Gary,
I would just like to say one thing,,,,,,,,,My comment was,by no means,a personal attack...
Cheers,
Frank
Edit Gary for RRebell
zstripe rrebell I am a dummy! I just found out that the radio control setup I go last year on e-bay has an 8 pin socket, boy do I feel dumb. Guess I need to try it out now! RREBELL, To keep your integrity intact,,,I believe You should have kept that comment to yourself..But What Do I Know!! Cheers, Frank
rrebell I am a dummy! I just found out that the radio control setup I go last year on e-bay has an 8 pin socket, boy do I feel dumb. Guess I need to try it out now!
I am a dummy! I just found out that the radio control setup I go last year on e-bay has an 8 pin socket, boy do I feel dumb. Guess I need to try it out now!
RREBELL,
To keep your integrity intact,,,I believe You should have kept that comment to yourself..But What Do I Know!!
rrinkeron an MRC system? Note, MRC has not been making much of any true quality anymore. Their DCC stuff is pretty much junk.
Russell
Wait, you don't want to use the Crest system, tried and proven for many years now, but would jump on an MRC system? Note, MRC has not been making much of any true quality anymore. Their DCC stuff is pretty much junk.
As reliable as their old DC power packs were, have you ever taken one apart and looked inside? Looks like it was a junior high electronics project, very no-neat assembly techniques. In the pre-electronics days it didn;t matter much, how could you really mess up a transfomer, rheostat, and big selenium plate rectifier? What's more amazing is how reliable their later soldi state stuff like the Tech II series are despite the rather shoddy build quality.
Simple stuff they seem to have down pretty well. I wouldn;t trust them on a direct radio control system which would be at least as complex as DCC internally. They also don;t seem to learn, so they might initially offer a system with 5 channels, but it won;t be upgradable once they figure out how to do 10, so you'll have to buy all new stuff, then they'll get 100 channels and once again need a new system that will FINALLY be able to be upgraded to the 300 channel version later on. All the while running full cover ads in MR proclaiming their system is the ultimate in radio operation and has been for 20 years.
Cynical? Yes, but MRC deserves it, as shown by their past track record.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Most all of my locomotives are DCC ready and some has to have a decoder but I still run DC Sheldon the Train Engineer I was going to get but change my mind because I did not want to de decoder them now if MRC will ever make a wireless DC that I will buy.
Motors are improving all the time - look at the latest Kao offering with truck-mounted motors in HO! Leaves a lot of space up in the body for fitting batteries and recievers and what-not. Extremely low current draw, too. Nothing really new - the Canon motor in my Bowser/Stewart Baldwin switchers draws about 25ma when running.
Also, you can run the crest system at the same time as any DCC system and on the same track. If you are really good, you could MU with with a DCC engine but you would both have to control your own engine (would make an interesting helper situation.
Lets face it, things change and some things are game changers. Who do you still know with a landline, I know of very few, gave up mine years ago as have all my tenants. Landlines are drying to the point that the phone company now keeps converted numbers in the phone book, even if they have gone elsewhere with their number. Pay phones, if I think real hard I may be able to think of a location, yes I know of one and no, I do not live in the boonies. If there were a cheap way to convert to something other than DC, I would change in a heartbeat!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The new radio receivers are supposed to sell for around $30 (without sound). Somebody will win the new technology battle, whether it is Crest, who knows but DCC would not exist if it were not for early adopters that led to further research.
cuyama ATLANTIC CENTRALThe tone of that is not any different than the name calling I discribed above - if your not into his view of the hobby, you don't count. You obviously have way more time to post many more words on the forum than do I, but in the future please do not quote me out of context in an attempt to put words in my mouth. Here is the full quote in context, which was in specific response to your erroneous contention that no additional established layouts were converting to DCC: cuyama This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here. DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone. Note that I prefaced it by saying that this is what is going on around here. And I added my belief that both DCC and DC are fine choices for specific needs. I don't ascribe to the notion that there is only one way to model railroad and it is inaccurate to attempt to paint me with that broad brush. Multiple-operator layouts are great, single-operator layouts are great, anything in between is also fine. I have a few clients and friends who are happily running DC. But of the 100+ layouts I have designed for others over the last ten years, the owners tell me that more than 90% will be operated with DCC for the foreseeable future. Just the facts.
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe tone of that is not any different than the name calling I discribed above - if your not into his view of the hobby, you don't count.
You obviously have way more time to post many more words on the forum than do I, but in the future please do not quote me out of context in an attempt to put words in my mouth.
