maxman ATLANTIC CENTRAL First I will ask you a question, do you have a basic understanding of how CTC works on the prototype? Yes, a very basic understanding. But I don't believe that has any relevance to my question. It is not clear to me what "toggle flipping" is, but in my opinion if there is a dispatcher required, that individual is doing the toggle flipping either by pushing a button, moving a lever, or (these days) using a stylus to point at a computer screen. The one thing that the dispatcher does not worry about is getting volts onto the tracks, which is of primary concern to most of us. ATLANTIC CENTRAL The big mistake people have made down thru the ages with DC block control is having too many blocks that are too small, and not taking advantage of simple wiring schemes to automate the routing of power thru groups of turnouts. Unfortunately, there are sometimes reasons why blocks are small. For example, in a yard or engine terminal where there may be multiple locos lurking about, or a situation where the engineer may want to move one loco up to couple to another. ATLANTIC CENTRAL And, if you want CTC There seems to be a misconception about the desire for CTC, both on your part and on the part of some DCC system proponents ("if you want signalling then this brand is better than that brand"). My opinion is that for every gigantic, barn sized space, model railroad that we read about, there are probably 50 small size layouts where CTC is either not practical or necessary, or beyond the owner's ability to install same. But said owners may still like to have the ability to move more than one train. For us, the simpler the better. ATLANTIC CENTRAL I can run my 8 scale miles of double track main line with only 16 primary blocks, and can have 4-6 trains moving seamlessly around the layout with only the occasional push of a button. That just isn't happening in my 9 x 17 foot space. ATLANTIC CENTRAL In addition to the dispatchers main panel, all the elements of the dispatchers panel are duplicated in sections as seperate "tower panels" at each interlocking. I didn't realize from your previous posts on this topic that you actually had these duplicate panels. Sounds like some redundent effort to me. But probably necessary on a barn size railroad where a dispatcher is needed. As a final comment, I really don't have a dog in this fight and don't personally care whether it is DC or DCC. I will say that I have operated on both types, and it was a lot more fun with DCC. No reply necessary. Thanks Dick from Downingtown, Pa.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL First I will ask you a question, do you have a basic understanding of how CTC works on the prototype?
Yes, a very basic understanding. But I don't believe that has any relevance to my question. It is not clear to me what "toggle flipping" is, but in my opinion if there is a dispatcher required, that individual is doing the toggle flipping either by pushing a button, moving a lever, or (these days) using a stylus to point at a computer screen. The one thing that the dispatcher does not worry about is getting volts onto the tracks, which is of primary concern to most of us.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL The big mistake people have made down thru the ages with DC block control is having too many blocks that are too small, and not taking advantage of simple wiring schemes to automate the routing of power thru groups of turnouts.
Unfortunately, there are sometimes reasons why blocks are small. For example, in a yard or engine terminal where there may be multiple locos lurking about, or a situation where the engineer may want to move one loco up to couple to another.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And, if you want CTC
There seems to be a misconception about the desire for CTC, both on your part and on the part of some DCC system proponents ("if you want signalling then this brand is better than that brand"). My opinion is that for every gigantic, barn sized space, model railroad that we read about, there are probably 50 small size layouts where CTC is either not practical or necessary, or beyond the owner's ability to install same. But said owners may still like to have the ability to move more than one train. For us, the simpler the better.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I can run my 8 scale miles of double track main line with only 16 primary blocks, and can have 4-6 trains moving seamlessly around the layout with only the occasional push of a button.
That just isn't happening in my 9 x 17 foot space.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL In addition to the dispatchers main panel, all the elements of the dispatchers panel are duplicated in sections as seperate "tower panels" at each interlocking.
I didn't realize from your previous posts on this topic that you actually had these duplicate panels. Sounds like some redundent effort to me. But probably necessary on a barn size railroad where a dispatcher is needed.
As a final comment, I really don't have a dog in this fight and don't personally care whether it is DC or DCC. I will say that I have operated on both types, and it was a lot more fun with DCC.
No reply necessary.
Thanks
Dick from Downingtown, Pa.
Well, a reasoned reply deserves a reasoned acknowledgment.
But I'm not good at the multiple quote thing, so here goes.
"toggle flipping" comes from the old, simple, two cab DC approach where DPDT toggles are used to connect each block to the two power packs. As two trains attempt to move around a single route, toggles must be flipped from cab A to Cab B, etc. Not the best approach to DC multi train operation, but for many it is their only "DC experiance".
