I have using a pair of GML walkaround throttles for many years and they are very reliable and troublefree. They make the running of my trains more enjoyable!
Cheers,
Beowulf wrote: I like the Controlmaster 20 also. It's ability to plug into a number of modular phone jack recepticals on the edge of the layout is very handy.But modular phone wire and jacks were designed to be pluged in and out only occasionally, when you move or buy a new phone. Under frequent use the phone wire tends to break and make intermittent contact right at the point where the jack is crimped on. It is an easy fix with a Radio Shack or Home Depot crimping tool set but it can cause a lot of confusion until you realize what is going wrong.I'd like to see a similar throttle but with a radio link between the hand unit and the base unit.
I like the Controlmaster 20 also. It's ability to plug into a number of modular phone jack recepticals on the edge of the layout is very handy.
But modular phone wire and jacks were designed to be pluged in and out only occasionally, when you move or buy a new phone. Under frequent use the phone wire tends to break and make intermittent contact right at the point where the jack is crimped on. It is an easy fix with a Radio Shack or Home Depot crimping tool set but it can cause a lot of confusion until you realize what is going wrong.
I'd like to see a similar throttle but with a radio link between the hand unit and the base unit.
I agree with your statements about the telephone style plug. I bought a GML throttle at www.thegmlenterprises.com and have been really happy with it. The plug is a stereo headphone plug. It will last forever and there are only 3 wires to connect. I'm not sure how many there are on the phone plugs but I think it is more than 3. I have a fairly large layout so I am plugging and unplugging all the time. Same with my 6 year old son. These jacks are the way to go.
For wireless I have used the quest but I really hate the pushbuttons, especially for switching. If they made a model with a knob, I would probably buy it.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
Sounds like it could do the trick for dirty track. It wouldn't solve my desire for top-weathered rail but that isn't to big of a need for me. Has anyone tried these? It doesn't really say what kind of distance the train can go without track power but I am guessing that it would be much less for my O scale stuff. I would really be interested in hearing if this works.
I have seen lighting kits for passenger cars that work great for DC. When the train pulls into a station the lights remain on because they are running off batteries that are charged by the track power. There is also no light flicker as the train travels down the track.
I do have DCC (Digitrax Zephyr) but my layout will always have the abillity to switch to DC at the filck of a switch. I have some engines that I my never get around to converting, plus I like to test my new enignes on DC before converting them to DCC (I don't like using the analog option on the Zephyr).
el-capitan wrote: Dirty track is a pain and I also would like to weather the top of the rails on some of my lesser used sidings. While it would be possible to use batteries since I am in Oscale, the idea of recharging them all the time is not pleasant either. What would be cool is to have a recharging track, like next to a water tower or coal chute. You pull your engine up to the spot, set a timer and it recharges the batteries without taking them out. Has this ever been done before, like in G scale? It would lend itself to better prototypical operation. There also could be a "hybrid" battery system where the motor runs off the battery but the battery is being constantly recharged from track power. There would be no shimmies or shakes when going over a small section of dirty track.
One thing I find amusing is the references to being "childish". Aren't we all just a little childish here, after all, we do play with toy trains.
beegle55 wrote:All this talk about old stuff and us DC users being old school and of all that jazz, but what about the light bulb? We have been using the same thing for a really large amount of years, since Edison first invented them back in the (1800'?). They still work fine,
Chaya--
Without getting into the various discussions of DC vs. DCC (which has already gotten me into some trouble in this thread), if you are going to go with DC, --and your reasons seem very sound to me--the Controlmaster 20 is a good decision, at least IMO. It's very powerful, and the walk-around throttle will extend (with phone wire) to 25 feet. The unit also comes with instructions on how to use it with multiple blocks, if you so choose. One thing it also has on the throttle is a 'Nudge' switch, so if you purchase a DC/DCC compatible locomotive, you can still run it comfortably in the higher quadrant of the controller.