Here is the full quote in context, which was in specific response to your erroneous contention that no additional established layouts were converting to DCC:
cuyama This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here. DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone.
This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here.
DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone.
Note that I prefaced it by saying that this is what is going on around here. And I added my belief that both DCC and DC are fine choices for specific needs. I don't ascribe to the notion that there is only one way to model railroad and it is inaccurate to attempt to paint me with that broad brush. Multiple-operator layouts are great, single-operator layouts are great, anything in between is also fine.
I have a few clients and friends who are happily running DC. But of the 100+ layouts I have designed for others over the last ten years, the owners tell me that more than 90% will be operated with DCC for the foreseeable future. Just the facts.
That's fine, but as I stated, around here, most everyone who wants DCC has already converted.
Respectfully, I would summit that your layout design clients are not an "average cross section" of the hobby. And in most cases they are the modelers with the most means, the least time, likely building "social group" layouts with a team of friends helping them. Not meaning to stereotype them too much, but it is likely most of them fit that exact group that is drawn to DCC, is not going to build something from scratch like my system, and is willing to spend the money.
And there is nothing wrong with that, and based on the current choices DCC is no doubt the best for them.
Assuming someone spends the money and does the work to bring more comprehensive systems to market, direct radio, with or without battery power, does hold some possible advantages. As for this notion that no "current" products exist, well that is not completely true. Are the various product lines complete and full tested? No. Can they be used as is? Yes.
Crest has a well proven hand held controller that has been in production for 4 years - I have one 4 years old. They have recievers small enough for most O scale equipment, they have base station recievers, they have batteries.
CVP has recievers for their AirWire900 throttle that will fit in HO locos and interface with DCC decoders. That throttle is even older and more proven in large scale.
Not to mention NWSL and RailPro.
I agree with you that we need to see more complete small scale application development - and then I still likely will not change unless I change scales, era, or layout theme - but that's me.
As for my views on DCC, I feel most modelers have "settled" for the throttles that are out there because they felt that having a universal command control system out weighed those factors - but face it, a DT400 is a miserable thing to actually use - at least for me.
Normally I don't have this kind of time, look at my recent post counts - but you just happened to catch me with few spare minutes - which are ending now.
Sheldon
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
ATLANTIC CENTRAL ...So before anyone suggests the rrebell or myself should just be quiet, maybe the same advice should apply to the DCC users who look down their noses at anyone who does not see the hobby their way. Sheldon
...So before anyone suggests the rrebell or myself should just be quiet, maybe the same advice should apply to the DCC users who look down their noses at anyone who does not see the hobby their way.
"Ladies and gentlemen, I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news is that both engines have failed, and we will be stuck here for some time. The good news is that you decided to take the train and not fly."
rrebell The reason is economics, the more demand, the lower the price and everyone wants availability of their choice and the cost to be less in their choice, simple economics! The nice thing about the system from crest is you can run it with DC or DCC or whatever if it is on battery power so you only convert what you want to. Changes the whole game a bit because now you are talking taking over one engine in Sheldons vast fleet! By the way Sheldon, how did you like the beta test you did back in 1988???????????
The reason is economics, the more demand, the lower the price and everyone wants availability of their choice and the cost to be less in their choice, simple economics! The nice thing about the system from crest is you can run it with DC or DCC or whatever if it is on battery power so you only convert what you want to. Changes the whole game a bit because now you are talking taking over one engine in Sheldons vast fleet! By the way Sheldon, how did you like the beta test you did back in 1988???????????
rrebell,
Respectfully you are putting the cart before the horse. Henry Ford did not presell Model T's so he could lower the price. He made the car at the lowest possible price, it proved itself in the marketplace and that success allowed him to lower the price even more. First Model T in 1908 cost $850, by the end of production in 1927 the base model could be bought for $260.
The Train Engineer Revolution I am refering is the first version of what they are selling now - only about 4 years old. I have had very little time to do anything with it yet, but do plan to run several tests when time allows, including onboard HO recievers when they are available.
My layout uses 10 of the older 10 Channel 27 Mhz Train Engineer throttles as trackside units, connected to the layout through an advanced cab control system similar to MZL and intergrated into a relay based signal system based on Bruce Cubbs original signal system.
EMD Don,
Well I am in nearly complete agreement with you. I have spent years on here explaining that the best control system is the one that fits a partular users specific layout, operational, modeling, cost and skill level goals.
But I must say, that over the years, most of the resistance, criticism, name calling, attempts ot convert me or others, have come from those using DCC, and who think everyone should.
