Dear All,
To me, most, if not all DCC command stations seem awakeward and outdated. Small monochrome display, lousy combination, tedious input, and above all, terribly expensive. I know digitraxx DSCXXX is somewhere around 250$, but if you look at the ones with TFT display and easier use like ESU Ecos or Viesmann 5300, you are abocve the 600$ level. Needless to mention how much boosters and other accessories would cost.
I am curious to know what do you think of the available command stations, which one you prefer, and which fuctionalities you wish to see. Personally I went the Roco z21 route because it is user friendly, less expensive to buy and less expensive to extend. It takes minutes to convert older Roco modules to z21 boosters. These modules can be found dirt cheap on Ebay.
Regards
Walid
PS. To the moderator, move to another forum if the subject is not appropriate.
I'm as much a technology guy as the next, heck it's my day job, but not everythign needs fancy graphical displays to accomplish simple functions. Just like not everything requires a multi-core ARM processor to accomplish or a 24 core 4GHz Intel or AMD CPU to accomplish.
At least for US prototypes. Locos have 1-4 digit numbers. VERY few exceptions to that. Why do I need an expensive, complex in both hardware and software, graphical interface to pick something easily identified with a 1-4 digit number? It's overengineering for the sake of overengineering, or just trying to appeal to the crowd that has to buy the latest smartphone when it gets released despite the one they have now being less than a year old and still working fine. A 4 year old smartphone loads Facebook adn Twitter just fine, and processes far faster than even a speed demon can type text messages, so why do you have to upgrade? My layout control system is using 8 bit Atmel microcontrollers. Someone asked why I am not using something like the STM32 32-bit ARM micros. WHY? The 8 bit ones at 16MHz are MORE than fast enough, and a LOT easier to program than the crazy 32 bit nonsense.
I am plenty happy with my Digitrax system. It's not 'difficult' because there's not a fancy color LCD screen. I see loco 657 sitting on the track and I want to run it, I punch in the numbers 6, 5, 7 and off I go. No muss, no fuss, no complex UI to get in the way. If I really want to use a big touchscreen LCD, I could, either with their wifi interface or through JMRI. But it's a less than satisfying experience. I love how all the SF shows (which I love, BTW) make EVERYTHING touch screen - for things that are direct control, like the engine throttle. No feedback, just slide your finger. Not a satisfying user interface to somethign mechanical. I noticed on one show, the Expanse, while the control panels are all touch screen, there is a multi-axis joystick like device on the arm of the pilot's chair that controls the ship thrusters. Seems much better thought out than the pure touch screens used on Star Trek TNG.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Randy,
I see you are mixing user friendly with over engineering. A clearer and easier to use interface is always a plus. You certainly know, since you are involved in the technology, it does not have to be complicated. Take long addressing as an example. You need to break the address into higher and lower bytes, add 192 to the higher and write into CV 17 and 18. Before that you have to check bit 5 in CV 29 and add 32 if it is not set. What about an interface that let you write 7953 and it cares about the rest? What about when the interface respond by an error if enters 79533? Why is it so bad to have a colourful TFT display (that cost only pennies BTW) instead of an LCD display with vague symbols and acronyms that blongs to the eighties of the 20th centuries? And, first of all, you know that a command station is nothing but a 2$ micro controller and some motor driver IC attached to it plus some components that cheaper than salt. Why on earth would it have to cost 200$ and more? Development cost?? DCC is 30 years old now, what is new about that needs development?
BTW, which layout control system you are talkig about that uses an Atmel MUC? I thought you use a commercial product.
I'm with Randy on this one. For me, the action is on the layout, not on the throttle's screen.
If I wanted to stand in one spot and watch a hand-held video game, well, I'd get a hand-held video game.
It seems that "Simpler is Better" is starting to catch on again...
khier Take long addressing as an example. You need to break the address into higher and lower bytes, add 192 to the higher and write into CV 17 and 18. Before that you have to check bit 5 in CV 29 and add 32 if it is not set. What about an interface that let you write 7953 and it cares about the rest? What about when the interface respond by an error if enters 79533?
