gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks. I don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains...... my guitar teacher discussed music theory. But he said when you play, you don't think about theory. Those many buttons are for configuring, not operating. user friendly isn't powerful
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks. I don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains......
I don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains......
my guitar teacher discussed music theory. But he said when you play, you don't think about theory.
Those many buttons are for configuring, not operating.
user friendly isn't powerful
And again, I can't see the display or the silly icons on a Digitrax throttle without my glasses and I can't get my fingers on the closely spaced buttons.
"user friendly isn't powerful" - ? If that is to imply that DCC is a "powerful", full featured tool, and thereby must be complicated in some ways, I say "so what?", as I have repeated explained, most of those "powerful" features are of no use to me.
Sheldon
A few thoughts about the relays.
I could do all my "logic" with processors - but I would still need to switch the eight 4 amp power supplies with relays.......
The relays handle the cab assignments (many automaticly with "X sections") as well as turnout/route logic and interlocking signal logic.
The relays allow cab assignments and turnout controls to be duplicated anywhere they are needed, typically on the dispatchers panel and at each tower panel.
Again, DCC does not in and of itself automaticly address turnout controls or CTC/signaling, so comparing what I do to the locomotive control portion of DCC is not fair, by any measure.
Many people are happy with basic DCC locomotive control and flipping PECO turnouts with their fingers or screwdrivers - good for them - that's not my goal.
You are welcome to correct my outdated info about DCC, and I will continue to correct mis information about DC.
cuyama We know you prefer DC, Sheldon. But some of your criticisms of DCC are seriously out-of-date (like years). Since newcomers may not realize that, here is my once-yearly restatement of facts. ATLANTIC CENTRAL Agreed, and when I couple up an ABBA consist, I don't want to have to tell two of the brains to run in reverse........ I don't either, that's why I like the easy way NCE DCC handles consists (others, too). Just select the loco on either end and off you go. ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks. I don't, either. No need to do that at all with NCE and others. After one-time set-up (significantly less than working out the logic diagram for a bunch of relays) select a loco, turn knob. ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains...... You need to actuate many more controls to power-up a route to run a train across the layout on your system. With DCC, select the loco once, turn knob, run train everywhere on the layout until you're done. And with typical cab-contol DC toggles, lots more controls. DC is fine. DCC is fine. IMHO, it's better if we keep things factual for the newcomers. Byron
We know you prefer DC, Sheldon. But some of your criticisms of DCC are seriously out-of-date (like years). Since newcomers may not realize that, here is my once-yearly restatement of facts.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Agreed, and when I couple up an ABBA consist, I don't want to have to tell two of the brains to run in reverse........
I don't either, that's why I like the easy way NCE DCC handles consists (others, too). Just select the loco on either end and off you go.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks.
I don't, either. No need to do that at all with NCE and others. After one-time set-up (significantly less than working out the logic diagram for a bunch of relays) select a loco, turn knob.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains......
You need to actuate many more controls to power-up a route to run a train across the layout on your system. With DCC, select the loco once, turn knob, run train everywhere on the layout until you're done. And with typical cab-contol DC toggles, lots more controls.
DC is fine. DCC is fine. IMHO, it's better if we keep things factual for the newcomers.
Byron
Byron,
Admittedly most of my somewhat extensive experiance with DCC is with Digitrax, and is now a few years old since I have changed some of my social habits in the hobby.
My biggest complaint with DCC has always been the user interface, just looking at the NCE handheld, and I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy, big clunky, yet with a display that requires my glasses. My Train Engineer throttles and my control panels do not require my glasses........
My Advanced Cab Control intergrates turnout control, CTC and signaling into one system with the block controls. Signaling and turnout controls are no simpler with DCC, and no less expensive.
If I have a dispatcher on duty, all my engineers do is run their train......speed and direction.....just like DCC.
With no dispatcher, they press two buttons at each interlocking tower panel to make their way around the layout. So if I had DCC they would still have to push one button at each interlocking panel to select the route? OR, a list of buttons to select a route via the DCC throttle.......