While those of us still using DC - be it simple or advanced - have spoken out to explain what we do, why, and why we have not chosen DCC, I can't recall one person trying to "sell" others on not using DCC. Sure if someone asks about my control system, I'm going to explain what I see as the features and benefits. And if someone asks the DC or DCC question, I'm going to give them my view - I have that right as much as the next person has the right to tell them what they like about DCC.
But over the years I, and others still using DC, have been called "scared of technology", backward, stupid, cheap, and more - sometimes directly and sometimes by innuendo - because we will not "see the light" and go DCC.
I'm not the super computer/electronics/solid state wiz kid, but I do know a little about electronics - likely a bit more than the "average" DCC user does. I did design relay circuits for years and programed some of the first PLC's used in industrial control. I have used DCC, I know a moderate amount about it. I'm very tired of hearing "if you try it you will like it" - I have lots of modeler friends who have it, I use it on their layouts all the time, I'm still not sold - as it relates to MY LAYOUT AND MODELING GOALS.
As for the idea that we are all model railroaders, not according to these kinds of comments:
"Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here."
The tone of that is not any different than the name calling I discribed above - if your not into his view of the hobby, you don't count.
So before anyone suggests the rrebell or myself should just be quiet, maybe the same advice should apply to the DCC users who look down their noses at anyone who does not see the hobby their way.
And in closing, I will repeat my views on DCC:
Most of the current user interfaces (throttles for those of you in Rio Linda) are poorly designed and hard to use.
If you like and want onboard sound - you NEED DCC in the smaller scales it is the only viable choice right now.
If you have a small to medium sized layout and want lots of action - you need DCC or other command control.
If you want ditch lights, sound, smoke, station announcements, and other features of that nature, you NEED DCC.
If you want/need to MU wildly different motive power lash ups, then DCC is a better choice.
But if you don't want sound, you plan on having signals, your layout is large and/or you are happy with less "action" per square foot, or you are a lone operator - you may find other systems offer a set of features more to your needs for considerably less investment of time and/or money.
If you believe you need to "model railroad" the way it is portrayed in the model railroad press, you need DCC. If you like the social side of the hobby then you likely want DCC.
If you think for yourself, you will choose based on your needs, or you can just follow the vocal, trendy pack, majority or not.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL ...But you will not change the minds of the DCC users any more than any of them have been able to convert me, or Chuck, or Dr Wayne to DCC. Sheldon
...But you will not change the minds of the DCC users any more than any of them have been able to convert me, or Chuck, or Dr Wayne to DCC.
rrebell Oh, and by the way, youtube has a few running battery powered HO radio controlled trains, and using old equipment and batteries.
Oh, and by the way, youtube has a few running battery powered HO radio controlled trains, and using old equipment and batteries.
I share your interest in the future of direct radio and direct radio with battery power, and as we know, it is already the system of choice in large scale, and is now very practical in O scale.
It will come to HO as the technology advances, but just like I am still running DC using track side radio throttles, don't expect too many people to leave DCC and move to direct radio.
The more likely market for these products is people who never did switch to DCC, and never invested in radio throttles or other advanced systems. And once some of the radio systems are highly developed for HO, you may well see a percentage of new modelers go that way rather than DCC.
I still have big concerns about decoder/reciever costs and installation - with any type of command control system. And if I can't convert every loco - I will not convert any. Even at the modest price of $30, decoders or recievers for my fleet would cost $3900. And before you or any one else says I don't need to convert them all, or all at once, my modeling goals are such that all of these locos are needed for the operational theme of the layout - it is all or none.
If I was in two rail O scale, or even S scale, I would already be in direct radio, likely with battery power. But as it stands, I am interested to watch the developements, but am unlikely to change any time soon.
I do own a Crest Revolution, one of th first available Beta test copies, and do plan to try it out in several ways, but life has been busy. I will be interested to see the new HO recievers and could easily do a track powered loco as a test with the transmitter I have when those recievers are available. And I was thinking of installing a direct radio reciever in my On30 Chirstmas train set with the Revolution.
But you will not change the minds of the DCC users any more than any of them have been able to convert me, or Chuck, or Dr Wayne to DCC.
I accually have one of the old radio control onboard but without battery, uses track power, so this stuff has been around for a long time! As far as battery power, did you not hear the 2000 times as powerfull, a button size battery may be enough.
cuyama ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd DCC is built on very old technology at this point Compared to your 40-year-old MZL? Thanks, that was good for a laugh.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd DCC is built on very old technology at this point
Compared to your 40-year-old MZL?