My dispatcher does not worry about getting power to the rails, it happens automaticly as he does his "railroad job". Or, as noted, operators do the dispatchers job piecemeal as they progress around the layout, again, they woud be setting turnout routes anyway with DCC, the dispatching takes one extra button at each tower.
"small blocks" - yes sometimes they are necessary, but most times they can actually be eliminated with a feature called "X sections". A search of the archives may produce some articles/diagrams, but again, they are sections of track that change from one block to another based on turnout position/route selection automaticly, needing no seperate user input.
I make no assumptions about who is interested, or not interested, in CTC and signaling. I make no assumptions about how big or small peoples layouts are. I just don't think "one size fits all" - more on that later.
I agree, and have said before, that small layouts can often benefit from the features of DCC more than large layouts can, at least from a cost effectiveness standpoint.
Sound - I don't like onboard sound in small scales like HO or N. I have a HiFi trained ear (one of my other hobbies) and I suffer mildly from Noise Sensitivity. Excess environmemtal sounds bother me more than most people. The low audio fidelity of two 1" speakers trying to reproduce the sound of a locomotive gets on my nerves pretty fast, no matter how low the volume.
So I tell everyone, if you want sound in your trains, you NEED DCC. It is without question the best "delivery system" we have for model train sound.
But I don't want sound, and I know a number of modelers who feel the same way. Several informal polls on this forum have shown interest in sound to be about 60% to 70% - that leaves a sizeable number of people in the "quiet" camp.
So without sound, what are the other advantages of DCC?
Ditch lights/seperate lighting control - great feature if you need it, I model an era way before them.
Individual loco control - a great feature, that comes with added work - consisting, possiblely speed matching, some need it, some of us don't. Depends again on your modeling/operating style and goals.
Good motor control - it does that, but so do my Aristo Train Engineer throttles that use full voltage pulse width modulation speed control just like a DCC decoder.
Cost - control systems with CTC and signals are expensive no matter the control method, DCC or DC. DCC offers no built in advantages to the construction or cost of CTC or signaling. In my case I have no desire to have my CTC panel on a computer screen.
I could "add" DCC to my exisiting control system, retaining my intergrated turnout route control, CTC, signals, it would work fine.
It would cost a additonal $8,000 to put non sound decoders in my locos, replace my 10 wireless throttles, and install the needed command station/boosters/circuit breakers, etc.
$8,000 to what end? To be able to move locos independantly in close proximity to each other, mainly in the yard and engine terminals. A feature not really that necessary on a layout with a "spacious" track plan.
My layout is good sized, but not "crammed" with track.
To to reach my modeling goals, at the lowest cost, with the least un-necessary work, and not spending time or money on features I don't want, I stayed with DC and advance cab control.
Others should choose based on their needs and wants, one size does not fit all.
But for people with little or no DC knowledge or experiance to tell others what is "wrong" with DC, is well, simply wrong.
I tell people all the time that their goals are best served by DCC. But read some of the replies above. Many have no interest in sound, no interest in moving more than one loco at a time.........
On that note, when I operate alone, I only "operate" one train at a time. I do put trains on dedicated "display loops" while I "operate" another one, but real operations require an operator for each train, as several other posters suggested above.
Hope this helps you understand my postion better.
Sheldon
Geared Steam I like DCC, and would advise any new person to the hobby to go that route until battery technology meets and surpasses the advantages to DCC. Older technology may have worked, but it doesn't mean we should stay at that level. I like DCC for all the reasons I don't want a new car with distributor, points and a carb. (unless its a classic musclecar with a 6 pack )
I like DCC, and would advise any new person to the hobby to go that route until battery technology meets and surpasses the advantages to DCC. Older technology may have worked, but it doesn't mean we should stay at that level.
I like DCC for all the reasons I don't want a new car with distributor, points and a carb. (unless its a classic musclecar with a 6 pack )
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
If you have archive access, or the 75th anniversary DVD, or a solid colelction of old MR back issues, check out the series of articles by Ed Ravenscroft where he introduced the MZL system. This is effectively what Sheldon uses. This is not like what you might see at a very old club where the dispatcher sits there and and connects each block to some engineer's cab. The only 'toggle flipping' in the MZL system is selecting the point position to direct which track the train will run on - no different than lining the turnouts for a more conventional DC layout, or DCC.
