richhotrain ATLANTIC CENTRAL Greg, one last thought. No offense to anyone, but I would be willing to bet a pretty large percentage of those reading this discussion lack the knowledge to design and install my approach or your approach completely on their own. And that speaks volumes about why so few layouts have CTC, signals or advanced route control. Sheldon That may be true, but another possible explanation is that many, if not most, layouts are too small to justify the time and expense necessary to install CTC or advanced route control. My layout is probably large enough to implement these controls, and I am probably smart enough to learn how to design and install these controls if I weren't so lazy. The concept does sound cool. Rich
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Greg, one last thought. No offense to anyone, but I would be willing to bet a pretty large percentage of those reading this discussion lack the knowledge to design and install my approach or your approach completely on their own. And that speaks volumes about why so few layouts have CTC, signals or advanced route control. Sheldon
Greg, one last thought.
No offense to anyone, but I would be willing to bet a pretty large percentage of those reading this discussion lack the knowledge to design and install my approach or your approach completely on their own.
And that speaks volumes about why so few layouts have CTC, signals or advanced route control.
Sheldon
That may be true, but another possible explanation is that many, if not most, layouts are too small to justify the time and expense necessary to install CTC or advanced route control. My layout is probably large enough to implement these controls, and I am probably smart enough to learn how to design and install these controls if I weren't so lazy. The concept does sound cool.
Rich
You are correct, layout size and design has a lot to do with the practical application of signaling or CTC.
The mistake, in my opinion, that many make is trying to model every nuance of the prototype, especially a specific railroad or location. Since our distances are compressed, this seldom works or has any benefit to operation or realistic appearance.
Your layout is large enough for some basic interlocking signals that would add a lot of visual interest and may aid in operation should you ever have a guest operator or two.
Most of it is stuff anyone can learn, if they want to. Many who are computer savvy will be more comfortable with Greg's high tech approach, others may do better with older methods where you can look at a diagram and understand why the light comes on.
In any case, I feel it is best to streamline signal systems a bit from actual prototype practice, which can get pretty complex.
jjdamnitHello All, York1 Any over/under bets on how many pages this will go? Well, you've expanded the discussion to the second page..
Ahem. I wish folks would just answer the OP's questions instead of rambling on about non-related matter.
OK, I will just go back to my first comment in my first post.
The every 6' buss wire feeder drop question. I don't think it is really necessary, BUT:
All the DCC "experts" seem to say you need to do this, especially on larger layouts.
So if I apply the 6' feeder drop concept just to the double track mainline of my new layout, 420 feet of double track.
So 420' feet of buss wire, 2 #12 wires?
420' of double track x 2 = 820' track divided by 6' x two wires = 2 drops every 6 feet = 280 drops, each of which needs to be connected on each end = 560 connections that have to made.
If each drop is 2' long x 280 drops = 560' of whatever size wire is recommended for that.
So now we are up to 1540' of whatever size wire, and 560 connections.
And we have not yet considered other trackage like my stub end staging which is another 250' of track that would require 25' of buss wire, 80 more drops which is another 160 connections.
Then there is the eight track, 25' long freight yard, three more staging yards, and the passenger terminal.......
How can anyone say that's not a lot of wiring?
I know that what I do is a lot of wiring.
And if you use powered switch machines you have to get those two or three wires from whatever controls them to the switch motor - I don't care if it is a solid state device or a toggle switch.
As I explained earlier, as a person with professional experiance building control panels that run machines, we counted connections as the primary measure of how much labor the control wiring would require to install.
Just because you don't have to know as much about what the wires are doing, it still takes the same amount of time to connect them.
How many of you buy some giszmo for your layouts to power turnout frogs? How many connections is that? I do that in DC as well, it is three more wires x 2 = 6 connections per turnout. In my case times about 120, yes a lot of wiring.
OK, you don't have to design, wire and implement a cab control system, yes that is a wiring savings.
A quick estimate suggests that the DCC buss connections described above for my layout are similar in number to the connections necessary for my push button cab control system using my custom circuit board panels. That's why it made sense for me to invest in those circuit boards, each circuit board saves 112 connections.
Again, I'm not suggesting anyone should follow my path, I have friend just getting started in the hobby, I told him to go DCC.
But why all this minimizing of the required wiring infrastructure?
ATLANTIC CENTRALNo offense to anyone, but I would be willing to bet a pretty large percentage of those reading this discussion lack the knowledge to design and install my approach or your approach completely on their own.