I have said repeatedly that if my goals were different I could well be interested in DCC.
But I don't like tinny onboard sound, I don't need speed matching or consisting, I model an era before ditch lights.
I want CTC and signals, I want to model bigtime railroading from the broad view, not zero in on being the engineer of one train.
I like display running as much as an operating session, and I want a layout that runs with a crew for opps or as a lone wolf display.
DCC would do little to improve the capabilities or features of my operation at the considerable expense of decoders for 140 locos and eight throttles. 140 locos that are needed for the 30 plus 50 car trains the layout can stage.
Again it gets back to goals.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAgreed, and when I couple up an ABBA consist, I don't want to have to tell two of the brains to run in reverse........
ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains......
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
The advantage I find with DCC ( & I was a avid user of DC) is that my main station can have 4 trains on the move in the station limits far easier with DCC than DC as the need for connecting controllers to blocks has vanished.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks. I don't want to push five or six buttons to "take control" of those brains......
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
BATMAN DCC- Each loco has a brain of its own. DC- All loco's share a brain.
DCC- Each loco has a brain of its own.
DC- All loco's share a brain.
Agreed, and when I couple up an ABBA consist, I don't want to have to tell two of the brains to run in reverse........
I don't want a wireless controller with 30 buttons I can't get my fingers on......or screens and buttons I have to "toggle thru" to perform tasks.
I don't want little "brains" talking to me.......(the sound is turned down on my computer and tablet too)
DCC is great, if I was modeling to a different set of goals, I may well be all in. But for my set of goals the cost of DCC is exponentially past the point of deminished return.
So my point remains, DCC is great, and may be the best choice for most people. BUT, you may want to define your goals and consider other options before you are all in - DC or DCC.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
drcookWhat is the difference between DC and DCC?
.
I think this will become my standard answer as an old school DC user:
Do you have a collection of DC locomotives already?
Are you comfortable with DC installation and troubleshooting?
Do you prefere not having sound from your locomotives?
Do you operate your railroad alone?
If you do not answer "YES" to EVERY question above, you should just start out with DCC.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
A few more thoughts about DC consisting.
More important than speed matching is starting voltage. If two locos start moving at the same throttle setting, and you really have a load that requires that much power, it is not so important for them to run the same speed when running light, the load will match their speed unless the difference is dramatic.
Agreed some locos just to not play well with other locos - BUT, in many cases those are combinations that make no sense in real life anyway.
I have never added resistors or modified wiring specificly to speed match my DC locos.
I have modified wiring to install better or similar constant lighting circuits in some locos.
The biggest irony of all is that DC locos from the last 20 years are more likely to play well together across brands than older "pre DCC era" locos.
For me, I admit, most of my diesel lashups are the same brand/type - I model the early 50's, diesels where still largely run in matched sets considered a "single locomotive".
And a large percentage of my diesel fleet is the same brand, with the same drive, so they all run well together.
BUT, I do successfully mix brands of both steam and diesel in a lot of cases.
I cannot speak to models of more modern locos, I cannot comment on Atlas locos, I don't own any. The newest prototype locomotives I own are a pair EMD SD9's, fresh from LaGrange.
None of my locos have dual mode decoders, I don't use any kind of sound systems.
But nearly all my trains are pulled by more than one powered unit, and they all work fine.
wjstix It's possible someone might own a number of engines that all run at the same speed on DC right out of the box, but it wouldn't be common. When I was in DC I found Atlas engines tended to run together well, but engines from other manufacturers would be faster or slower than the Atlas ones, or sometimes different from similar engines from the same manufacturer. You can add resistors to faster engines to slow them down, but in the long run it's really a lot easier just to plug in a DCC decoder and adjust a couple of CVs so all engines begin, run, and stop the same.
