maxman davidmurray Liver and bacon is better. An Amish market just opened up around here. I understand that they have chocolate covered bacon. I think I'd like that better.
davidmurray Liver and bacon is better.
An Amish market just opened up around here. I understand that they have chocolate covered bacon. I think I'd like that better.
YUCK!!!!! LOL.
Take Care!
Frank
davidmurrayLiver and bacon is better.
Two decades ago, the question would have been: Do we need anything but DC to control model trains? Today the answer is obvious. While many of us are still happy with DC, others feel they have more fun with DCC.
Let us have fun with whichever technology that pleases us.
Guy
Modeling CNR in the 50's
Paul:
You are wrong. Liver and bacon is better.
Dave
Rich, the short answer to your question is: absolutely nothing. It is your railroad/hobby time and how you choose to use it is your choice . There are many world class layouts operating with DC tethered throttles and there probbly always will be. That being said, this is a discussion forum and those who enjoy that phase of the hobby should be free to discuss topics including dcc wireless control of their layouts. For me, wireless control is a better option than tethered throttles. But I am always open to talking about other avenues.
carl425I don't like brussel sprouts. Anybody claiming to like them is lying. They only eat them to prop up their "more health conscious than me" superiority complex.
Well, now you've started it!! Now I see why sometimes these threads go into a negative sprial that gets totally negative, with type A males going at it, ending up (rightfully) getting blocked by Steve. I like brussel sprouts, so there! And limas beans are good too, so take that!
EDIT: I forgot the best...liver & onions.
All in fun,
Paul
Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent
To be totally honest with you, I love electronics. I run my layout in DCC. I have divided my layout into 7 power districts, each controlled by a PSX circuit breaker or PSX-AR auto-reversing circuit breaker. I have two RRampMeters, one for each of two boosters.
But all of these electronic gizmos provide me with some element of control or critical information. I just come up short when it comes to thinking how smart phones and tablets can help me run my layout any better than I already do.
Rich
Alton Junction
[quote user="richhotrain"]
...So, once again, I ask, what's wrong with a handheld DCC throttle or a DC power pack to run trains?
[quote]
Nothin' at all, rich, just as there's nothin' wrong with any of those new-fangled methods, either.
richhotrain I am really getting tired of reading about smart phones, tablets, Blue Tooth, WiFi and dead rail......
I am really getting tired of reading about smart phones, tablets, Blue Tooth, WiFi and dead rail......
I'm pondering a move to dead rail, but my version puts house current directly to the rails. Anyone who looks with their hands rather than their eyes will make the connection immediately.
Wayne (still trying to figure out DC)
nothing except...
1. I have Loksound, Lentz, Digitrax, QSI (V1, 2, 3, 4), Sountraxx LC, and Tsunami all with different button mappings. I wrote an app that clearly has buttons that say, "Bell, Whistle, Short Whistle, Coupler, Brake, water load, startup / shutdown, add consist front, add consist middle, and add consist helper" which makes remembering the exact mappings and CVs unecessary.
2. I have a macro that allows me to input the tonnage I have hooked up. Based on the tractive effort I can calculate how fast I can accelerate (CV3). I can also adjust the brakes (CV4). This allows a simulation of how a real train works. I then apply the brakes. And I have an emergency stop button which reprograms CV4 to 0 then sets speed to 0. (And in some cases the consist decel CV (QSI))
I need to program in quick set buttons...light, medium, heavy, and Allegheny H-8 loads. ;-)
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
richhotrain <snip> As I say, I am not anti-computer. I use mine all the time for a variety of purposes. But I just cannot see the purpose of using a laptop, tablet or smart phone to operate my layout when my DCC system already provides a totally functional device in the form of a throttle. Rich
<snip>
As I say, I am not anti-computer. I use mine all the time for a variety of purposes. But I just cannot see the purpose of using a laptop, tablet or smart phone to operate my layout when my DCC system already provides a totally functional device in the form of a throttle.
Well, let me give you an example of why I use a computer/smartphone/tablet.
I'm not trying to change your mind, just giving you an example of MY "purpose of using a laptop (actually I use a desktop machine), tablet or smart phone to operate my layout".
First, the computer: It's old hardware that was laying around, not being used for anything else. So it was basically free. JMRI, LocoNet Chcker, LibreOffice, and Firefox (the programs I use most often on that machine) are also free. And I have a wireless router in my home for other uses, so no added expense there.
