAVE to do anything. Adding the one extra step of hitting Loco, Exit just clears them out immediately without waiting for the timeout. It's really no different or more complex and concept than taking a tool off the rack, using it, and then returning it to where it came from. FOr whatever reason, people who have no difficulty doign this with a screwdriver suddenly freeze up when a piece of electronic gear is involved. But it is no different.
A side benefit is less traffic ont he control bus, combined with a faster bus to begin with means plenty of room for extra goodies liek detection and signalling,. SUre withthe others you can just add C/MRI - but unless you have a small layout, you'll have the Loconet run already, if just to connect multiple boosters. And the I/O devices for Loconet are far less expensive thant he C/MRI components. Much as I admire Bruce's work, the parts you HAVE to buy from him, even if you shop the various suppliers for the other things, are just too expensive.
All in all, the whole issue is blown way out of proportion. Most people never see it. I thinkt he only large club that regularly has issues is The Model Railroad Club, Inc, and that is simply because their layout is so big they actually run more than 120 locos There are several large, seriously operated layout using Digitrax, like Ken McCorry, who don;t have problems with lots of operators and lots of trains.
Some day I'd like to call Digitrax and try to speak to AJ and learn his reasoning for the design of the Digitrax command station so I could better explain it. I know I am leaving things out - for one the ability of the ocmputer interface to read the commands and staus of any running loco - the other systems do not rebroadcast the throttle commands, but since there is only one bus with Loconet, the computer interface sees every command sent by every thottle. Not important? Well, in PanelPro I can make a panel that does not allow operators to control DCC turnouts with their throttles by intercepting the switch commands. Can't do that on the others. I know people are working on things liek scripts to blow crossing signals with just one function key, or use throttle functions to operate stationary objects on the layout. All because the computer can 'see' what any throttle does, not just send commands tot he command station.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Careful there, Joe,
You're sounding an awful lot like ME!
I picked NCE for my control system because I want to model railroad without having to go through what looked to me like a substantial learning curve. I did read the manual when I first installed the system, but it was a pretty cursory once-over (except the part that told how to install the system - I read that pretty close. Took ten minutes to study). Even programming decoders, I never read through the manual past the part that said "follow the display prompts" or some such thing - I follow the prompts and I'm there in just minutes!
I'm an engineer and Mathematician. I deal with some pretty technical issues all day long, using some pretty user-unfriendly computer software. So I wanted a very user-friendly control system for my layout - work can stay at work - so that's why I went with NCE.
I'm not claiming NCE is better than Digitrax, except that it is for me. Maybe it isn't better for others. That's a personal choice.