It's possible someone might own a number of engines that all run at the same speed on DC right out of the box, but it wouldn't be common. When I was in DC I found Atlas engines tended to run together well, but engines from other manufacturers would be faster or slower than the Atlas ones, or sometimes different from similar engines from the same manufacturer. You can add resistors to faster engines to slow them down, but in the long run it's really a lot easier just to plug in a DCC decoder and adjust a couple of CVs so all engines begin, run, and stop the same.
I agree with the spirit of this comment. I think its generally much more difficult to speed match (I've tried occasionally) with different manufacturers. Also complicating that is the fact that manufacturers change running gear and motors over several vintages. An Athearn Genesis runs differently than a Blue Box.
And that issue also applies to DCC. A QSI Atlas will run much differently than a Tsunami Athearn, and not just staring speed but also throughout the speed band. It takes quite a bit of work to get them to match well.
All of my DCC/Sound Atlas QSIs run the same...exactly. I can consist an SD35 with an MP15, a GEU23B, and an ALCO C420 (interesting consist), and they all start and accelerate perfectly the same right out of the box. OTOH, the LokSound U18B needs EXTENSIVE programming to run the same. It can be done, but its easier to just use a different locomotive in the consist.
So I agree with your comment. I would say the easiest way to consist locos is to stick to the same manufacturer within each consist.....and even the same decoder.
- Douglas
mbinsewi rrinker And it's these things that make me laugh when people post complex steps to do all sorts of speed matchign in DCC - WHY? You didn;t have to do it with DC, well, you don't have to do it with DCC either. Just because you CAN... My most run set of locos were put together exactly like I would have done it if running on DC - put the three locos on the track, and couple them up. I've said many times in here that I have locos that run great together, all on address 03. That's how I "consist", when needed, or when I just want to. I don't need to mess with any CV's. Mike.
rrinker And it's these things that make me laugh when people post complex steps to do all sorts of speed matchign in DCC - WHY? You didn;t have to do it with DC, well, you don't have to do it with DCC either. Just because you CAN... My most run set of locos were put together exactly like I would have done it if running on DC - put the three locos on the track, and couple them up.
I've said many times in here that I have locos that run great together, all on address 03. That's how I "consist", when needed, or when I just want to.
I don't need to mess with any CV's.
Mike.
In a slightly different twist, my shortline only has 3 locos on the layout at any one time, but I only run one loco at a time. The other two are parked. I'll probably build my new layout the same as my previous layout and have dedicated kill switches for the parking tracks. The only time those tracks need power is when the specific loco moves. I simply find it easier to install simple on/off switches and use them to power the tracks rather than punch in unique addresses into the command station to select different locos. Consequently, all of my locos also have the address 3.
DCC sends a signal through the track that is specific to a particular locomotive when programmed. Each DCC loco has a decoder in it that reads its particular signal based upon how that signal and the decoder are addressed (usually the road number of the loco). The address of each decoder is programmed, and the signal is sent to each loco when that address is selected on the command station or throttle. The decoder then picks up its signal and executes the commands you gave it, like speed up or slow down.
A DC loco runs directly off of the current sent through the tracks. Any loco that picks up the current will move as the current dictates. In order to get independent movement of the locos, you need to block the track into sections so that each loco picks up only the volume of current you want it to.
My You Tube
And it's these things that make me laugh when people post complex steps to do all sorts of speed matchign in DCC - WHY? You didn;t have to do it with DC, well, you don't have to do it with DCC either. Just because you CAN... My most run set of locos were put together exactly like I would have done it if running on DC - put the three locos on the track, and couple them up. I didn't even adjust so much as CV2 for start voltage, they all have good motor control decoders and work together without any effort in setting them up.
What yooou CAN do with DCC, but not with DC, is set up operating characteristics for each class or type of loco you have. For example, Alco and GE units with 4 stroke prime movers tend to load slower than EMDs with 2 stroke prime movers. So you can set them up that way, so that no matter how you advance the throttle, slowly or crank it wide open, the locos will move based on the settings in the decoder. Works really good with soudn added. Sure, you can train yourself to turn the throttle knob differently for each loco and simulate the same thing, DC or DCC, but by fixing the operating characteristics in the loco, you get similar performance no matter who is at the throttle - although there still we be a difference between those who crack the throttle slowly and those who yank it to the highest notch possible. More of that "being the engineer" thing, I guess.