I certainly can agree with you on that, Sheldon.
My DC layout is powered by just two wires, with no CTC, no semaphores or signals of any kind, and no multiple trains running at the same time...those things not only don't interest me, but are beyond my capabilities.Of course, those two wires did require additional wiring so that I could control which tracks were live and which ones weren't.I hadn't planned for any further wiring, but when I decided to add some electrically-powered turnout controls, to accommodate turnouts that were no longer reachable, more wiring was required.While the layout is still not "done", I'm pretty sure the need for additional wiring will not be too onerous.
Wayne
Overmod ATLANTIC CENTRAL Assuming one is comfortable/willing to use computer screen interfaces and/or DCC handhelds/smart phones as the human interface. I am not comfortable with those choices. With all due respect: this thread isn't about what you do or don't want, it's about what the OP does and doesn't want. As he stated initially that he thinks DCC is the 'way of the future', any discussion of advanced non-DCC wiring schemes that 'he doesn't have the knowledge to build' is ridiculous, even if it weren't being repeated over and over and over. Let the OP comment on whether he's comfortable with computer screen or phone interfaces, or would prefer something else. Make the case for DC after he says what he does and doesn't find valuable. I'd be surprised if you can convince him that DC ought to be his 'way to go', but convince HIM based on what HE values.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Assuming one is comfortable/willing to use computer screen interfaces and/or DCC handhelds/smart phones as the human interface. I am not comfortable with those choices.
With all due respect: this thread isn't about what you do or don't want, it's about what the OP does and doesn't want. As he stated initially that he thinks DCC is the 'way of the future', any discussion of advanced non-DCC wiring schemes that 'he doesn't have the knowledge to build' is ridiculous, even if it weren't being repeated over and over and over.
Let the OP comment on whether he's comfortable with computer screen or phone interfaces, or would prefer something else. Make the case for DC after he says what he does and doesn't find valuable. I'd be surprised if you can convince him that DC ought to be his 'way to go', but convince HIM based on what HE values.
I already suggested the op and others go with DCC.
I just suggested the that op understand that the other features one might want still require wiring of one sort or another.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAssuming one is comfortable/willing to use computer screen interfaces and/or DCC handhelds/smart phones as the human interface. I am not comfortable with those choices.
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL You are fixing and finishing something others did not know how to do. how does that demonstrate that DCC requires more wiring?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL You are fixing and finishing something others did not know how to do.
how does that demonstrate that DCC requires more wiring?
I never said MORE.
Alton Junction
Note to all, I did not start out trying or wanting to defend or describe my control system.
I simply pointed out that hooking up feeder drops every 6 feet is a lot of connections and thereby a lot of work. For the 1000 or more feet of track on my new layout that would be over 600 connections.
The other thing I pointed out was that signaling, detection, and turnout control still have to wired up if you want those features.
That was my ONLY point.
ATLANTIC CENTRALYou are fixing and finishing something others did not know how to do.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Again, proved my point. You are fixing and finishing something others did not know how to do.
And I am still happy I don't have 145 decoders to configure........
Back to porch....
ATLANTIC CENTRALYou used a key phrase - "I am planning on replacing" - how long has the previous product been in use?
you've repeatedly described the "Sheldon Approach" for doing layout control. but there are many ways to accomplishing that depending on needs and how the layout may already be wired.
the club had some signals in place and because i discovered that PSX circuit breakers had a block occupancy detector, started trying to get the signals to work.
to do so, i quickly put together a small transistor circuit to turn on LEDs to indicate STOP or CLEAR. that worked and club members were very happy to see the signals working as well as providing some meaningful information when operating their trains during open houses
that simple $1 transistor circuit built on a solderless breadboard served it's purpose and is being replaced. because of that experiment, we're cutting and splicing DCC track buses to make the blocks more suitable for signaling. this includes replacing a DigiTrax PMM circuit breaker with spare PSXs supporting block detection
while i wouldn't replace existing electronics if it does what is needed, there's no reason not to try something simple and inexpensive as a stepping stone towards something more complete.
even if you have older electronics on your layout, there's no reason not to use newer less expensive stuff when expanding the layout while leaving the older stuff in place
SeeYou190 The Dream House layout had a room dedicated to the CTC panel. About six months into layout construction... FORGET THAT! The room was only ever used for storage. -Kevin
The Dream House layout had a room dedicated to the CTC panel.