Behind the scenes, it is contacts on the switch machines and some added relays that eliminate what with more conventional cab control wiring is a whole lot of switch flipping to set your cab to the track your train is on, then setting it back to 'free' once out of the block. That kind of operation - I can't imagine ANYONE preferring that to DCC or Sheldon's system. It's from those systems that "toggle flipping" comes from, as either the actual engineer or the dispatcher is constnatly flipping switches to assign power.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
ATLANTIC CENTRALFirst I will ask you a question, do you have a basic understanding of how CTC works on the prototype?
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe big mistake people have made down thru the ages with DC block control is having too many blocks that are too small, and not taking advantage of simple wiring schemes to automate the routing of power thru groups of turnouts.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd, if you want CTC
ATLANTIC CENTRALI can run my 8 scale miles of double track main line with only 16 primary blocks, and can have 4-6 trains moving seamlessly around the layout with only the occasional push of a button.
ATLANTIC CENTRALIn addition to the dispatchers main panel, all the elements of the dispatchers panel are duplicated in sections as seperate "tower panels" at each interlocking.
The real problem with these discusions on forums is that we do not realy know well the people we are dealing with. We all have different inteligent levels, skill levels etc. I myself may be very smart but my math skills are at what is now called an elimentery school level, but I am very good at finances, point being we are all different. Also we all take critisium diferently, me, dish it out, I can take it. In fact I go by the premise that to be smart you have to fist admit how stupid you are. I look at each idea and consider it and things change all the time now do to Moores law applied to everything now. People say I am crazy for planning on going the battery route but I have seen the new batterys and don't see it that way as I alway plan 10 years out (that is why I was able to retire the first time at 29, just telling you a bit more info about me, not bragging though others may see it that way).
I understand it's a topic that has strong adherents on both sides, but if you want to discuss DCC vs. DC, you have to be able to do so without getting snarky toward your fellow Forum members. Because if you don't moderate yourself, I'll have to step in and do so. Posts have been deleted, and I'll be keeping an eye on this thread. Debate the topic, not the personalities.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Jerry M Hello members, I am in the planning stages of my layout, originally I was going to run HO but after seeing what is available, along with my available space I am going N-Scale with KATO equipment, the reason being for KATO after reading many of the forums it just seems to work well. My issue is that I do not really know a lot about either wiring system to develop a decision tree. My layout will be two 80 by 30 doors in an L shape and I would like to run two trains. Thank you.
Hello members, I am in the planning stages of my layout, originally I was going to run HO but after seeing what is available, along with my available space I am going N-Scale with KATO equipment, the reason being for KATO after reading many of the forums it just seems to work well. My issue is that I do not really know a lot about either wiring system to develop a decision tree. My layout will be two 80 by 30 doors in an L shape and I would like to run two trains.
Thank you.
I am not an expert in either system. Since I operate my layout alone, one train at a time, I don't have much need for more complexity in how to wire my layout. However, I do run both DCC (onboard sound) and DC locos via wireless throttles (not at the same time).
I will say, I agree with those who say that its difficult for one person to run two trains at the sme time....ON THE SAME TRACK.....with distance between the two trains being the only form of separation. Not such a problem on a large layout where blocks can be spacious, but really a problem on a small layout (where the constant toggle flipping thought comes to mind)
Most would prefer to have two separate tracks, or paths, for each train to take. Imagine switching local industries and having to dodge an oncomimg train that it circling the layout on the same track. Whether in DC or DCC, that process is less than comfortable. IMO.
In DC, you may have to flip some toggles to assign the power to the track. However, in DCC, you have to assign the throttle to the the correct loco in order to change its speed or direction. Don't be misled, running two trains on the same track in DCC involves fiddling also, you're fiddling with loco addresses to change speeds or directions, and possibly do a lot of up front fiddling if you want/have to program the locos to run a certain way.
Either way, the least complex way to to run two trains at the same time is to have two separate tracks, at least at the choke points. For example, one train can circle the layout but duck onto a passing siding where the local switcher is occupying the main. This is simple to wire in DC, and simple to assign the throttle in DCC.
In your specific case, it sounds like you are wanting to avoid a lot of under layout wiring. For a small noncomplex layout, wiring for DCC is simpler than wiring for a DC layout where you might need power blocks. DCC requires only two wires for each track, unless you want a reverse loop or two, where the loop(s) would have to be wired the same as DC.