Then the smartphone: Got a Samsung Galaxy Blaze for $15, which was it's trade-in value when a 20-something upgraded. It's in perfect condition, just no cell service. Works great with JMRI/Engine Driver (both also free) using the above-mentioned PC and WiFi router. The phone has a rocker-style volume control that ED uses for speed control, so I don't have to look at the screen.
So for a wireless throttle, I paid $15 and a little time to download and install a couple apps. Price if I wanted to upgrade to a single wireless throttle from my DCC manufacturer: About $330 for a wireless throttle and a radio receiver.
Now, on to the tablet: Paid about $50 or so (I don't really remember) for a 7" Android tablet, and another $10 for a headrest mount for it that I was easily able to convert to a fascia mounting. Then a little time to create a JMRI panel for the yard throat. Again, works great with the old PC and WiFi.
So for about $60 I have a layout-mounted touchscreen control panel for my yard throat that can easily be changed should I reconfigure that yard throat. I recently did just that when I added a pocket track for my switchers. Maybe five minutes to add the track to the background image and update it with the new turnout address. MUCH faster, easier, and less messy than having to rework and rewire a physical panel.
Oh, and I've installed ED on that tablet, too, so it can double as another wireless throttle. It's kinda clunky for a throttle, but additional cost for that ability = $0.
And a little more about that computer. In addition to JMRI and LocoNet Checker for the DCC aspects of the layout, I also use it to record my entire layout inventory, my wiring guides, various notes, etc, listen to the radio when I'm working on the layout, look layout-related stuff up, and so on. So even if I DIDN'T use it for decoder programming/throttles/panels, it would still be useful.
Again, I'm not trying to change your mind. You might not find any of that useful. But some folks do, or none of that stuff would exist.
EDIT: Fixed grammar.
I think that it comes down to "need" vs "want". You don't need a computer to run your trains but on the other hand you might want to. Neither is wrong and there is no reason to worry if you are in either camp. That to me is the beauty of this hobby- we have a lot of choices that we can enjoy.
Joe
rrinker Honestly, I think those Euro throttles that use a picture of the loco are more distracting than helpful, and more limited for north american modelers. I have a half dozen RS-3s - how big a screen do I need to have a picture big enough to read the road number on each one so I know which one I am selecting? That's the only differentiating factor - they are all in the same paint scheme for the same road name. That option came about because it's pretty much not possible to use the cab number for the DCC address in europe, european locos either do not have cab numbers or the numbers are 5 and 6 digits long. Most US railroad don;t go over 4 digits, so cab numbers can be directly used as the address. Typing in no more than 4 digits is FAR faster than scrollign through a bunch of pictures to find the loco I want. This is one of my examples of technology for technology's sake - it doesn't help me do anything easier or faster, in fact it makes a simple task MORE difficult. Not sure why modelers of north american prototypes would want something like that. It's similar to the recall stacks - great, your DCC system is better than mine because it has 16 recalls? How so? I press a maximum of 6 buttons to select ANY loco I own, recall stack or not. Loco, up to 4 numbers, and enter. Fewer if the loco address is less than 1000. To select a loco from 16 in a recall stack, you can have to press up to 18 buttons - recall, the scroll button or thumb the wheel or whatever up to 16 times, if the loco is the last one in the stack, and enter to select it. I say again, how is this better? I look at my loco, I see that it is cab number 865, so to run it on my DCC system I select 865. Not a picture of a Trainmaster. Not scroll through 16 locos in my recall stack only to find it wasn't one of my last 16 locos I ran. It says 865 on the side of the loco, I hit 865. Done. I don;t think it's a lack of fancy electronics that keeps young people away from trains. It's a total lack of relevance of trains in everyday life. The only time there is news about trains is when there is a wreck, or maybe yet another article about how Amtrak has lost another billion dollars. Look at all teh grade crossing accidents - they aren't all suicide by train, they are ordinary people who are totally unaware of their surroundings and totally forget that those shiny steel rails carry large vehicles that will turn their puny car into so much scrap metal of they don't pay attention. If anything killed the hobby, it's Tyco and LifeLike garbage train sets of the 70s, just as video games were starting to take hold, train sets get so bad you were lucky if they would hold together and run for an hour after taking them out of the box. Oh, broken again? The heck with it, back to Pong..... All this video-gamey