cuyama fwrightThird is the difficulty in getting a large group of modules built by a dozen or more individuals to work together properly under DCC control. It usually takes a couple of hours at every setup to get all modules working under DCC, regardless of DCC manufacturer. Even the club DCC experts get stumped by anamolies they don't understand, and can't explain. Independent train control anywhere on a layout comprised of modules built independently by many different modelers would likely be even more difficult with DC, wouldn't you say? Not to say that DCC is perfect, but you are describing a demanding environment unlike what folks experience with home layouts.
fwrightThird is the difficulty in getting a large group of modules built by a dozen or more individuals to work together properly under DCC control. It usually takes a couple of hours at every setup to get all modules working under DCC, regardless of DCC manufacturer. Even the club DCC experts get stumped by anamolies they don't understand, and can't explain.
Independent train control anywhere on a layout comprised of modules built independently by many different modelers would likely be even more difficult with DC, wouldn't you say?
Not to say that DCC is perfect, but you are describing a demanding environment unlike what folks experience with home layouts.
I totally agree that we have a very demanding environment, that none of the popular control systems (DC, DCC, proprietary) anticipated in their design and implementation. The real difference between trying to do a multiple builder modular setup in DC and DCC is the troubleshooting tools and knowledge - not the number of issues.
For DC trouble-shooting, a few multimeters will generally suffice. However, even with lots of pre-planning and the addition of extra wiring, DC will never be as flexible for operations in the modular setup environment as DCC. Which is why no modular group I know of still uses DC.
But troubleshooting digital circuits and links is not as easy. There are 2 separate signal links in DCC - track power and throttle bus/Loconet - and both must function correctly and simultaneously across multiple modules and wire couplings. The tools to accurately monitor the links are quite complex compared to a multimeter. Unfortunately, DCC track power has less tolerance for signal loss than DC.
Radio control has been seen as a solution to get rid of the throttle bus/Loconet issues, but in reality is a bust in the normal modular environment. There is just too much spectral noise and interference at train shows (the most frequent setup location) for consistent and reliable radio communications using any of the common model railroad radio systems. At private setups - church halls and similar - radio control is a thing of beauty.
Although DC is eminently practical for my home layout situation (normal single operator, max 2 operators), I am now wiring for dual use (master switch for DCC or DC). I do the same for my modules for testing - the switch is hidden underneath the module and will be taped at a show to prevent yet another head puzzler. Once I have put decoders in my locomotives, I have no desire to operate a decoder-equipped locomotive on DC. But I want the simplicity of DC while I build, test, and tune my locomotives.
Others have made good points about the simplicity of basic DCC leading to ignorance of the basics of turnout and reversing section wiring.
I didn't explain my thoughts very well the 1st time. Thanks for leading into a 2nd chance.
Fred W
Admittedly, it was seeing and hearing Tsunami sound and the Blackstone HOn3 locos in action that dragged me back into MR in 2009 after a 15 year dry spell. I had always dreamed of an HOn3 layout since the 70's. DCC was just a tag along rider to get at the sound. I had no great trial with DCC and certainly no issues with the soundtraxx decoder or the CV's. By reading and in the doing, plowed into DCC with only a little gear grinding.
I am happy to let my 5 DC MRC II power packs, 30+ HO locos and 50 odd pieces of rolling stock of yesteryear, just rot in storage. No turning back now, except to remember an era where I had a lot of fun, but it's nothing like the fun I am having now.
Richard
If I can't fix it, I can fix it so it can't be fixed
narrow gauge nuclear What was your most difficult part of the transition? (For the old guys)
What was your most difficult part of the transition? (For the old guys)
I can't say that there was much intimidation into the decision, or much difficulty in the transition. Mine was always about having a reason to switch. The desire for onboard sound prompted me to buy a DCC system. Operating it really doesn't take much learning at all, even programming CV's. But I tend to be the type of person that buys things to replace something that is broken, not necessarily to keep up. I only recently bought my first flat screen lcd/led TV w/in the past year because the tube on the old Sony finally gave up. Probably would not have considered a different operating system like DCC if it wasn't for the newish feature of onboard sound.
I suppose the source of some frustration would lie in having to press too many buttons, especially when an errant finger presses a wrong one and you have to start over.
- Douglas
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
This is an issue in a couple of other web forums I attend. No one wants to read anymore. It is a lost skillset for many of the youngest, especially. They want the answers dropped in their laps. It is just too much work, it seems. The same that simple to answer questions are repeatedly asked over and over again.
In answer to Fred. The assumption in my post was that the folks queried are in DCC, are paying the price and gaining the benefits of DCC operation and not whether DCC is good or bad. It is here and many people are in it to stay.