I like mine. Very much. It gives smooth control, and plenty of power, in case you DO decide to run front-train helpers later. And the walk-around throttle gives you plenty of control on a standard home-sized layout.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
I'm planning a new layout after a move to a new house. It'll be a double-decker, n-scale. I think I'm going to be sticking with DC, especially after reading all the different posts in both the "DCC Club" and the "DC Club," as well as some of the flame wars.
I'm not any whiz at wiring, but I'm willing and happy to learn. I like the thought of spending hardly anything, working hard with my hands, and having a product that works well and pleases me. The alternative is to buy DCC stuff, send all my engines off to be modified by other people, which will cost way too much money, and spend my time being annoyed at yet another computer. I have a computer and I think I'm pretty functional with it--but I don't want it to become a part of my hobby. (Yes, I'm one of those who prefers landlines to cell phones--because they SOUND better).
So far, each of the points made in favor of DCC has failed to resonate with me. Okay, they control all kinds of lighting effects and sound. Great. I don't care about lighting effects, and I truly dislike the sound effects. They sound phony and cheesy to me. The purist in me also wonders: when I can hear the engine, why am I not hearing everything else as well? I'm happier just imagining the sound, thank you.
I also don't plan on having more than two operators and will usually have only one, don't intend on running helpers, would get confused if I tried to run more than one engine at a time, and don't care about time spent on wiring.
This has been a great thread for me because it's helped me decide what kind of control system I want to buy--I think the MRC Control Master 20 sounds great.
All this talk about old stuff and us DC users being old school and of all that jazz, but what about the light bulb? We have been using the same thing for a really large amount of years, since Edison first invented them back in the (1800'?). They still work fine, and new designs have always been on the surface, but have never been as mainstream as the original form. I like the old light bulb (DC) and want to wait a while too see what advances of the floresent and engery saving bulbs (DCC) before I make a change in my DC world.
-beegle55
Texas Zepher wrote: el-capitan wrote:I guess that is why DC will be around forever because... can motors will never go out of style.You realize of course that can motors aren't synonymous with DC. Generally that is sort of what Thomas Edison thought in the 1890s. I think that perhaps you are right as far as model railroads are concerned because it (DC) is the most trivial way to control them. I've also often wondered why the environmentalists aren't after us because we are wasting so much energy with all those potentiometers in power packs.
el-capitan wrote:I guess that is why DC will be around forever because... can motors will never go out of style.
You realize of course that can motors aren't synonymous with DC. Generally that is sort of what Thomas Edison thought in the 1890s. I think that perhaps you are right as far as model railroads are concerned because it (DC) is the most trivial way to control them. I've also often wondered why the environmentalists aren't after us because we are wasting so much energy with all those potentiometers in power packs.
Yes I know that, I was just trying to point out that the components to make DC work have so many other uses in the world. The technology will be around for a long time. The technology is not specific to one use. Laser discs, beta and DCC decoders are pretty specific technologies that are much more likely to become obsolete when a better technology comes around. Copper wire, can motors and transformers will be around for a long time.
navygunner wrote:After the Beta and Laser disc purchases, I decided that keeping up with technology was not for me.
After the Beta and Laser disc purchases, I decided that keeping up with technology was not for me. I waited to buy a DVD player when they were selling at $45.00. I don't rent or buy too much media so scaling back on that investment has saved me a ton of cash! As for the next generation, It will also likely be the format with the most manufacturers undercutting the competition.
Bob
rrebell wrote: BRAKIE wrote: I have seen this system use..Its very nice system..The advance system:http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSR90&P=WR and the basic system:http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSR91&P=WR There is a third one from crest that has a plug in decoder just like dcc only it is radio controled so the only thing it gets though the track is power, no signal!!!!!
BRAKIE wrote: I have seen this system use..Its very nice system..The advance system:http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSR90&P=WR and the basic system:http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSR91&P=WR
I have seen this system use..Its very nice system..