That's a high level example - but then you also have the differences between switchers, drag freight engines, mainline passenger locos, and commuter engines. You can further refine the operating characteristics based on the service the prototyle loco was made for. Fast accelerating for getting commuter trains moving from frequent stops, slow but powerful for those long drag freights, somewhere int he middle leaning towards the drag freight for mainline freight service, or leaning towards the commuter loco for mainline passenger service.
Now if we could scale the adhesion - it would be up to the operator playing power director/hostler to assign the correct locos to each train or the road crew will have problems....
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
To follow up on John's comments about multiple unit consisting in DC, nearly every freight train I run NEEDS, three to four powered diesel units or two steamers. The combination of long trains, 45 to 60 cars typically, some longer, and 2% grades make it so.
Running multiple powered units on DC was not a problem before DCC, it's not a problem now.
Example, my Proto 2-8-8-2's run perfectly with my Spectrum 2-6-6-2's, and 2-10-2's.
In my case, most of my diesels are matched sets, but they too can be mixed and matched to a large degree, with no speed tables, CV adjustments, etc. Many of my diesels are older Proto2000 models and they all run great together.
Tom--
You do not even need to have PWM in order for constant lighting in DC now. As an example, my son has two of the latest run Kato C44-9W's. They have really nice LED lights that come on full brightness at very low voltage. The lighting is better than Kato lighting effects from just a couple years ago.
Ok, I'm using "block" operation with power routing turnouts BUT I did not have to wire the layout for blocks. The wiring was very simple. All I have is a few feeder wires, approximately one set of feeder wires every 40 linear feet of main track now. (One set of feeders was ruined by a track realignment and was not replaced.) As long as my track is clean, there are no issues whatsoever with voltage drop.
I keep the track clean with conductive lubricants.
For me, DCC would be a costly luxury that is just not necessary to enjoy playing with trains.
My son wants to run long freight trains - 45 cars and up. We are able to speed match locomotive consists reasonably well in plain DC. The old Stewart/Kato engines from 30 years ago run pretty darn well with new Katos, and they both run pretty darn well with Athearn Genesis units. (Athearn RTR engines do use a different, slower, gear ratio, and so they do present a challenge for DC loco consists. We just don't use them in power sets--have only one). I have not checked out the mathematical gear ratios, but was astounded at how well current Athearn Genesis units speed match in plain DC with Katos from thirty years ago.
So for everybody telling me that I must use DCC for multiple unit consisting, etc etc. I have proven that to be totally unnecessary. We are able to assemble 3 or 4 unit lashups in plain DC and things run fine.
To keep one (relatively short) train from rear ending another without using the sidings too often, I simply adjust train lengths as needed. It's really not that difficult, and as Sheldon noted, it saves me money for other things.
John
riogrande5761 ATLANTIC CENTRAL The unfortunate truth is most people in the hobby today have never seen or operated on a well designed DC system, yet they are all "experts" on what is "wrong" with DC. So if you have to see and operate on a well designed DC system, and so many haven't, there lies the problem. You have to and so many haven't. That tends to make them "experts" in a practical way - meaning they know what they don't know and maybe don't need to know. That isn't a bad thing necessarily. Prototype jobs: Engineers: control locomotives Conductors: control trains Dispatchers: control railroads - by controlling the tracks those other two people must use DCC does that first job the best, no question. DC can simulate that last job just as well as DCC..........usually for a lot less work and money. DC can simulate that last job just as well as DCC..........usually for a lot less work and money. Bingo, which is probably why DCC has gotten so popular. But again, I realize few people with model trains are really interested in prototype operation. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. There can be a point for some where getting "realistic" becomes "work" and not so much fun. Many are in the hobby for fun and relaxation and like to simulate train operations to some degree without it becoming too laborious or tedious. In otherwords, different strokes for different folks. It depends on what your poison is. But again, to new people I always say DCC is likely your best choice, especially if you like sound. Sheldon And old people too.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL The unfortunate truth is most people in the hobby today have never seen or operated on a well designed DC system, yet they are all "experts" on what is "wrong" with DC.