- Douglas
rrebell They do it by using the switches to energise the rail instead of energizing via the track between the switches. Or some would call this power routing via switch.
They do it by using the switches to energise the rail instead of energizing via the track between the switches. Or some would call this power routing via switch.
Yes, it is power routing, but it uses the position of multiple turnouts to decide the required power route, and it does not rely on the rails of the turnout to direct the power, relay logic looks at the whole route and decides the path.
It could be done with a computer, or a PLC (programable logic controller), but that would actually cost more and take about the same amount of wire.........
SeeYou190That sounds like it is for mainline operations. I have no desire to ever run heavy mainline operations again. . -Kevin
Kevin,A DC point to point layout with a dispatcher operating a CTC board is like the prototype as far as setting up opposing train meets,over takes and allowing time for a local to do its work. The main line engineers must obey trackside signals.
Once you spend several years operating on a point to point layout its hard to return to a simple loop operation because on a point to pont you have the feeling you are indeed going to point A to B or point B to A...
And yes,a point to point layout can be DCC.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
ROBERT PETRICK Hang on a second . . . I have never run a DC train, but if what you say is true... Are you saying that if the command station switch is still set to 'forward' and you advanced the throttle that the train would run clockwise, tail first? I thought you DC guys had to flip the gears or rotate the motor mount or something to have (more or less permanent) tail-to-tail consists. I guess this falls into the category of learning something new every day. Thanks for the info. Robert
Hang on a second . . .
I have never run a DC train, but if what you say is true... Are you saying that if the command station switch is still set to 'forward' and you advanced the throttle that the train would run clockwise, tail first? I thought you DC guys had to flip the gears or rotate the motor mount or something to have (more or less permanent) tail-to-tail consists.
I guess this falls into the category of learning something new every day.
Thanks for the info.
Robert
Yes, it's true. Focus on some details for a second and it should come clear:
A. As Sheldon describes later, two straight rails, one positive, one negative...your choice of rail. Pick a loco, pick an orientation for it, and set it on the rails;
B. When you apply DC current, the DC drive mechanism must revolve in one of two directions. That will make the loco move one of two ways down the tracks;
C. You pick up the loco and turn it end-for-end and replace it on the rails;
D. When you apply power once again, darned if it doesn't keep going the same way down the tracks!!! How is this possible?!?!
Answer: When you flipped the loco, but not the rails, the motor drive now has to change its direction of rotation. You turned the loco, but not the rails' polarity, so the drive now runs in reverse from previously, thus making the loco move in the reverse direction...which is now backwards. Same direction down the rails as before.
maxman ATLANTIC CENTRAL And while I'm here, one more time, the idea that multi train operation on DC requires constant "toggle flipping" is also simply not true. If I may ask a question, if a dispatcher is required when you want to run multiple trains, and the dispatcher is assigning the block power to the individual trains, is not the dispatcher doing the "toggle flipping"? I only ask this because I have a very limited knowledge of your system, and probably would not understand it anyway. But I can't quite comprehend how multiple engineers manage to stay out of each other's way without being able to assign power to their engines. So if you can explain this to me in 100 words or less, it would be appreciated. And if the answer happens to be "my control system makes it happen and no human intervention is required", I will accept that and move on. Thank you.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And while I'm here, one more time, the idea that multi train operation on DC requires constant "toggle flipping" is also simply not true.
If I may ask a question, if a dispatcher is required when you want to run multiple trains, and the dispatcher is assigning the block power to the individual trains, is not the dispatcher doing the "toggle flipping"?
I only ask this because I have a very limited knowledge of your system, and probably would not understand it anyway. But I can't quite comprehend how multiple engineers manage to stay out of each other's way without being able to assign power to their engines.
So if you can explain this to me in 100 words or less, it would be appreciated. And if the answer happens to be "my control system makes it happen and no human intervention is required", I will accept that and move on.
First I will ask you a question, do you have a basic understanding of how CTC works on the prototype? It helps to understand how CTC or other signaling works in real life - my system simulates that. I will try to be as brief as possible, it will take more than 100 words.
To answer that as simply as possible, a dispatcher does two things on a real CTC system. He aligns the turnout route at interlockings (groups of turnouts like a crossover are called an interlocking) and he "clears" the signals giving the train authority to occupy the next block.
So he effectively turns the signal green when he is ready to allow the train to proceed. Once the train enters the block, automatic aspects of the signal system turn the signals behind the train red, and turn opposing traffic signals red, etc.