The advance system:
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSR90&P=WR
and the basic system:
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXSR91&P=WR
OK, this has caught my attention. Do you have to wire a decoder in each loco? A system like this makes a lot more sense than DCC.
navygunner wrote:The Beta v VHS analogy is a particularly good point to bring up. The NMRA has issued a set of standards and recommended practices that address compatability among different manufacturers. The fact that the manufacturers have bought into this set of standards and practices is a testament to our resolve as consumers to demand this compatability. These standards apply to electrical and mechanical function. How many times have us N Scale folks called someone to task for non RP25 wheels? We got MTL to waffle on LP wheels in N Scale to the point where they were shipping their models with both! We pointed out that the sides on some InterMountain locomotives were backwards; they replaced the shells. Atlas has fixed issuesd with their models too. You got a problem with a manufacturer? Stop buying from them. In most cases (when I wasn't totally screwed up in my thinking), the manufacturers came around to our train of thought.The DCC standards are very important to the future of our hobby! This standard crosses all of the scales. That MTH and Lionel have opted to go with different standards only limits the consumer to one particular product to expierience the full capability ot the models features. A lot of us in the smaller scales have already noted our displeasure with this. In the smaller scales, all of the major manufacturers have gone to a standard that allows all of the product to perform to the cutomers basic needs for DC and DCC control. We are the ones spending the money that keeps the lights on at the manufacturers of our hobby supplies. If they want to keep groceries on the table and the lights on at the office, they must come up with ways of keeping us happy. We are customers in a discretionary market, we are at the top of the food chain. If someone gives us a piece of junk and says that it's the best thing to come down the pike, we have the ability to throw the internet BS flag. What are they going to do? If you want DC or DCS or anything else, to be the dominant technology in the MRR world, you have to vote with your hobby dollar. Otherwise you are standing next to the DC. DCS, DCC or other Folk folk and peeing into the wind. At 46 years old; I have not commited to any technology. I like living in both worlds, with dry pants!. Afterall, they figured this crap out with the internet, didn't they!Bob
The Beta v VHS analogy is a particularly good point to bring up. The NMRA has issued a set of standards and recommended practices that address compatability among different manufacturers. The fact that the manufacturers have bought into this set of standards and practices is a testament to our resolve as consumers to demand this compatability.
These standards apply to electrical and mechanical function. How many times have us N Scale folks called someone to task for non RP25 wheels? We got MTL to waffle on LP wheels in N Scale to the point where they were shipping their models with both! We pointed out that the sides on some InterMountain locomotives were backwards; they replaced the shells. Atlas has fixed issuesd with their models too. You got a problem with a manufacturer? Stop buying from them. In most cases (when I wasn't totally screwed up in my thinking), the manufacturers came around to our train of thought.
The DCC standards are very important to the future of our hobby! This standard crosses all of the scales. That MTH and Lionel have opted to go with different standards only limits the consumer to one particular product to expierience the full capability ot the models features. A lot of us in the smaller scales have already noted our displeasure with this. In the smaller scales, all of the major manufacturers have gone to a standard that allows all of the product to perform to the cutomers basic needs for DC and DCC control.
We are the ones spending the money that keeps the lights on at the manufacturers of our hobby supplies. If they want to keep groceries on the table and the lights on at the office, they must come up with ways of keeping us happy. We are customers in a discretionary market, we are at the top of the food chain. If someone gives us a piece of junk and says that it's the best thing to come down the pike, we have the ability to throw the internet BS flag. What are they going to do?
If you want DC or DCS or anything else, to be the dominant technology in the MRR world, you have to vote with your hobby dollar. Otherwise you are standing next to the DC. DCS, DCC or other Folk folk and peeing into the wind. At 46 years old; I have not commited to any technology. I like living in both worlds, with dry pants!. Afterall, they figured this crap out with the internet, didn't they!
So Bob.....whats you're money on in the next video War? Blue Ray HD VS. HD-DVD? So far Blue Ray is twice the cost of HD-DVD. Sounds eerily reminiscant of the Beta Vs. VHS wars. We know who won that one....The less expensive model
Well Athearn join the DC/Sound on their newest Genesis F7s-these are modernized F7s with tons of details changes..This also applies to the latest SD45-2 release.
DC Functions:
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
There are still plenty of DC products that are new and top of the line on the market. I also agree with the compatibility point because DC is like a universal language of model railroading. And yes, those tough little can motors will always have a spot in model railroading.