Still, for those old guys and the new guys...What were your key issues after leaping into DCC. (Assuming you did some homework like I did, prior to your leap)
For the moment, my feet is still firmly in both camps. DC at home; DCC on the HOn3 modules when used in a club setup.
There are several things that irritate me about DCC.
- First is the attitude of many (but by no means all) DCC-only users. There seems to be a belief that modern (in terms of electronics and operating capabilities) model railroading started with DCC. The attitude that those DC dinosaurs couldn't possibly appreciate or understand how great DCC is. Truth is that virtually all the capabilites of today's DCC were available (albeit with considerable effort in some cases) to the interested model railroader before the Coming of DCC. Yes, automated routing, command control, radio control, incredible slow speed running, slow speed turnout motors, and even great sound were known and available before DCC appeared. What DCC did was bring these known capabilities and technologies (along with significantly higher locomotive prices) together to the average model railroader in the form of a couple of well-disguised programmable black boxes.
- Second, the cost of DCC systems make many users brand-centric in an effort to justify the price they paid (or will pay). At the same time, this brand-centrism causes its users to overlook the drawbacks of their particular brand of DCC (they all have their own drawbacks). What is a very minor nuisance to some is a major drawback to others. Because of the brand-centrism, many looking for advice on their DCC selection get advice which does not account for individual priorities for their DCC system.
- Third is the difficulty in getting a large group of modules built by a dozen or more individuals to work together properly under DCC control. It usually takes a couple of hours at every setup to get all modules working under DCC, regardless of DCC manufacturer. Even the club DCC experts get stumped by anamolies they don't understand, and can't explain.
my thoughts, your choices
narrow gauge nuclearDCC is indeed fine and I would have my current MR'ing no other way, but we all see, daily, the trials of others here. Many, often have an air of despondency in their post, but it is more frustration than disappointment, I think
I will note that only those with problems post, and a good many of those problems are self-inflicted. Folks who don't know what constitutes a reversing loop, for example, will have trouble with DC or DCC. A good introductory reference such as Basic DCC Wiring for Your Model Railroad: A Beginner's Guide to Decoders, DCC Systems, and Layout Wiring would answer many of the questions seen here, but most fail to RTFB (Read The Fine Book). Others ignore the documentation that came with their DCC system.
Those for whom DCC went well don't show up here, so there is a built-in bias.
DCC is indeed fine and I would have my current MR'ing no other way, but we all see, daily, the trials of others here. Many, often have an air of despondency in their post, but it is more frustration than disappointment, I think.
I wrote my post to find out what the most common complaints might be since few post here with anything but problems that need solving. And, this is not necessarily a bad thing......It is what we are here for.......DCC/electronics issues
Honestly, your opening post seems a little ... well, overwrought.
For me, and for many I know, DCC was a pretty painless transition. The trickiest bit can be decoder installation, but with more and more drop-in decoders and factory-equipped DCC, that issue is diminishing, even in N scale.
To graybeard and newbie alike, I would say, "Come on in, DCC is fine."
The famous line from the Wizard of Oz was one of fear for what might lie ahead. Such is the case for many neophyte MRs in the modern world of DCC.
Many of us old timers became used to DC operation where a good degree of mechanical and electrical skills were developed. On a pike of any size, there was the inevitable rats nest of block, switch and signal control wiring....Literally hundreds of wires routing their way to some important destination from a very busy master control panel. Today, only moderate electrical skills are required with about the same mechanical skills as in days of old.
Electronics skills are now at the forefront, but not very complex ones. Basic computer savy and a basic understanding of CV settings within the framework of the DCC's micro controller are very important to get the most out of that sound decoder. Undertable wiring on all but the largest pikes can be reduced to viritually nothing if you DCC control everything. The old slap and slam switch solenoids of the DC days have given way to silent slow motion switch machines controlled with no toggle switches or significant wiring, if desired.
In DCC, we traded in the old 110 watt weller "under the table" soldering gun for the 15 watt pencil iron, installing sound controllers. A single heavy gauge "buss" now replaces many long runs of wires of yesteryear. Model railroading has gotten much easier for the modern guy and a bit more expensive, if he goes full featured DCC all the way.
DCC can be forbidding to a startup guy as well as the old hand, in some cases. Many old MR's have long torn down their old layout of the 90's and rebuilt around the less copper filled 21st century form of model railroading. If we old guys have "kept up", then the transition was only moderately painful to the brain and the wallet. We learned new skills along the way, too.
Assuming you are currently involved in DCC....
What is your most worrisome area of entering MR with DCC (For the new guys.)
My issue was coming into the digital technology and learning what was out there to do what task and how it was implemented before I made some bad or expensive mistakes on my new DCC layout after 15 years of being out of the hobby. Fortunately, I read a lot and while finding the experience a bit tedious, it was not so costly in time or headaches as I first thought it would be.
What about you guys?