Now to model trains.
First, on a DCC controlled layout, you still have to throw the turnouts right? You either do that manually or with a "toggle switch", push button, etc, correct?
So do I, turnouts are controlled by lighted push buttons in a track diagram. It only takes one button to select a complete, sometimes complex route of turnouts. All turnouts for the route change as needed, the lights indicate the selected path.
Yes the dispatcher selects these routes and "assigns" the primary blocks to the throttles, using push buttons, not toggles. And that action also gives the green signal to the engineer, just like prototype CTC.
BUT, only about half the blocks, called primary blocks, actually have to be manually assigned by this action. The rest are automaticly connected to the correct throttle as a result of the turnout/interlocking routes, which you are going to have to do even with DCC.
And, if you want CTC with DCC, than you too will have a dispatcher setting routes and clearing signals just like I do. So the progression of cab power to the blocks is "built into" the CTC process, no extra action is needed.
If no dispatcher is on duty, you can still run trains, you can still have multiple trains/operators.
In addition to the dispatchers main panel, all the elements of the dispatchers panel are duplicated in sections as seperate "tower panels" at each interlocking. So as you walk around with your train and your wireless throttle, you will throw the turnouts for your desired route at each interlocking (much like many people run with DCC), and you will press one extra button, to assign your throttle to the next block.
You need not ever go backwards to turn anything off, the next guy can just take it over with his throttle once you are out of the block.
So as a comparison, lets say you have digitrax DCC and decoder controlled turnouts. As you approach an interlocking you will have to push 5 buttons on your throttle to set a route thru (turnout, 3 digit number, throw) (yes, I know a little about DCC).
To do that same thing, I will only push two buttons on my tower panel - select route, select next block.
If your DCC layout route is already correct, you do nothing.
If my Advanced Cab Control route is already correct, I push one button, select next block.
Let's see who has the lower button pushing count at the end of an operating session..........
The big mistake people have made down thru the ages with DC block control is having too many blocks that are too small, and not taking advantage of simple wiring schemes to automate the routing of power thru groups of turnouts.
I can run my 8 scale miles of double track main line with only 16 primary blocks, and can have 4-6 trains moving seamlessly around the layout with only the occasional push of a button.
My system also is fail safe. If cabs are not properly assigned, dead spots, large dead spots are automaticly created at the interlockings. This causes any train that runs a red signal to simply stop - Automatic Train Control. The interlocking block is simply not powered until a correct route is selected and assigned on both sides.
There are alternate versions of my system for non signaled layouts, which have been built and used by other modelers. Various adaptions can be made for single track lines, double track, etc.
All require only minimal throttle assignment tasks with the same self clearing selection circuit. Turnout position does half the cab assignments automaticly.....
It is all done with inexpensive 24 volt control relays and inductive train detectors.
tstage angelob6660 Since Atlas discontinued their plain DCC with DCC Sound if will a hard to find extra money if I want them. Are you sure about that, Angelo? Doesn't Atlas offer both "Gold" & "Silver" version in N-scale - like they do in HO? The Gold comes with sound; the Silver w/o sound but DCC-ready. Tom
angelob6660 Since Atlas discontinued their plain DCC with DCC Sound if will a hard to find extra money if I want them.
Are you sure about that, Angelo? Doesn't Atlas offer both "Gold" & "Silver" version in N-scale - like they do in HO? The Gold comes with sound; the Silver w/o sound but DCC-ready.
Tom
Yes, I think I wrote that way. I guess writing simplicity doesn't make sense some time.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
angelob6660Since Atlas discontinued their plain DCC with DCC Sound if will a hard to find extra money if I want them.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd while I'm here, one more time, the idea that multi train operation on DC requires constant "toggle flipping" is also simply not true.
I'm going both ways of DC vs DCC. I grew up with DC wiring when DCC was still being improving and work properly.
I have the same idea as you with a 2 door layout. I will follow the idea that MR magazine did with their N Scale Red Oak project layout making it dual power.
My first DCC layout will be Conrail. Since Atlas discontinued their plain DCC with DCC Sound if will a hard to find extra money if I want them. I'll slowly convert DC locomotives like Amtrak, Union Pacific, BNSF, and others. The railroads that wouldn't change will be Chessie System and New York Central.