Take long addressing as an example. You need to break the address into higher and lower bytes, add 192 to the higher and write into CV 17 and 18. Before that you have to check bit 5 in CV 29 and add 32 if it is not set. What about an interface that let you write 7953 and it cares about the rest? What about when the interface respond by an error if enters 79533?
I'm not Randy, but I'll reply anyway - My Digitrax system does all that. I'm pretty sure NCE does as well, and probably Lenz, too. And if you use JMRI, it does all that for you as well. Which DCC system were you referring to that *doesn't* do that?
khier Why is it so bad to have a colourful TFT display (that cost only pennies BTW) instead of an LCD display with vague symbols and acronyms that blongs to the eighties of the 20th centuries? And, first of all, you know that a command station is nothing but a 2$ micro controller and some motor driver IC attached to it plus some components that cheaper than salt. Why on earth would it have to cost 200$ and more? Development cost?? DCC is 30 years old now, what is new about that needs development?
Why is it so bad to have a colourful TFT display (that cost only pennies BTW) instead of an LCD display with vague symbols and acronyms that blongs to the eighties of the 20th centuries? And, first of all, you know that a command station is nothing but a 2$ micro controller and some motor driver IC attached to it plus some components that cheaper than salt. Why on earth would it have to cost 200$ and more? Development cost?? DCC is 30 years old now, what is new about that needs development?
You're forgetting that these are small manufacturers with limited resources.
Although the display itself may cost only pennies more, they would have to re-engineer their entire command station and throttle lineup to accommodate them, and to make it backward-compatible with their old lineup would only add to their expense.
They'd also have to carry parts for, and repair, their legacy equipment for at least some period of time. Otherwise, they will risk losing the goodwill and brand loyalty they've built up. Which is another financial hit.
So it's not as simple as paying pennies to buy a different display.
Yes - EVERY current DCC system takes care of the long address CV17/18 thing for you. No one does that by hand, at least not out of necessity. That's not a system issue, that's a "this is how the NMRA DCC committee decided to do it" thing.
You're confusing fancy touch screen interfaed for easier. In what what is a proces of loading iamges of my locos into the DCC systema dn then scrollign through a bunch fo pictures easier than entering no more than 4 digits? I understand that in other countries, locomotives did not necessarily carry numbers, or if they did, they were a lot more than 4 digits, and therefore an alternative method of distinguishing them is necessary, but I don't model European prototypes. Yes, I get that my 'picture' can be a picture of the number - but the whole point is that's a lot of extra steps to load all my locos into the system. That's 'easier'? With the simple digit readout, there's nothing to preload, no reason to preload anything.
As for programming, that's why products like JMRI exist. It seems overkill to have JMRI functionality built in to every throttle when programmign the decoder is generally soemthign you do once, and unless the decoder blows up, you generally don't have to do again for that loco. You even mentiond the greater cost of such throttles.
Could the LCD on the Digitrax throttles be bigger? Perhaps. I have vision issues and have no problem reading mine though. Bigger, but with the same numbers and function symbol layout instead of a color touch screen. I believe we won't be seeing much in the form of new throttles from any of the established DCC manufacturers since with wifi interfaces and JMRI you can use any throttle with any system - for example I think theyhave standard Engine Driver working on the ESU Cab Control Android throttle, which means it will work on any system supported by JMRI, or with MRC and Digitrax through their wifi interfaces. It's where I think they went wrong with the ProtoThrottle - it works with multiple DCC systems but since they used a proprietary radio interface it needs a specialized radio base for each one, instead of just using a wifi radio and working directly with JMRI or the wifi interfaces.
My layout control system is something I'm designing and building myself. Link between driver boards and the computer is RS485 using a modified CMRI protocol.
A toaster is a toaster. Add this, add that, in the end I want my toast.
P.S. - Almost forgot. I call my system the 'clunk'. That was the term of endearment the Canadian Air Force called their CF-100. It's what I use for the Digitrax DB150. Nothing clunky about it, really, but it is as old as the hills and still works, right where I left it.
I have been using the NCE PH-PRO-R system for 12 years. I find it works great for me. I admit I don't use many (most?) of the features, but it allows me to wirelessly control my locomotives, works with NMRA DCC, and simplifies wiring - all of which is why I bought it. At the time other systems either didn't have wireless or it wasn't as fully developed. I haven't seen anything on today's market that looks better for what I want.