Exactly, DC control has no compatibility problems, or at least it didn't until some bright spark came up with non-DC compatible decoders (older Soundtraxx for example). Although the trend today seems to be very much towards dual control decoders for sound and non sound. I think that the fact that BLI introduced their non-decoder versions of models and now the Blue Line DC sound systems speaks volumes about the large number of DC users.
I can't see the can motor going anywhere either. They are cheap to make and they are more than up to the task. What will change is how the power is delivered to the motor and how that power is controlled. DC and DCC locos are identical from the wires to the motor brushes through the drive train. In simple terms, the only difference is that the DC guy is holding the rheostat in his hand and attenuating and increasing the voltage to the track, which is directly connected to the motor leads via the wheels and pickups, whereas the DCC guy is remote controlling the rheostat in the loco that is attenuating and increasing the voltage to the motor leads directly.
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
simon1966 wrote: el-capitan wrote: simon1966 wrote: The other problem for any radical change in new technology will be getting credibility. I would imagine that we may be faced with more than one competing new technology. Will this be like a VHS v Beta-max where one wins out and the other falls by the wayside? Will modellers shy away from adopting these new things in case they are left with a dead end technology? It has happened before in this hobby. Look at all the attempts at command control that have not thrived.I don't think the beta vs VHS analogy carries as much weight in the model train world simply because many MRers don't need infinite compatibility with everyone else. Just look at how many scales there are. I know there are also alot of guys that enjoy bringing their equipment to a buddy's house. I am not one of them and I am pretty sure that I am not alone. If some guy rang my doorbell tommorrow and offered me the dream system for my layout but I would be the only one who had it, I would take it in a heartbeat.My point here was more to do with the notion of what happens when a competing technology fails. The owner of such technology gets left out in the cold and eventually has to replace it or stay stagnant. Any new technology in MRR is going to have a control component, a transmission component and something in the locomotive to actually make it work. If a technology fails and the parts to make the loco work are no-longer available (Betamax tapes) then you either have to be content with the roster you have or move on to another technology if you want to run new locomotives.
el-capitan wrote: simon1966 wrote: The other problem for any radical change in new technology will be getting credibility. I would imagine that we may be faced with more than one competing new technology. Will this be like a VHS v Beta-max where one wins out and the other falls by the wayside? Will modellers shy away from adopting these new things in case they are left with a dead end technology? It has happened before in this hobby. Look at all the attempts at command control that have not thrived.I don't think the beta vs VHS analogy carries as much weight in the model train world simply because many MRers don't need infinite compatibility with everyone else. Just look at how many scales there are. I know there are also alot of guys that enjoy bringing their equipment to a buddy's house. I am not one of them and I am pretty sure that I am not alone. If some guy rang my doorbell tommorrow and offered me the dream system for my layout but I would be the only one who had it, I would take it in a heartbeat.
simon1966 wrote: The other problem for any radical change in new technology will be getting credibility. I would imagine that we may be faced with more than one competing new technology. Will this be like a VHS v Beta-max where one wins out and the other falls by the wayside? Will modellers shy away from adopting these new things in case they are left with a dead end technology? It has happened before in this hobby. Look at all the attempts at command control that have not thrived.
The other problem for any radical change in new technology will be getting credibility. I would imagine that we may be faced with more than one competing new technology. Will this be like a VHS v Beta-max where one wins out and the other falls by the wayside? Will modellers shy away from adopting these new things in case they are left with a dead end technology? It has happened before in this hobby. Look at all the attempts at command control that have not thrived.
I don't think the beta vs VHS analogy carries as much weight in the model train world simply because many MRers don't need infinite compatibility with everyone else. Just look at how many scales there are. I know there are also alot of guys that enjoy bringing their equipment to a buddy's house. I am not one of them and I am pretty sure that I am not alone. If some guy rang my doorbell tommorrow and offered me the dream system for my layout but I would be the only one who had it, I would take it in a heartbeat.