control is just another version of some of those goofy 80's train sets, in a last ditch effort makign stuff like GI Joe trains, or ones that could climb vertically up a wall. Even adding stuff like vertical climbs, loops, and lane changing to slot cars couldn;t keep that hobby popular either. And it's not going to - non railroad people love to say we're all just kids playing with toys, and maybe we are, but at least you have some credibility when everythign matches an era, or a specific railroad. If your train is festooned with cartoon characters, that's all out the window - it is definitely a toy. Do we need that stuff to keep the hobby alive? I don't think so. Look at how many little kids love trains. Not just Thomas and Chuggington, but real trains. Somewhere, that love gets lost, at least for a majority of kids. Because they can't get an Avengers train complete with a self assembling Iron Man suit? I don't think so. --Randy
Honestly, I think those Euro throttles that use a picture of the loco are more distracting than helpful, and more limited for north american modelers. I have a half dozen RS-3s - how big a screen do I need to have a picture big enough to read the road number on each one so I know which one I am selecting? That's the only differentiating factor - they are all in the same paint scheme for the same road name. That option came about because it's pretty much not possible to use the cab number for the DCC address in europe, european locos either do not have cab numbers or the numbers are 5 and 6 digits long. Most US railroad don;t go over 4 digits, so cab numbers can be directly used as the address. Typing in no more than 4 digits is FAR faster than scrollign through a bunch of pictures to find the loco I want. This is one of my examples of technology for technology's sake - it doesn't help me do anything easier or faster, in fact it makes a simple task MORE difficult. Not sure why modelers of north american prototypes would want something like that. It's similar to the recall stacks - great, your DCC system is better than mine because it has 16 recalls? How so? I press a maximum of 6 buttons to select ANY loco I own, recall stack or not. Loco, up to 4 numbers, and enter. Fewer if the loco address is less than 1000. To select a loco from 16 in a recall stack, you can have to press up to 18 buttons - recall, the scroll button or thumb the wheel or whatever up to 16 times, if the loco is the last one in the stack, and enter to select it. I say again, how is this better? I look at my loco, I see that it is cab number 865, so to run it on my DCC system I select 865. Not a picture of a Trainmaster. Not scroll through 16 locos in my recall stack only to find it wasn't one of my last 16 locos I ran. It says 865 on the side of the loco, I hit 865. Done.
I don;t think it's a lack of fancy electronics that keeps young people away from trains. It's a total lack of relevance of trains in everyday life. The only time there is news about trains is when there is a wreck, or maybe yet another article about how Amtrak has lost another billion dollars. Look at all teh grade crossing accidents - they aren't all suicide by train, they are ordinary people who are totally unaware of their surroundings and totally forget that those shiny steel rails carry large vehicles that will turn their puny car into so much scrap metal of they don't pay attention. If anything killed the hobby, it's Tyco and LifeLike garbage train sets of the 70s, just as video games were starting to take hold, train sets get so bad you were lucky if they would hold together and run for an hour after taking them out of the box. Oh, broken again? The heck with it, back to Pong.....
All this video-gamey control is just another version of some of those goofy 80's train sets, in a last ditch effort makign stuff like GI Joe trains, or ones that could climb vertically up a wall. Even adding stuff like vertical climbs, loops, and lane changing to slot cars couldn;t keep that hobby popular either. And it's not going to - non railroad people love to say we're all just kids playing with toys, and maybe we are, but at least you have some credibility when everythign matches an era, or a specific railroad. If your train is festooned with cartoon characters, that's all out the window - it is definitely a toy.
Do we need that stuff to keep the hobby alive? I don't think so. Look at how many little kids love trains. Not just Thomas and Chuggington, but real trains. Somewhere, that love gets lost, at least for a majority of kids. Because they can't get an Avengers train complete with a self assembling Iron Man suit? I don't think so.
--Randy
This is one of my examples of technology for technology's sake - it doesn't help me do anything easier or faster, in fact it makes a simple task MORE difficult.
I don;t think it's a lack of fancy electronics that keeps young people away from trains. It's a total lack of relevance of trains in everyday life.
Do we need that stuff to keep the hobby alive? I don't think so. Look at how many little kids love trains. Not just Thomas and Chuggington, but real trains.