Most people tend to be on one side or the other. The facts are straight DC is the similest to build and maintain, that is for a basic lauout. Once you start getting into more complicated stuff at some point DCC becomes simpler. You add sound onboard (less likely in N scale) DCC has many advantages. Controling lights ect. then DCC also (I only have DC stuff so trying to be nutral here). Then we get into what I am trying to get into which is battery on board (in HO). Simpiler than DC as far as wiring but you get into much more complex stuf on the engine but really simple for sound as long as you don't need it onboard but once you want it onboard, that is another story. Many hybread systems out there too but not as much in N scale.
Ok, I cry uncle.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
bearman This thread is starting to degenerate into the DC vs DCC debate.
This thread is starting to degenerate into the DC vs DCC debate.
Per the title of the topic, dcc vs non- dcc, the topic IS about the debate. It didn't degenerate, it started out that way. ;)
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
xboxtravis7992 ATLANTIC CENTRAL How many DCC layouts have you visited/built with CTC and signaling? Do you realize how much more complex that makes DCC wiring? What kind of turnout controls do you use? Mine provide one button route selection through complex interlockings, and turnouts can be operated from multiple locations. Hmmm... where is WP8thSub when I need him? Rob is working on eventually installing signals on his NEC powered layout (can't remember if its ABS or CTC but still)... and I am sure he knows as well as I do that Gary Peterson's layout is a fully operational DCC set up with full CTC and a remote dispatcher. Just saying, CTC on a DCC layout is not unheard of even if the particulars of the system are different than on a DC layout. Anyways... I have no experience with DC at all. So I will not try and chime in with any thing to say about it. My DCC experience though has been good, even though I am at home a lone wolf operator. The sound functions have been worth it for me, and I love the way my sound equipped engines make the model come to life. And wiring was pretty easy to understand, just needed feeders to keep each track alive and my engines just run everywhere I want them to.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL How many DCC layouts have you visited/built with CTC and signaling? Do you realize how much more complex that makes DCC wiring? What kind of turnout controls do you use? Mine provide one button route selection through complex interlockings, and turnouts can be operated from multiple locations.
How many DCC layouts have you visited/built with CTC and signaling? Do you realize how much more complex that makes DCC wiring? What kind of turnout controls do you use? Mine provide one button route selection through complex interlockings, and turnouts can be operated from multiple locations.
Hmmm... where is WP8thSub when I need him? Rob is working on eventually installing signals on his NEC powered layout (can't remember if its ABS or CTC but still)... and I am sure he knows as well as I do that Gary Peterson's layout is a fully operational DCC set up with full CTC and a remote dispatcher. Just saying, CTC on a DCC layout is not unheard of even if the particulars of the system are different than on a DC layout. Anyways... I have no experience with DC at all. So I will not try and chime in with any thing to say about it. My DCC experience though has been good, even though I am at home a lone wolf operator. The sound functions have been worth it for me, and I love the way my sound equipped engines make the model come to life. And wiring was pretty easy to understand, just needed feeders to keep each track alive and my engines just run everywhere I want them to.
I did not say that there are not DCC layouts with signals and CTC/ABS. I have helped build several, there are lots of them out there.
The point is that all notions of DCC wiring being simple go out the window as soon as you ad those features.
The wiring then becomes just as intense, just as complex, just as expensive as the most advanced and complex DC systems with those features.
And while I'm here, one more time, the idea that multi train operation on DC requires constant "toggle flipping" is also simply not true. Two cabs and block toggles is the most basic approach to DC multi train control, but it is by no means the best or most effective and is only suited to small/medium sized simple layouts with limited operational goals.
And just like Mel, I could "super impose" DCC on to my system and my CTC, signaling, turnout controls, and even my ATC (automatic train control) would still work fine.
And again, if you want sound, then the whole conversation is mute, you need DCC.
BigDaddy The OP asked about DC vs DCC That makes a DC vs DCC debate fair game. Seems like we have had a pretty fair and civil discussion so far and people are going to have different opinions. You don't see fair or civil much anymore these days outside of model railroading.
The OP asked about DC vs DCC That makes a DC vs DCC debate fair game.
Seems like we have had a pretty fair and civil discussion so far and people are going to have different opinions. You don't see fair or civil much anymore these days outside of model railroading.
Seems to me your are correct Henry, and all I expect is for people with little or no knowledge of DC to avoid using incorrect information to disparage DC.
DCC can stand on its own merrits and short commings. So can DC.
I myself listed DCC's strengths over DC, and agree that those who like sound should be in DCC no questions asked.