Paul
For my limited DCC needs I used a MRC Tech 6 and its hand held throttle..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
My Lenz system is over 10 years old. It runs my trains just fine. I added a pair of CVP wireless throttles which also do what I need. Monochrome simple alphanumeric displays do all I need, too. I usually run my throttles by feel, seldom looking at the display.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Well, I disagree with all your comments, Gentlemen, and I really prefer modern, user friendly, equipment than LCD and push-bottom technology of the 20th century. But this is a matter of personal taste where there is neither right nor wrong. Hence, for me, the debate stops here.
rrinker My layout control system is something I'm designing and building myself. Link between driver boards and the computer is RS485 using a modified CMRI protocol. --Randy
When I see RS 485 it sounds like mutual communication. Now you made me curious. Could you give more details? The reason is I was thinking of a digital control system to control servo-driven turnouts and signals. For some time, I considered RS485 communication. Finally converged to an essentially DCC, but without the DCC zillion variations. Perhaps I can find some inspiration in your design.RegardsWalid
My answer is a simple one - none! My layout is 3 rail AC, the old fashioned way, with two power packs supplying power to the track and the overhead. If I were still into DCC, my choice would be Roco´s Multimaus, as it handles well. I am not into touch screen thingies.
Happy times!
Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)
"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"
I use a RailPro HC-2. And I love it. Every time I use my NCE Pro Cab I cuss it. Don't get me wrong it's a fine DCC controller. But that's the problem, it's 1990s DCC technology. Nothing has really changed in DCC in a long time. You can use JMRI to program the decoders, which is a GUI, but that is a third party program and requires a computer. You can use a smartphone and an APP but that is also third party and more hardware. Want radio control for your DCC system, that's an add-on, more money. And the CVs are the pits. There has to be a better way of tuning these from the handheld controller instead of cryptic numbers.
Each system has it's good and bad points, it boils down to what's important to you, and what you want to do with your layout. I started out in DCC c.2004 with a Digitrax Zephyr. It worked fine, but I was disappointed when I tried to add radio control. Someone much more tech savvy than me said that there is a glitch in the Digitrax system that causes trouble with their radio control system, but I don't really know what exactly the problem is.
Anyway, I switched to CVP a few years ago and am in the process of adding radio control to that. I ended up using the Zephyr and a walkaround unit to run my 'logging line', an elevated line not connected to the rest of the layout. I use that for programming, as I find the Digitrax is easier to program with than the CVP system (although I use Decoder Pro for a lot of programming).
IRONROOSTER I have been using the NCE PH-PRO-R system for 12 years. I find it works great for me. I admit I don't use many (most?) of the features, but it allows me to wirelessly control my locomotives, works with NMRA DCC, and simplifies wiring - all of which is why I bought it. At the time other systems either didn't have wireless or it wasn't as fully developed. I haven't seen anything on today's market that looks better for what I want. Paul
Yup, this is me, same ten-year-old wireless system. I don't even look at the controller when running trains or my turntable. Like learning a musical instrument, after a while, you don't need to look anymore. Sure I look at the screen to program, but that doesn't happen too often.
I was at a train show recently watching a kid run his layout from a laptop, his eyes rarely left the screen to actually look at the trains, all the info he needed was on his laptop. I wondered why he even had a layout, I then figured his interests were trains and technology. Whatever floats his boat was fine with me.
Up at the ranch, there is a fully loaded F-350 crew cab P/U that cost $90,000.00 and a bare-bones one with vinyl seats, rubber floor and roll up windows that cost $45,000.00, guess what one we use to run the fence line in and what one we use to take a trip in. You want the top line, buy it, but please offer the basics if that is all I need.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
sounds like you want a better interface to program a decoder? what about JMRI
that may not be the best interface for operation
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
rrinker I am plenty happy with my Digitrax system. It's not 'difficult' because there's not a fancy color LCD screen.
I didn't choose Digitrax — Digitrax chose me. A friend was in a situation where he couldn't continue in the hobby and sold me his DCS-200. This was thirteen years ago.