Those are pretty much my views. As I say, I am not anti-computer. I use mine all the time for a variety of purposes. But I just cannot see the purpose of using a laptop, tablet or smart phone to operate my layout when my DCC system already provides a totally functional device in the form of a throttle.
fieryturbo richhotrain It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what. I'm going to regurgitate something said all over these forums. If you use DCC, you already have a computer on your layout. What you're describing "the notion of a "computerized" layout" is just a decision to see it as visible to yourself as the operator.
richhotrain It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what.
It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what.
I'm going to regurgitate something said all over these forums. If you use DCC, you already have a computer on your layout.
What you're describing "the notion of a "computerized" layout" is just a decision to see it as visible to yourself as the operator.
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
carl425 I don't like brussel sprouts. Anybody claiming to like them is lying. They only eat them to prop up their "more health conscious than me" superiority complex. I have a simple way of dealing with this on the cooking sites I follow. If the subject line says "brussel sprouts" I don't click on it. And BTW, I use my smartphone as the "throttle" on my ceramic cooker during the 18 hours my pork shoulders are smoking.
I don't like brussel sprouts. Anybody claiming to like them is lying. They only eat them to prop up their "more health conscious than me" superiority complex.
I have a simple way of dealing with this on the cooking sites I follow. If the subject line says "brussel sprouts" I don't click on it.
And BTW, I use my smartphone as the "throttle" on my ceramic cooker during the 18 hours my pork shoulders are smoking.
fieryturbo richhotrain The trouble with smart phones and tablets is that now you need an interface like JMRI. Just seems more complicated than using the DCC system's throttle. As far as the TV remote is concerned, my TV remote has 39 buttons compared to 34 on my NCE Pro Cab. It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what. All of this added technology doesn't appear to accomplish anything more than a DCC command station and throttle does. Am I wrong? Rich Actually, you're wrong on both accounts. JMRI can be used with physical throttles, or smartphone throttles. MTH has a smartphone based throttle, as does Roco, and both of them do not require a PC or layout control software of any kind. The added technology accomplishes the following: Buttons can be labled as to what they do, specific to the locomotive being operated (Steam and diesel have very different functions, but this even varies within each of those types). Those buttons can switch labels on the fly, so wrong-press mistakes are avoided. Bizarre labels due to an awful controller screen are avoided. I'm sorry dude, but the NCE screen is laughable. It looks like a VCR clock from 1986, and has maybe 2 lines. A smartphone can display icons or notifications letting you know something is wrong. In short, the computerized control reduces mistakes and allows the technology to communicate with you, the hobbyist, better than a static throttle does. Finally, I'm going to regurgitate something said all over these forums. If you use DCC, you already have a computer on your layout. What you're describing "the notion of a "computerized" layout" is just a decision to see it as visible to yourself as the operator.
richhotrain The trouble with smart phones and tablets is that now you need an interface like JMRI. Just seems more complicated than using the DCC system's throttle. As far as the TV remote is concerned, my TV remote has 39 buttons compared to 34 on my NCE Pro Cab. It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what. All of this added technology doesn't appear to accomplish anything more than a DCC command station and throttle does. Am I wrong? Rich
The trouble with smart phones and tablets is that now you need an interface like JMRI. Just seems more complicated than using the DCC system's throttle.
As far as the TV remote is concerned, my TV remote has 39 buttons compared to 34 on my NCE Pro Cab. It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what. All of this added technology doesn't appear to accomplish anything more than a DCC command station and throttle does. Am I wrong?
Actually, you're wrong on both accounts. JMRI can be used with physical throttles, or smartphone throttles. MTH has a smartphone based throttle, as does Roco, and both of them do not require a PC or layout control software of any kind.
The added technology accomplishes the following:
Buttons can be labled as to what they do, specific to the locomotive being operated (Steam and diesel have very different functions, but this even varies within each of those types). Those buttons can switch labels on the fly, so wrong-press mistakes are avoided.
Bizarre labels due to an awful controller screen are avoided. I'm sorry dude, but the NCE screen is laughable. It looks like a VCR clock from 1986, and has maybe 2 lines. A smartphone can display icons or notifications letting you know something is wrong.
In short, the computerized control reduces mistakes and allows the technology to communicate with you, the hobbyist, better than a static throttle does.
Finally, I'm going to regurgitate something said all over these forums. If you use DCC, you already have a computer on your layout.