Thanks, that was good for a laugh.
Glad you are entertained, I make no apologies for for the fact that I use old technology. My signal system uses relays - and solid state inductive current detectors.
And while my system is based in part on Ed Ravenscroft's MZL, it is enhanced to provide true walk around with the Aristo Train Engineer throttles - relays do that work too.
I find it interesting that you seem to define who is a real "model railroader" by their interest in group operating sessions and/or their use of DCC. Yet my control system is designed for group operating sessions - AND it is designed for display running and solo operation.
I chose to build my own control system to suit my wants and needs, I know my wants and needs are outside the "mainstream". My system is focused on what I want, leaving out what I don't want, and for my list of goals is 100% more cost effective than DCC.
And I don't have any service or support issues. The commercial products I do use are easily replaceable with other products, the rest is simple generic electrical hardware. I like it that way.
I full well agree and realize that for most people, right now, DCC is the best choice - I'm not most people.
After careful consideration at two different points in time, I did not choose DCC for the following reasons:
130 decoders is a lot of money, and a lot of work to install.
I don't like onboard sound in small scales. I don't need ditch lights, or to turn loco lights on and off, or to control sounds.
I want signals and CTC - I was going to need blocks anyway.
I run lots of matched set diesels, DCC would mean more work speed matching and setting them up - they work just fine in DC without all that.
My DC system has automatic block over run protection and collision avoidance by virture of no common rail, seperate power supplies for each throttle, and staggered gaps at section joints - in other words basically for free.
My interlockings work like the real thing - you cannot throw a switch in a given interlocking while a train is in that interlocking.
My trains have constant lighting and great speed control with pulse width modulated control and wireless hand held walk around throttles - range about 200' - the layout room is 24 x 40 - never lost a signal.
Throttles are simple, no hard to read displays or small buttons crowded together.
Trains can be run from CTC panel or by walk around - with or without a dispatcher. With a dispatcher, mainline operators simply drive their train - no different than DCC. Even without a dispatcher, operators simply walk around, throw turnouts at tower panels and assign the next section (block for those of you in Rio Linda) with a simple push button - they don't have to double back, if they need to turn a section off, there will bea button for that at the next tower panel.
The system includes full working block and interlocking signals which can be used with or without CTC control.
Turnouts are controlled in multiple locations, on the CTC panel and at local tower panels - all with one button routing.
There are 10 throttles available for operation of up to 10 trains at once.
All of this for a construction cost less than a basic wireless DCC system with 10 throttles and basic non sound decoders for my 130 locos.
You bet, I like old technology - like the 112 year old original slate roof on my house - if its not broken, don't fix it.
rrebellThe only thing limiting the adaption of total onboard control is not the battery but the electronic components in the controllers
That doesn't seem correct at all. For HO and smaller scales, batteries are the largest volume and weight element and lag the components significantly (since batteries don't improve with Moore's Law)
There is also an array (pun intended) of RF (radio frequency) issues that come into play in antenna design and frequency and modulation choice for direct radio. Polk obviously made some wrong choices there earlier, which is part of the reason they say that they are going out of business.
Direct radio DC battery will likely come* for HO at some point. But until folks like you can show us photos of working installations of Crest's system in typical HO engines (with or without sound), it's vaporware.
* Edit: I should say something like ""practical, widely deployed drop-in direct radio DC battery will come for HO at some point"-- obviously early systems are out now.
The blown decoders is just one of the reasons, so don't take that as the only reason and also I was stating for me, personally, not as a trend as far as DCC. Also, on a forum it is hard to relay where one is coming from. I have always thought at least 10 years out, I tend to throw all my eggs in one basket including financially, I tend to be a lone wolf because I find it hard in my area to find people of the same mindset as me, not that I avoid being social. DCC is great for some and for clubs, it is really the only game in town but it is not without issues and through various forums, I talk to a lot of people and we all communicate our problems so I am exposed to more than my group of friends and have knowledge of what goes on at a half dozen large clubs as far as what's happening and where they are going (right now two are DCC only, two are being built as DCC only, one is both and one is being converted to both from just DC). As far as batteries are concerned, unless you follow this stuff, most don't have a clue to the daily breakthroughs. The only thing limiting the adaption of total onboard control is not the battery but the electronic components in the controllers and if you know Moore's law, you know that that will soon not be a problem! In fact, due to photonics, one university just announced a major breakthrough!