But somehow it is ok for the uninformed to repeat whatever "myth" they were told about DC, or what they saw on one poorly built control system. And I am the bad guy because I don't roll over for it.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
SeeYou190 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Once again, even as a DC operator, you apparently have never seen a well designed DC Advanced Cab Control system in action. . That sounds like it is for mainline operations. I have no desire to ever run heavy mainline operations again. . -Kevin .
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Once again, even as a DC operator, you apparently have never seen a well designed DC Advanced Cab Control system in action.
.
That sounds like it is for mainline operations. I have no desire to ever run heavy mainline operations again.
-Kevin
I love heavy mainline CTC operations.......and industrial switching.
My layout has several "industrial switching layouts" imbeded within it that are operated independently of the mainline operations.
Just like most protoype operations in any major city.
I can put 2-4 trains on display loops on the main while I operate the yard and ISL's separately.
tstage Okay, can we please get back to the regularly schedule program? Thanks, Tom
Okay, can we please get back to the regularly schedule program?
Thanks,
ROBERT PETRICK ATLANTIC CENTRAL Not sure I understand your comment about consisting requiring fiddling in DC - see below. If you take two DC powered F7's with directional lighting, place them back to back, they run the same direction with no modifications, and the one in the rear, going in "reverse", has its headlight off, without having to "change any settings". DC trains don't know forward or reverse, they simply move in the direction that places the positive rail on the right hand side of the direction of travel. Got to go now, Sheldon Hang on a second . . . I have never run a DC train, but if what you say is true (and I have every reason to believe that it is), then this is something I didn't know. Suppose you had a simple oval of track and placed an engine on it with its nose pointing to run clockwise and the command control station switch set to 'forward' and advanced the throttle. The engine would run 'forward'. Simple. Then you picked up the engine and rotated it 180 degrees and placed it so that its nose and tail were pointing the opposite directions. Are you saying that if the command station switch is still set to 'forward' and you advanced the throttle that the train would run clockwise, tail first? I thought you DC guys had to flip the gears or rotate the motor mount or something to have (more or less permanent) tail-to-tail consists. I guess this falls into the category of learning something new every day. Thanks for the info. Robert
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Not sure I understand your comment about consisting requiring fiddling in DC - see below. If you take two DC powered F7's with directional lighting, place them back to back, they run the same direction with no modifications, and the one in the rear, going in "reverse", has its headlight off, without having to "change any settings". DC trains don't know forward or reverse, they simply move in the direction that places the positive rail on the right hand side of the direction of travel. Got to go now, Sheldon
Not sure I understand your comment about consisting requiring fiddling in DC - see below.
If you take two DC powered F7's with directional lighting, place them back to back, they run the same direction with no modifications, and the one in the rear, going in "reverse", has its headlight off, without having to "change any settings".
DC trains don't know forward or reverse, they simply move in the direction that places the positive rail on the right hand side of the direction of travel.
Got to go now,
I have never run a DC train, but if what you say is true (and I have every reason to believe that it is), then this is something I didn't know.
Suppose you had a simple oval of track and placed an engine on it with its nose pointing to run clockwise and the command control station switch set to 'forward' and advanced the throttle. The engine would run 'forward'. Simple. Then you picked up the engine and rotated it 180 degrees and placed it so that its nose and tail were pointing the opposite directions. Are you saying that if the command station switch is still set to 'forward' and you advanced the throttle that the train would run clockwise, tail first? I thought you DC guys had to flip the gears or rotate the motor mount or something to have (more or less permanent) tail-to-tail consists.
Well Robert, its not called a "command control station" and the direction switch is not labled "forward" and "reverse".
So you have never operated a DC model train, and I have hundreds of hours running DCC trains and choose not to use that system on my own layout.
It is a shame that some of the most fundimental elements of electricity and mechanics are not common knowledge today.
Think of DC direction control like this, forget about an oval. You are standing in front of 20' of straight track. If the rail closest to you is positive, the train will move from your left to your right, no matter which way the loco is facing.
Change the polarity to make the far rail positive, the locos moves from your right to your left - every time.
On my layout, I purposely designed my track plan so the train never reverses in viewing position. So the operator is in theory always facing north and left is west, right is east. My wireless throttles have two buttons for direction, the left button makes the train move left or west, the right button makes the train move right or east.
Trains do go around "reverse loops", but that is too much to explain right now.