The unfortunate truth is most people in the hobby today have never seen or operated on a well designed DC system, yet they are all "experts" on what is "wrong" with DC.
So if you have to see and operate on a well designed DC system, and so many haven't, there lies the problem. You have to and so many haven't. That tends to make them "experts" in a practical way - meaning they know what they don't know and maybe don't need to know. That isn't a bad thing necessarily.
Prototype jobs: Engineers: control locomotives Conductors: control trains Dispatchers: control railroads - by controlling the tracks those other two people must use DCC does that first job the best, no question. DC can simulate that last job just as well as DCC..........usually for a lot less work and money. DC can simulate that last job just as well as DCC..........usually for a lot less work and money.
DC can simulate that last job just as well as DCC..........usually for a lot less work and money.
Bingo, which is probably why DCC has gotten so popular.
But again, I realize few people with model trains are really interested in prototype operation.
That isn't necessarily a bad thing. There can be a point for some where getting "realistic" becomes "work" and not so much fun. Many are in the hobby for fun and relaxation and like to simulate train operations to some degree without it becoming too laborious or tedious. In otherwords, different strokes for different folks. It depends on what your poison is.
But again, to new people I always say DCC is likely your best choice, especially if you like sound. Sheldon
And old people too.
I would not disagree with any of that.
As for the Engineer thing, sometimes I want to be the Engineer, other times I would rather be the dispatcher or a railfan. That's why my layouts always have dedicated display loops - don't need DCC for that or good CTC operation.
Since I don't care for squalky onboard sound, the $8,000 or so it would take to install DCC on my layout and decoders in 140 locos would only add a few features, and make some aspects of the current operating plan more complex.
Again, it really has a lot to do with your interests and goals.
tstage The other thing that DCC does well (and it's not often mentioned on these discussions about DC & DCC) is constant lighting and lighting-effects. I've never cared for the unrealistic non-constant lighting of DC. In order to make the headlight turn on you have to increase the voltage to the track; thereby requiring your locomotive to be in motion for the headlight to light up. And, as you slow down, the headlight gets dimmer and dimmer until it goes out completely. Because DCC is constant voltage, I can have the headlight come on full-strength as my locomotive idles away in the yard or trackside. With Rule 17 programmed I can also have a dimmed headlight brighten when starting off or dim again after coming to a complete stop. I can also have the opposite headlight dim when going from forward to reverse back to forward again. I can create mars or gyralighting effects and play with the flash-rate. To me - that's a LOT more fun than sound and something I don't feel the need to "mute" should I get tired of it. While the above could be utilized with DC using circuit boards and caps, it's already suited for and integrated into a DCC decoder. But...if lighting isn't important to you, or the operation of your layout - it's a moot point. I thought it worth adding to the discussion, nonetheless... Tom
The other thing that DCC does well (and it's not often mentioned on these discussions about DC & DCC) is constant lighting and lighting-effects.
I've never cared for the unrealistic non-constant lighting of DC. In order to make the headlight turn on you have to increase the voltage to the track; thereby requiring your locomotive to be in motion for the headlight to light up. And, as you slow down, the headlight gets dimmer and dimmer until it goes out completely.
Because DCC is constant voltage, I can have the headlight come on full-strength as my locomotive idles away in the yard or trackside. With Rule 17 programmed I can also have a dimmed headlight brighten when starting off or dim again after coming to a complete stop. I can also have the opposite headlight dim when going from forward to reverse back to forward again.
I can create mars or gyralighting effects and play with the flash-rate. To me - that's a LOT more fun than sound and something I don't feel the need to "mute" should I get tired of it.