I have since added four boosters, solid-state breakers, auto reverse "loops", upgraded to duplex by simply replacing the network reciever (UR-92) and sending the throttles in to Digitrax for a $30 upgrade.
I updated the firmware in the throttles through a free download.
I also use JMRI and Lokprogrammer which takes the guesswork out of programming and also provides many tools for diagnosing the DCC network, decoders and throttles.
IF I prefer to run with touch-screen and graphic images, including locomotive icons, I will use any of the Android devices along with (free download) LocoDriver. I will use this occasionally but I much prefer the DT-402 throttle.
I'm quite satisfied with my Digitrax "system". Again, in thirteen years it is still fulfilling its original purpose and has been completely upgradeable. Except a few old throttles, every component of the system is still functioning on a daily basis.
Regards, Ed
I'm using a 2.5 amp Cave Zephyr. In the mean time, I've run just about all the major DCC systems in ops sessions. They all work pretty much flawlessly.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
My control system I have shamelessly borrowed from the cpNode by MRCS
http://www.modelrailroadcontrolsystems.com/cpnode/
I'm simplifying the CMRI protocol because I don't need any initialize type packets - I know what each 'node' will have as far as inputs and outputs and I figure why not just send the same number of bytes to each node, and just use as many as I actually have ports. The overhead won't be much and some of that will be made up by the loop not having to look for 2 of the packet type. Downside is I probbaly won't be able to use JMRI to control it, which is fine, because any full layout control system is going to require custom programming and of all the mainstream programming languages, I think Java is one of the worst and if anythign needs to disappear forever, that would be it. ANd for simpler scripting, they went with Jython out of several Java compatible scripting languages, and that too is absolutely horrid - I mean, the number of spaces you indent a line actually matters to making the code run or not? What genius thought up that? My language of choice on the back end is actually old school - vb6. Not the newer .Net versions - the original makes handling a virtual on-screen CTC panel stupidly simple because you cna access the parameters of each object via an array reference - scan controls 1-20 in a simple loop. .Net enforces full OOP to the point where you simply cannot do that. I was able to simulate it, but it requires an insnae number of methods. VB6 does not. You can get VB6 to run on a modern Windows 10 machine, but I can avoid any issues by running it on XP running in a VM. The railroad control computer will not have internet access, at least not the VM, so there is zero concern for security holes and someone hijacking my railroad. Eventually I will have a physical CTC panel, but the computer will still sit in the middle to do the logic.
With money and time limited, I like NCE corperation's starter system. It really is one of the easiest things I've used in MR. There are plenty of tutorials from the company walking you through everything. Another reason they rock is the helpufl and comprehensive customer service. I really can't say more positive things about them!
kasskabooseI like NCE corporation's starter system. It really is one of the easiest things I've used in MR.
I agree!
I'm an admitted dinosaur when it comes to electronic devices, and I am all thumbs too. The NCE Power Cab works great, is easy to understand, and is inexpensive. As others have said, I want to watch my trains run. Having to look away is annoying.
The club uses Digitrax and AFAIC it is vastly inferior from an ease of use perspective.
However, each to his own.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
rrinker My control system I have shamelessly borrowed from the cpNode by .....
My control system I have shamelessly borrowed from the cpNode by .....
I plan to have an Atmega as a master, Attiny as the receiver, 9g servos as actuators, and simple SPDT switches on the control panel. Each switch also controls two Bi-color LEDs to indicate the status of the turnout or signal on the control panel. By this way, I need only a 3 wire bus, one for +, the other for -, and the third carry the signal.
Pro: Digital control and actuation that cost pennies, and the DIY fun factor of course.
Cons: Custom made, 100% autistic, meaning zero upgrade or communication with the outer world, but who needs that?
khier Well, I disagree with all your comments, Gentlemen, and I really prefer modern, user friendly, equipment than LCD and push-bottom technology of the 20th century. But this is a matter of personal taste where there is neither right nor wrong. Hence, for me, the debate stops here.
That said, I use the NCE 5 amp wireless PH-Pro. I have used it for 14 years, and it provides problem free service to satisfy all of my needs. As others have stated, the only thing you want from a command station is the ability to run trains, not launch space satellites.