I always view that term as offensive. Kinda like being in a restaurant in France and calling for your waiter by yelling "Garcon!". But whatever.
I won't argue the fact that my NCE Pro Cab screen is laughable if you say so, but tell me what the icons and notification will tell me that my Pro Cab or command station will not. I'm not saying you are wrong. I am just unfamiliar what these other devices will do.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
richhotrain As far as the TV remote is concerned, my TV remote has 39 buttons compared to 34 on my NCE Pro Cab. It seems to me that some guys are just caught up in the notion of a "computerized" layout, but for what. All of this added technology doesn't appear to accomplish anything more than a DCC command station and throttle does. Am I wrong? Rich
No, I think you're dead on. Sometimes change doesn't provide a real benefit or convenience.
A lot of advancement taking place in the computer age is really a 3 steps forward 2 steps back process in providing convenience to the user. The problem is, you can read and learn about the 3 steps forward part from industry publications and purchasers of products, and it seems great, but you can only learn about the 2 steps backwards part with experience...after you've made a financial commitment...because the industry will certainly not ever point it out, and current users of the technology seem too sensitive to bring it up.
That's just my take on it.
And..some confuse having/learning new technology with being smart, so it sometimes doesn't even have to do with practicality.
But the real push for the smartphone train technology is so that a new generation of customers won't be "turned off" by an electronic toy, like trains, not being able to be controlled by the devices. And the industry wants to keep trains attractive to the next generation.
You and me don't have to really be concerned about it.
- Douglas
The reason I prefer the old school controllers is they have real knobs or buttons, which are superior if you want to keep your eyes on the trains most of the time and not have to look at your "touch screen" to see where the heck the virtual button or slider is!!! Uh huh!
tstage I agree with Steve. I still have a "dumb" phone and don't plan on a smartphone because of the expense of them per month. (As much as I use a cell phone I save hundreds of dollars a year using a pay-as-you-go plan vs. a contract.) Tom
I agree with Steve. I still have a "dumb" phone and don't plan on a smartphone because of the expense of them per month. (As much as I use a cell phone I save hundreds of dollars a year using a pay-as-you-go plan vs. a contract.)
Tom
My wife and I had dumb cell phones from Verizon and were paying around $80/mo. We got tired of paying that and found if we got two inexpensive Smart Phones (Nokia Lumia Window 8 phones) we could get a pay as you go plan and install apps like Viber and Skype and use those while on wifi for calls and texts and only use the T-mobile cell service as necessary. My wife and I only pay about $25/mo now for the limited calling and texting we do over the cell service and save $50/mo. We had to get Smartphones in order to make the savings work - we have jobs so still have to do some texting and standard cell calling. Sometimes modern technology helps you save money! =) Our pay as you go is a minimum of $3/mo for 30 minutes or 30 texts; obviously we go well over that but still pay an average of $25/mo combined for our service . I don't think it's possible to pay less than that these days and still use phones for work too!
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Chessie reinhard It would seem that the use of smart phones, tablets, and the like would be distracting from the operation of the trains themselves. One would be concentrating more on the device than the running of trains. At times I find that the DCC throttle is distracting. Technology continues to march on which is good. For me the DCC throttle, and for that matter, a DC power pack are good enough. Call me old fashion, that's O.K. All the best. Reinhard
It would seem that the use of smart phones, tablets, and the like would be distracting from the operation of the trains themselves. One would be concentrating more on the device than the running of trains. At times I find that the DCC throttle is distracting. Technology continues to march on which is good. For me the DCC throttle, and for that matter, a DC power pack are good enough. Call me old fashion, that's O.K.
All the best.
Reinhard
Julian
Modeling Pre-WP merger UP (1974-81)
Joe F
fieryturbo The physical DCC throttles from the USA are really caught up in 1980s/1990s design. Look at NCE, MRC, and Digitrax. They do not include new tooling, and the buttons are pretty much the same across the entire controller. You still have to look down to see what they do. Now, compare that to a modern TV remote, many of which have their own screen. They aren't expensive, especially compared to a model railroad throttle. And they look about a hundred times more modern, with the all-important shaped buttons for operating by feel.
The physical DCC throttles from the USA are really caught up in 1980s/1990s design. Look at NCE, MRC, and Digitrax. They do not include new tooling, and the buttons are pretty much the same across the entire controller. You still have to look down to see what they do.