My point here was more to do with the notion of what happens when a competing technology fails. The owner of such technology gets left out in the cold and eventually has to replace it or stay stagnant. Any new technology in MRR is going to have a control component, a transmission component and something in the locomotive to actually make it work. If a technology fails and the parts to make the loco work are no-longer available (Betamax tapes) then you either have to be content with the roster you have or move on to another technology if you want to run new locomotives.
good point. I guess that is why DC will be around forever because toggle switches and can motors will never go out of style.
simon1966 wrote: Just out of curiosity, what has been happening to the price of DC throttle packs in the last 5 years? I would assume that sales volume of these has dropped significantly and I would expect the MRC's of this world to start to ramp up the prices of the higher end throttle as they appeal to a smaller more specialized market segment. Is that what is happening?
Just out of curiosity, what has been happening to the price of DC throttle packs in the last 5 years? I would assume that sales volume of these has dropped significantly and I would expect the MRC's of this world to start to ramp up the prices of the higher end throttle as they appeal to a smaller more specialized market segment. Is that what is happening?
For Oscale walkaround throttles the price has stayed consistent over the past 5 years however the number of manufacturers has dropped. The only ones that I know of are MRC and GML. There are more manufacturers but those 2 are the only ones that carry walkarounds with enough juice for O scale. I would bet that I higher percentage of Oscale guys have gone to DCC than the smaller scales because of the size of the locos making it easier to install decoders.
simon1966 wrote: My personal expectation is that we will see and evolution over the coming years based on the now well established unnamed technology. We will see dramatic improvement in the user interfaces employed by the throttles as manufacturers tackle the issue of large banks of functions. More and more functions and gimmicks will be added again requiring huge improvements in the control systems. I think within the next decade that these are the changes we will see, not a radical change in the actual control system through the rails.
My personal expectation is that we will see and evolution over the coming years based on the now well established unnamed technology. We will see dramatic improvement in the user interfaces employed by the throttles as manufacturers tackle the issue of large banks of functions. More and more functions and gimmicks will be added again requiring huge improvements in the control systems. I think within the next decade that these are the changes we will see, not a radical change in the actual control system through the rails.
Dirty track is a pain and I also would like to weather the top of the rails on some of my lesser used sidings. While it would be possible to use batteries since I am in Oscale, the idea of recharging them all the time is not pleasant either. What would be cool is to have a recharging track, like next to a water tower or coal chute. You pull your engine up to the spot, set a timer and it recharges the batteries without taking them out. Has this ever been done before, like in G scale? It would lend itself to better prototypical operation. There also could be a "hybrid" battery system where the motor runs off the battery but the battery is being constantly recharged from track power. There would be no shimmies or shakes when going over a small section of dirty track.
Simon,
You got me thinking about MRC so I went to their site and it lists most of the power packs as "This item is out of stock. Please order this item from your favorite hobby dealer."
Now I have to wonder what they are up to?
Jim
Paul3 wrote: el-capitan,I'll continue to take the manufacturer's specs of DCC products over the word someone who has very little use for DCC and isn't shy in saying so. No offense, you understand. But I have to assume that when a company offers a 5 amp product, it's good for 5 amps. And unless you can come up with an example of a greater than 5 amp continuous load O-scale engine, then I will continue to point out that one can get O-scale decoders for about half of what you originally claimed.
el-capitan,I'll continue to take the manufacturer's specs of DCC products over the word someone who has very little use for DCC and isn't shy in saying so. No offense, you understand. But I have to assume that when a company offers a 5 amp product, it's good for 5 amps. And unless you can come up with an example of a greater than 5 amp continuous load O-scale engine, then I will continue to point out that one can get O-scale decoders for about half of what you originally claimed.
I don't remember the specifics but I know the guys in my club were having problems with decoders not living up to what they said they would. You are right, if the manufacturer says 5 amps it should work in my locos. Let's put an end to this argument as we are not getting anywhere.