cuyama ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't think any of these companies thinks they will "replace" DCC, but they may well make a big dent in the 60-70% of model railroaders that do not use DCC. That's right, 60-70%, by all reasonable estimates. In HO DCC seems to be at about 50-60% and growth has slowed to mostly new entries into the hobby. This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here. DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone. As far as direct radio battery DC, the Original Poster has started a number of threads like this one. And as long as the products don't quite exist yet for HO, it is easy to imagine them as a panacea. When Crest publishes photos of actual HO engines with on-board batteries and direct radio receivers installed and demonstrates them working on an actual layout with people in the aisles, it will be a newsworthy item.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't think any of these companies thinks they will "replace" DCC, but they may well make a big dent in the 60-70% of model railroaders that do not use DCC. That's right, 60-70%, by all reasonable estimates. In HO DCC seems to be at about 50-60% and growth has slowed to mostly new entries into the hobby.
As far as direct radio battery DC, the Original Poster has started a number of threads like this one. And as long as the products don't quite exist yet for HO, it is easy to imagine them as a panacea. When Crest publishes photos of actual HO engines with on-board batteries and direct radio receivers installed and demonstrates them working on an actual layout with people in the aisles, it will be a newsworthy item.
Well stated and it holds true for my area as well. DCC around here hasn't slowed and continues to grow. The LHS has more DCC items in stock now then ever, and it's moving, not sitting around. Different parts of the Country can/may have different trends. That stands to reason. But I personally do not see a trailing off/slowing of growth in expanding DCC or entry into DCC in my area. I also personally have not seen enough blown decoders to warrant being frightened to take a step into DCC or full on DCC conversion . It's probably best to simply say "I do not like DCC" and move on and be happy. I like and still use DC...I like and use DCC...both operating systems are tried, tested, and true for HO and N scale. Radio does nothing for me whatsoever. Besides, as others have stated, until we see actual working operating control units for HO and N scale, HO and N radio equipped locomotives and other devices operating and reviewable, and en masse marketing and availability of these products then this is all moot, pure speculation, and borderline guesswork. But, if radio floats your boat...all the power to you (pun intended). Each to their own.
Happy modeling!
Don.
Well northern California must be behind the curve, because here in the Mid Atlantic nearly all those "social type, operating session" modelers have already converted to DCC - and for the most part I understand their reasons.
I'm sure that there are a a few modelers left who have not converted but will, and I suspect most new people will go DCC for the forseeable future. Butt there are many "lone wolf" modelers, who's layouts are by no means "neglected or dusty" who have not imbraced sound and have no interest in DCC.
Or, should we assume they are not "real modelers" so they don't count - they are just grandpas playing with train sets because they are not in your social click?
My info comes from local dealers who talk to their customers, and know what their customers buy - control system wise and locomotive wise - they still have lots of HO and N scale DC customers who show no signs of switching.
Every informal poll taken on this forum has shown DCC useage to be about 60%, and it would be fair to assume most on here are tech savy, social or both, with few indicating they will switch over in the future.
I make no claim that Crest will produce a perfect product, or how long it will take to bring it to market, or that battery power is just around the corner in HO. But there are four manufactuers investing in direct radio - they must see some sort of future based on some sort of data or customer response?
I don't plan to go to direct radio or DCC and time soon, if ever. I don't want onboard sound and my trackside radio throttles work just fine with my user friendly advanced cab control system. Other people I know using the same type of system as me feel the same way - we are happy with our control system just as you are happy with DCC.
But I am interested to see what develops. And DCC is built on very old technology at this point, and the user interfaces in DCC are poor in my opinion.
Still happy in DC, just watching the developments.
Been DCC for 10 years and I saw my first fried decoder just this summer. And it wasn't one of mine. One of my fellow club members was working on an Athearn loco he had a decoder in, on a LIVE TEST TRACK, with most of the wires just twisted, not well trimmed, and not soldered. You can imagine what happened next.
Not going DCC because you fear blowing decoders? Haven't blown one yet, nor have I seen any otherwise working ones just blow out on a large club layout where a given set of locos will run continuously, pulling long trains, for an hour or so at a time.That includes both user-installed and factory equipped locos.
Tam Valley's radio system also connects to a standard DCC decoder.
rrebellThe reason I have not gone DCC is I have seen too many fried decoders already
I've operated on dozens of layouts totaling hundreds of engines and have only seen this happen once or twice -- and always due to human error. The danger is vastly overstated
On the other hand, the potential dangers of over-charging lithium batteries in confined spaces leading to overheating and fried equipment is also real, although it will happen rarely. Ask Boeing.
Nothing's perfect.