While the above could be utilized with DC using circuit boards and caps, it's already suited for and integrated into a DCC decoder. But...if lighting isn't important to you, or the operation of your layout - it's a moot point. I thought it worth adding to the discussion, nonetheless...
Tom
Tom, constant brightness headlights have been pretty standard on all but the least expensive DC locos for 20 years or more now.
And, as Randy pointed out, they work even better with Pulse Widith Modulated power.
With my PWM Aristo Train Engineer wireless throttles, my headlights come on full brighness way before the loco moves, in fact you can leave the loco sitting still with the lights on. Then as you accelerate the lighting stays constant at all speeds.
OK, if you model modern times with ditch lights and what not, I get it. But in 1954 many roads had just started turing lights on in daylight, and just started experimenting/adopting with Mars lights.
In theory, the green lightboards that engines started to come with in the 1990's were supposed to allow for constant lighting, by causing the first say 1.5 volts of DC power to go to the lights, and then only anything more than that to go to the engine. Except for making the engine run slower than a similar engine without a lightboard, I never saw that it really had any effect.
BTW re sound...I suspect the future of sound is going to move away from sound and speakers being in the engine, and towards being in the controller - kinda like Bachmann's "EZ-App" system. You can use a phone or tablet to run the engine, and the sound (if you want it) comes from the phone.
I bet pretty soon DCC manufacturers will offer something similar, with a speaker and a headphone plug built into a walk-around device. I think you could get into "virtual reality" sound. So for example, the closer you are to the engine, the louder the engine sounds in the headphones or speaker. You may be able to make it so that with headphones, if the engine is to your left, the sound is louder in the left earpiece. Plus, you could have proximity-based background sounds running, like street sounds in the big city on the layout, mooing when you're near the dairy farm, etc. I'd think a lot of it could be done now with transponding DCC technology?
You CAN do constant lighting with DC, but you MUST use a pulse, preferentially a PWM, DC power pack.
I ired up some stuff for another member of the old club I belonged to. We had 2 power systems, the big MRC walkaround one and the CMI similar system. The two ran trains simialrly, but they used different types of pusle power - on one main, the constantly lighting circuit worked great, loco standing stilla nd the headlight would still be on. On the other track, connected to the other power supply - nada. All because one supplied pulses with enough amplitude to charge the capacitor in the constant light circuit, and the other one did not.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
You can have two or more trains running at one time in DC without using blocks, but you can't control each one separately. With a large enough layout, you can have one train following the other and if there speeds are similar (which is easier to do in DCC than DC) the trains will be OK. But with no blocks, if you stop one train, you stop both. (BTW if you're using power routing turnouts to create sidetracks so you can put one train 'in the hole' so another can pass, you are using blocks.)
Cost-wise, I think the issue is bigger if you start in DC and have a fleet of 10-20 engines and then decide to convert to DCC. It is easier if you're starting from scratch to just go with DCC. A DCC system from CVP or NCE with two controllers built into it costs about the same as two good, new DC powerpacks and the toggle switches you'll need to divide the layout up into blocks. If you're not interested in sound, good regular decoders can be bought for around $20, maybe less if you find a sale or buy in bulk. Micro-Mark catalogue usually has sound/DCC-equipped engines selling in the $110-160 range.
I run a layout that has no blocks, only Peco power routing turnouts. I do run multiple trains in plain DC--that is when things can get exciting--keeping trains from running into each other--but it can actually be done. You do not have to have block control or fancy wiring. One must pay attention to where each train is and the speed. One does not have to have DCC to do this; one must only be attentive to what is going on.
I'm 51 in two weeks, have tried DCC and sound but was always underwhelmed, and I have some models that I don't want to deal with disassembling to convert to DCC, including Overland Models diesels.
John Mock
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
kasskaboose Get ready for a lively discussion about the differences. I've done both and converted to DCC. It was a fun learning curve to climb. You also had to pay a larger upfront cost with getting the power cab, throttle, etc. I love DCC. Once you know how to attach the feeders, you go slowly and constantly checking. DCC requires a bit more accuracy.