Rich
Alton Junction
When this thread opened, it was obviously a "my way or the highway" endeavor to start one of our infamous "versus" threads. I have a Digitrax set up, and it has worked great for me these last 10 years. That said, I could just as easily have gotten an NCE set up and I'm sure the results would be the same - both get the job done well.
We all have our preferences and bias and there is nothing wrong with that. But don't tell me mine are "wrong", and I will refrain from doing that to you.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
richhotrain khier Well, I disagree with all your comments, Gentlemen, and I really prefer modern, user friendly, equipment than LCD and push-bottom technology of the 20th century. But this is a matter of personal taste where there is neither right nor wrong. Hence, for me, the debate stops here. Let's not overlook the fact that you started the debate by starting the thread. That said, I use the NCE 5 amp wireless PH-Pro. I have used it for 14 years, and it provides problem free service to satisfy all of my needs
Let's not overlook the fact that you started the debate by starting the thread.
That said, I use the NCE 5 amp wireless PH-Pro. I have used it for 14 years, and it provides problem free service to satisfy all of my needs
However, I think we deserve something that belongs to the century we live in, not an LCD screen from the eighties, especially when it does not really cost much to match to be up to date. A Viesmann or an ESU command station costs almost the same as a brand new IPhone, although it consists of a 2$ Microcontroller, a 20C motor driver, and a 30 years-old software (yeah it has been extended over the years, I know). Give it to a professional programmer and you will have that program that you pay 650$ for done in two days, checked and tested in a week (I know because I read several DCC software over the net).As I said before, it is a matter of personal liking. Hence, it is pointless to try to bring the point further. It is exactly like trying to convince a Burger King fan to enjoy a Big Mac. Therefore, I stopped the discussion until you decided to re-start it again.RegardsWalid
Walid, then what was the point of starting the thread in the first place if you really didn't want to hear what other systems are preferred? After all, that was your initial question.
khier Dear All, To me, most, if not all DCC command stations seem awakeward and outdated. Small monochrome display, lousy combination, tedious input, and above all, terribly expensive. I know digitraxx DSCXXX is somewhere around 250$, but if you look at the ones with TFT display and easier use like ESU Ecos or Viesmann 5300, you are abocve the 600$ level. Needless to mention how much boosters and other accessories would cost. I am curious to know what do you think of the available command stations, which one you prefer, and which fuctionalities you wish to see. Personally I went the Roco z21 route because it is user friendly, less expensive to buy and less expensive to extend. It takes minutes to convert older Roco modules to z21 boosters. These modules can be found dirt cheap on Ebay. Regards Walid PS. To the moderator, move to another forum if the subject is not appropriate.
I could be wrong, but this, along with your strong support of your system, looks like a commercial disguised as a debate.
That said, I use Digitrax. It does everything I can imagine needing, it does not make anything obsolete when it upgrades, and is not difficult to use.
I understand that there are several good systems and each has people who chose that system after looking them all over or experiencing them on another layout.
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Rich,
At the begining I stated my opinion to see if others share the same. I had two points: We have outdated systems that can be much easier and much more comfortable to use. The second: DCC equipments are overpriced. I was surprised to read how rediciluous it is to think about these silly graphical tools, and how useless anything but the 8 segment and ancient LCD display, old cell phones work even better than new ones, why should I ever think we need something different than what we have, how great the available equipment are, and how anything different is certainly nonsense, and how superficial these gadgets are since the objective is to "run trains not to launch satellites". Despite this "tone" in the replies, I stated clearly that hobby is about fun, and it is purely personal, where there is neither right nor wrong. And hence, I stopped the debate (which I did not want to have originaly) and read only what others think. However, the replies continued in the "VS" and "right and wrong" directions. Therefore, I had to re-state what I said at the beginning, and respond to the arguments with mine. Regards
Phoebe Vet I could be wrong, but this, along with your strong support of your system, looks like a commercial disguised as a debate
I could be wrong, but this, along with your strong support of your system, looks like a commercial disguised as a debate
"To me, most, if not all DCC command stations seem awakeward and outdated. Small monochrome display, lousy combination, tedious input, and above all, terribly expensive. "
That is where I saw the lead in to an infomercial. Please forgive me if I was wrong.