Paul3 wrote: Again since you seem to have read all my posts you will notice that a helpful DCCer explained how block control could be done with DCC. Unfortunately it would require completely rewiring the blocks on my layout. Anything is possible with enough money and time.Actually, it wouldn't require that much wiring for your layout. Since you already have a centralized block control panel (your dispatcher's panel), all you'd do is run wire from your toggles to the BDL168 inputs, then run the BDL168 outputs to the blocks using the existing wires. The specifics would change depending on how you wired your layout in the first place (the common return, for example), but it sounds like a simple installation.
Again since you seem to have read all my posts you will notice that a helpful DCCer explained how block control could be done with DCC. Unfortunately it would require completely rewiring the blocks on my layout. Anything is possible with enough money and time.
Actually, it wouldn't require that much wiring for your layout. Since you already have a centralized block control panel (your dispatcher's panel), all you'd do is run wire from your toggles to the BDL168 inputs, then run the BDL168 outputs to the blocks using the existing wires. The specifics would change depending on how you wired your layout in the first place (the common return, for example), but it sounds like a simple installation.
Right now my layout's blocks stretch from signal to signal (assuming that I have signals which have not been installed yet, but for sake of argument). In order to have proper protection yet still have maximum operation with DCC I would want to isolate a 24" section of track at the signal which would be tied into that signal's relay. The rest of the 30ft blocks would operate constantly. If the signal is red in both directions, that short section of track would go dead. I'm sure there would be other ways of doing it but this seems to me like the most operator friendly as the dispatcher would only need to worry about what signals to throw and not routing track power. I would basically be doubling the amount of mainline blocks.
Paul3 wrote: $240 for block detection? really? Does it detect trains that are not moving? If there is a cheaper way of doing it please share but I was simply quoting one suppliers price that has a unit that is able to detect stopped trains. I never said this was the only way.Um, of course it does. Why wouldn't it? Heck, the old Twin-T coils that MR helped bring into the hobby back in the, what? 1950's? 1960's? Those old things could detect a train standing still. The BDL168's sense a current draw across the block like the Twin-T's do. So any motor, running or not, will detect. Also, by adding a resistor or a light source to any rolling stock will also cause it to detect. Jay-Bee even makes resister wheelsets in HO scale for just that purpose, although one could make them yourself if you wish.What kind of detection system can't sense stopped trains? Unless they don't have resistors or engines...but then without engines it's not really a train (by rule).
$240 for block detection? really? Does it detect trains that are not moving? If there is a cheaper way of doing it please share but I was simply quoting one suppliers price that has a unit that is able to detect stopped trains. I never said this was the only way.
Um, of course it does. Why wouldn't it? Heck, the old Twin-T coils that MR helped bring into the hobby back in the, what? 1950's? 1960's? Those old things could detect a train standing still. The BDL168's sense a current draw across the block like the Twin-T's do. So any motor, running or not, will detect. Also, by adding a resistor or a light source to any rolling stock will also cause it to detect. Jay-Bee even makes resister wheelsets in HO scale for just that purpose, although one could make them yourself if you wish.
What kind of detection system can't sense stopped trains? Unless they don't have resistors or engines...but then without engines it's not really a train (by rule).
Again, I was simply stating what it would cost me given one company's price. I am in no way an expert in block detection because I have never had a need for it with block control. I was simply using that company's price as a rough estimate of what it would cost me.
Paul3 wrote: If all this on-screen stuff can be done with DCC then why havn't I seen it at my LHS? Again if you read the entire post I want all of this in a simple plug and play system. I never said it can't be done.How many LHS's sell software? My club uses Railroad&Co. http://www.freiwald.com/ But there's also a free program called JMRI. http://jmri.sourceforge.net/apps/PanelPro/PanelPro.html
If all this on-screen stuff can be done with DCC then why havn't I seen it at my LHS? Again if you read the entire post I want all of this in a simple plug and play system. I never said it can't be done.