Now, compare that to a modern TV remote, many of which have their own screen. They aren't expensive, especially compared to a model railroad throttle. And they look about a hundred times more modern, with the all-important shaped buttons for operating by feel.
True for some of the "not used quite as often" buttons on my NCE Power Cab throttle but NOT the speed buttons or thumbwheel. THAT'S the important ones - the ones I use the most - and I know exactly where they are in my right hand - without even having to look at 'em.
Using a smartphone as a universal throttle...THAT makes a ton of sense and I have no problem with that.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
richg1998 Bottom line, some like being stuck in a time warp. Some like cutting edge. Don't like the latest, stay off the forums or ignore the subject line. Easy enough to do. I enjoy the cord when running trains. Good enough for me. I use cutting edge for communication. Rich
Bottom line, some like being stuck in a time warp.
Some like cutting edge.
Don't like the latest, stay off the forums or ignore the subject line. Easy enough to do.
I enjoy the cord when running trains. Good enough for me.
I use cutting edge for communication.
If you ever fall over in public, pick yourself up and say “sorry it’s been a while since I inhabited a body.” And just walk away.
fieryturbo I started with DCC, so take my opinion for what you will: Smartphones and tablets are easy to program, and give you a more flexible throttle based more upon the locomotive you are driving at the time. My 3 diesel models all have different controls with marked 'buttons' on the tablet for what each do. Rocrail takes care of this for me (I'm sure JMRI would do the same) The physical DCC throttles from the USA are really caught up in 1980s/1990s design. Look at NCE, MRC, and Digitrax. They do not include new tooling, and the buttons are pretty much the same across the entire controller. You still have to look down to see what they do. Now, compare that to a modern TV remote, many of which have their own screen. They aren't expensive, especially compared to a model railroad throttle. And they look about a hundred times more modern, with the all-important shaped buttons for operating by feel. So part of the reason you hear about smartphones, tablets, and WiFi is because they are probably already owned by the hobbyist, and the other part (the "what's wrong with" part) is that the current examples of DCC throttles in the USA are really terrible (and VERY expensive) examples of new technology. Europe is slightly more advanced (look at ESU EcOS) I think if you had better - heck, not even more modern, but more /thoughtful/ design, you would see more people buying physical throttles. But for some reason, the attitude toward them is either (a) it needs to be gimmicky (i.e. with a giant notching handle), or (b) if it works, it's good enough. The industry can do better than either of these, but chooses not to. Consciously.
I started with DCC, so take my opinion for what you will:
Smartphones and tablets are easy to program, and give you a more flexible throttle based more upon the locomotive you are driving at the time. My 3 diesel models all have different controls with marked 'buttons' on the tablet for what each do. Rocrail takes care of this for me (I'm sure JMRI would do the same)
So part of the reason you hear about smartphones, tablets, and WiFi is because they are probably already owned by the hobbyist, and the other part (the "what's wrong with" part) is that the current examples of DCC throttles in the USA are really terrible (and VERY expensive) examples of new technology. Europe is slightly more advanced (look at ESU EcOS)
I think if you had better - heck, not even more modern, but more /thoughtful/ design, you would see more people buying physical throttles. But for some reason, the attitude toward them is either (a) it needs to be gimmicky (i.e. with a giant notching handle), or (b) if it works, it's good enough. The industry can do better than either of these, but chooses not to. Consciously.
I agree totally
In my area clubs use Digitrax and NCE close to a 50%/50% ratio and we visit each other on the occasion. Cell phones or tablets are now the commun denominator as far as throttles are concerned.
Jack W.
My laout is just 5x10 so my two DCC wired throttles are ok for me and the grandkids.
It strikes me there are several considerations, including:
a) just plain preferences; e.g., I like the way the basic NCE throttles work (I have two types) and I may not like an alternate in terms of the way it is used, how many steps to do something, etc
b) being wired versus untethered control; this could be accomplished by upgrading my NCE, say to infrared or wireless, or a completely different approach (cell phone). Not sure whether any operating characteristics would have to be considered; e.g., does IR have to be aimed carefully? where would IR sensors be located
c) cost; not sure how much more IR or wireless would have cost me by going that way initially versus transitioning to a fancier approach
So, it's a combination of things that make a given approach "right" for a person. Interesting to think over. For instance, I haven't consider whether I want to upgrade (but it's not even on my to do list low priority items.