About six months into layout construction... FORGET THAT!
The room was only ever used for storage.
-Kevin
Kevin, I agree. I would NEVER have a CTC panel in a separate room or jammed in a corner.
I hate all that prototype "extreme" operational realism stuff.
My dispatcher will have a commanding view of 2/3rds of the layout.
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL But understand, if you want to add signals, CTC and advance turnout route control to DCC, it will be complex and expensive - even if it does not take quite as many wires as this. route control is already done using JMRI. no panels are needed because turnouts are controlled using the DCC controllers how is it complex and how expensive? we're adding circuits to control signals at the club. we're using the PSX's built in block occupancy output to drive a small transistor circuit to control the signals that costs $3. basic signal logic is trivial: if block occupied // PSX output display STOP else display CLEAR i'm planning on replacing that with an esp12 board that supports WiFi that will simplify the circuitry to control just a couple signals which will cost maybe $15. WiFi allows the nodes to communicate with one another allowing APPROACH signals to blocks in a different node if block occupied display STOP else if next block occupied // over WiFi display APPROACH else display CLEAR once the wire connections are correct, logic bugs and enhancements can be changed by plugging in a USB and reprogramming the processor. WiFi avoids stringing multiple wires between nodes or back to a dispatcher panel as already mentioned, a graphical JMRI CTC panel can control turnouts and signals with locoNet and/or WiFi yes, some of this is easy for me design because of my background, just as the wiring and relay logic is easier for you. but i've helped modelers using Arduinos to do similar (e.g. control semaphores) and a generic program with predefined pin functions can be download by modelers so they can build a node it's not that complex and it doesn't have to be expensive 2861
ATLANTIC CENTRAL But understand, if you want to add signals, CTC and advance turnout route control to DCC, it will be complex and expensive - even if it does not take quite as many wires as this.
route control is already done using JMRI. no panels are needed because turnouts are controlled using the DCC controllers
how is it complex and how expensive?
we're adding circuits to control signals at the club. we're using the PSX's built in block occupancy output to drive a small transistor circuit to control the signals that costs $3.
basic signal logic is trivial:
if block occupied // PSX output display STOP else display CLEAR
i'm planning on replacing that with an esp12 board that supports WiFi that will simplify the circuitry to control just a couple signals which will cost maybe $15. WiFi allows the nodes to communicate with one another allowing APPROACH signals to blocks in a different node
if block occupied display STOP else if next block occupied // over WiFi display APPROACH else display CLEAR
once the wire connections are correct, logic bugs and enhancements can be changed by plugging in a USB and reprogramming the processor.
WiFi avoids stringing multiple wires between nodes or back to a dispatcher panel
as already mentioned, a graphical JMRI CTC panel can control turnouts and signals with locoNet and/or WiFi
yes, some of this is easy for me design because of my background, just as the wiring and relay logic is easier for you.
but i've helped modelers using Arduinos to do similar (e.g. control semaphores) and a generic program with predefined pin functions can be download by modelers so they can build a node
it's not that complex and it doesn't have to be expensive
2861
Greg, I understand, and even agree. But that was not always the case.
Assuming one is comfortable/willing to use computer screen interfaces and/or DCC handhelds/smart phones as the human interface.
I am not comfortable with those choices.
As I explained somewhere above, I have used Digitrax throttles to select turnout routes - that is a miserable process - of course for me the whole Digitrax throttle is a miserable experience. Why would I push 5 buttons when I can push one?
And again, many of these options were not available, or fully available, or fully developed 22 years ago when I needed a control system. You are coming at this from what is readily available and in many cases pretty new right now.
I'm not chainging this now just like I'm not replacing 50 years worth of rolling stock with all new high end RTR. Or, just like I am not replacing or rewiring 145 locomotives to get 5% more detail and DCC/sound.
Again, I will fully concede that the cost of doing this stuff has come down, again, if you are willing to accept specific approaches.
You used a key phrase - "I am planning on replacing" - how long has the previous product been in use?
I can't participate in this hobby from that perspective - the perspective of constant replacement and upgrading.
I just want to the whole thing built one more time in my lifetime and to play with it. The electronics is not thewhole hobby for me - it is a means to an end.
I don't want to be in a club, I have helped enough others build their layouts. I do want to invite people to come to my house and play.
I have the space, the stuff, the extra money, and now am about to have plenty of time. But I will use what I have, because it was good enough 20 and 30 years ago, it is still good enough.