How many LHS's sell software? My club uses Railroad&Co. http://www.freiwald.com/ But there's also a free program called JMRI. http://jmri.sourceforge.net/apps/PanelPro/PanelPro.html
I had a chance to take a look at these websites and if I am reading it correctly I would need the following: A program from whatever manufacturer that shows my layout on screen, a computer interface system (from a different manufacturer) that connects my computer to the switches, blocks, etc. Decoders and boosters from yet a different manufacturer to run the trains. And all these different systems from different manufacturers are supposed to communicate with each other. This really seems like something way above my head. Remember, that thread was titled "ultimate operating system" and I simply said that I wanted something that is plug and play that a simple person like me can use. This seems like something that I would need to hire an IT guy just to wire in a switch. I new that this stuff was out there, just not in the package that I could use.
I've been kind of lying low on this thread for a while, mainly because I have a feeling that my original reply to Modelmaker is the one that started the whole series of blasts on this thread. I was told by another contributor that my reaction to the term "Dinosaurs", when I mentioned being happy with the Jurassic Era was out of whack when I was the one who had brought up the subject originally (hey, really, guys, there WERE little Mammals back during that era. Really! It wasn't all Brontosauri and precursors to T-Rex'es).
But enough of Paleontology.
Actually, in re-reading Modelmaker's thread, I begin to see the humor in it, and I DO owe you an apology for mis-reading it. I must have been in 'Defensive Mode' because nobody has ever accused me of not having a sense of humor.
So, people, let's let the DC/DCC battle rest for a while and all listen to each other, okay? I KNOW my reasons for not converting, they're financial. STRICTLY financial! And let me reiterate, an $11 dollar decoder for one of my Swiss Watch brass locos is going to be like purchasing an Ipod instead of a home entertainment system. That's my belief and also what I've been told at my LHS by DCC experts who know both my layout and loco roster. But that shouldn't deter anyone who is thinking about DCC from going ahead. It's just not for me, at the present time.
Argument presented, argument settled.
Now let's get back on topic, okay? As I said, I apologize to all of those that I offended, we wouldn't all be in this hobby if we didn't first of all love TRAINS, no matter HOW we operate them.
You are so right El Capitain, not only does the technology move slowly the uptake and acceptance of new technology is very slow. Consider the control technology that shall not be mentioned by name, what are we, 10, 15 years since it was introduced? Finally reaching critical mass where it is on a level footing and now out-pacing DC. Look at all the incredibly valid reasons that are listed here for DC users not to switch. Imagine the resistance to a new technology if there was significant cost and or difficulty in upgrading all the decoder equipped locos? Someone further up the thread suggested that they would wait until prices came down. I suspect we are close to the bottom of the barrel for pricing. There has been a substantial drop so that entry level system can be had for under $100 and good starter sets under $150. Decoder prices have dropped also. How low can they go and allow relatively low volume manufacturers to still make a viable business. We are not in the high volume consumer market here so we are never going to get pricing like pocket calculators.
As long as the dinosaur club is in session, I thought I'd show some fossil bones. My control Panel. It really doesn't look as bad as the picture seems. Upper black labels are for blocks, yellow label switches are switches. 3 lighting switches also on panel, there are a couple more on top.
Jerry SP FOREVER http://photobucket.com/albums/f317/GAPPLEG/
beegle55 wrote: Hey Jim, you have a good list of reasons why you are in the DC club. I agree with number 6 alot :P, it seems like every time I make an investment into a piece of new technology, something else comes out that I want more... I guess that will always happen though. Anywho, I think it will be interesting in what develops over the next few years. -beegle55
Hey Jim, you have a good list of reasons why you are in the DC club. I agree with number 6 alot :P, it seems like every time I make an investment into a piece of new technology, something else comes out that I want more... I guess that will always happen though. Anywho, I think it will be interesting in what develops over the next few years.
While I will agree that I would like something more robust to come along, I don't think that will happen anytime soon, not 5 yrs anyway. MR technology moves pretty slow compared to other fields because of the limited market. If everyonw who owns a cell phone would get into model railroading perhaps the MR technology would move as fast as cell phone technology.
Yea I can hardly wait until my b-day!
Paul, I might have used some stong words, but we are putting all of the bad on this thread behind us, so please don't get it started again!!!!!! We are trying to get back on some sort of topic related to DC use. Thanks for your reply and the heads up on your critiquing of others, but lets try to keep those kind of posts on the down low, thanks!