Get ready for a lively discussion about the differences. I've done both and converted to DCC. It was a fun learning curve to climb. You also had to pay a larger upfront cost with getting the power cab, throttle, etc.
I love DCC. Once you know how to attach the feeders, you go slowly and constantly checking. DCC requires a bit more accuracy.
Now that's a new one? Requires a bit more accuracy? I would love to hear that explained.
By the way, if I did want to use DCC, it would be from this company:
www.cvpusa.com
It still gets back to each person's goals for their modeling, one size does not fit all.
richg1998 rrinker riogrande5761 drcook What is the difference between DC and DCC? With DC, to control more than one train on a layout, you have to control the tracks - by dividing sections of track into into electrical blocks, which feed power from more than one power pack. On a good sized layout, it may not be uncommon for someone to say "who's got my train" because they selected a block with your train in it for their cab/power pack. With DCC, you control trains by their address, and not the track. And at our club, sometimes you still yell "who's got my train" because after all these years, people still can;t figure out that if their loco is 564, they need to put the numbers 564 in the throttle they are holding to control it, not 714. Sorry Dave, I think you will be herding cats at your club for a long time to come, even if they at least stop running into one another. --Randy My local club bullt in the early 1980's had fourteen blocks in two rooms. Four throttles. A control panel with one fellow to control blocks. If he got to talking, we heard that cry almost every operating session. With DCC, no more. Rich
rrinker riogrande5761 drcook What is the difference between DC and DCC? With DC, to control more than one train on a layout, you have to control the tracks - by dividing sections of track into into electrical blocks, which feed power from more than one power pack. On a good sized layout, it may not be uncommon for someone to say "who's got my train" because they selected a block with your train in it for their cab/power pack. With DCC, you control trains by their address, and not the track. And at our club, sometimes you still yell "who's got my train" because after all these years, people still can;t figure out that if their loco is 564, they need to put the numbers 564 in the throttle they are holding to control it, not 714. Sorry Dave, I think you will be herding cats at your club for a long time to come, even if they at least stop running into one another. --Randy
riogrande5761 drcook What is the difference between DC and DCC? With DC, to control more than one train on a layout, you have to control the tracks - by dividing sections of track into into electrical blocks, which feed power from more than one power pack. On a good sized layout, it may not be uncommon for someone to say "who's got my train" because they selected a block with your train in it for their cab/power pack. With DCC, you control trains by their address, and not the track.
drcook What is the difference between DC and DCC?
What is the difference between DC and DCC?
With DC, to control more than one train on a layout, you have to control the tracks - by dividing sections of track into into electrical blocks, which feed power from more than one power pack.
On a good sized layout, it may not be uncommon for someone to say "who's got my train" because they selected a block with your train in it for their cab/power pack.
With DCC, you control trains by their address, and not the track.
And at our club, sometimes you still yell "who's got my train" because after all these years, people still can;t figure out that if their loco is 564, they need to put the numbers 564 in the throttle they are holding to control it, not 714. Sorry Dave, I think you will be herding cats at your club for a long time to come, even if they at least stop running into one another.
My local club bullt in the early 1980's had fourteen blocks in two rooms. Four throttles. A control panel with one fellow to control blocks. If he got to talking, we heard that cry almost every operating session.
With DCC, no more.
Rich
And yet I can build a DC system were it is impossible to over run the block or blocks assigned to you. And guess how much extra it costs? Zero, zip, nada, not one penny.
How you ask? You really don't want to know, because you are happy with DCC.
And most people should use DCC, for a number of reasons.
But few of those reasons have to do with the common reasons given against DC.
How about we sell DCC based on its features and benifits rather than miss information on the limitations of DC?
Prototype jobs:
Engineers: control locomotives
Conductors: control trains
Dispatchers: control railroads - by controlling the tracks those other two people must use
DCC does that first job the best, no question.
But again, to new people I always say DCC is likely your best choice, especially if you like sound.
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.