ATLANTIC CENTRALBut understand, if you want to add signals, CTC and advance turnout route control to DCC, it will be complex and expensive - even if it does not take quite as many wires as this.
Living the dream.
gregc the topic is does DCC require less and simpler wiring? it certainly can, both in terms of # of wire as well as length of wire (as explained) ATLANTIC CENTRAL But you would still have to build and wire the panel? That's the hard work? not if your willing to use a graphics screen such as JMRI you haven't explained the connections between the CTC and your layout
the topic is does DCC require less and simpler wiring?
it certainly can, both in terms of # of wire as well as length of wire (as explained)
ATLANTIC CENTRAL But you would still have to build and wire the panel? That's the hard work?
not if your willing to use a graphics screen such as JMRI
you haven't explained the connections between the CTC and your layout
OK, did my share to preserve history today in the town of Havre de Grace.
First point - I can tell you as a former electrician who built industrial control panels, and as a project manager in that industry who did cost estimates, do you know how people in industry figure out how much labor it will take to build a hard wired control panel?
They count terminations - how many ends of a wire must I connect? Within the panel there is no labor concern about how much wire.
Yes, at some point in a complete industrial installation remote runs are measured in feet and standard labor rates gathered from experiance are used to estimate the cost of "pulling the wire", but then it has to be terminated.
So on the scale of building a model train layout, hooking up 20 pushbuttons is a bigger factor than how much wire is between the 20 pushbuttons and whatever they are connected to. Running cat5 wire is pretty easy.
BUT, my wiring does work to limit long runs to the fewest number of conductors.
Using wiring methods and circuits that have been used in industrial control for over 100 years now.
How does my non computerized CTC panel work?
Well, the logic is not anywhere near the panel. The logic is spread all over the layout in "nodes" as you would call them.
CTC panels rely on three basic elements - detection, turnout position, permission.
Dispatchers see where trains are, they align routes, and they give permission. The automatic features of the turnout controls and the signal system do the rest.
My CTC panel will not use the traditional lever switches from the prototype - they take up too much space. While I like actual tactile buttons and switches, I do need to put a lot of info in about 12' wide x 16" tall control panel.
And, I prefer to streamline CTC a little due to our compressed distance and time in our model worlds.
And, also as a concession to our compressed time and space, I use lighted pushbutons with circuits that release previous settings when a new setting is selected.
Nearly all the signals on my layout are absolute signals, controlled by detection and CTC, protecting and directing traffic at the interlockings.
I do not model any permissive automatic block signals. Even on a layout of this size, the distances vs train lengths do not support it. A primary design goal is to run long trains, the distances between interlockings do not support the movement of more than one, or in a few cases two, trains in the same direction between any two given interlockings, so block signals between interlockings are only required in a few locations.
The dispatchers panel will contain cab assignment/permission buttons for the 15 primary control blocks - control blocks are not the same as signal blocks.
15 blocks x 6 cabs + 15 reset buttons = 105 buttons = 107 wires, grouped into cat5 cables that go out to the various nodes at each interlocking to assign primary blocks throttles and grant signal system "permission". That is only one cat5 cable from each primary control block node back to the dispatchers panel.
Those buttons are lighted to indicate selection but require no addtional wire because the control wire of the selected cab stays hot when selected and powers its own LED.
There will be about 60 separate route control circuits controling turnouts, 28 of which are for the hidden staging. That will require 62 wires, and again, those circuits support their own indicator LED's without additional wires.
The 15 primary blocks will report block occupancy and that will require 16 wires.
The 28 staging tracks will have separate detection reporting that will require 29 wires.
There will be a few other wires for some interlocks and other features.
All other logic and control is handled by relay panel nodes near the related interlocking and tower panels.
Relay and control panels will be bench built. Once installed they get connected to each other and to nearby switch motors, track connections, signals and daisy chained to the next node to the east and west.
Detectors for nearby bocks are located on the relay panels - signal logic all happens right there and is daisy chained as needed from east and west, typically just 4 wires each way.
Relay panels typically contain two/four cab assignment circuit boards and detectors, six to twelve permission relays, and one relay for each turnout controlled by that tower panel. All depending on the complexity of the interlocking.
Tower panels will contain the same turnout route controls and cab permission controls as that section of the dispatchers panel - the dispatcher will be able to disable or inable tower panel control.
Trains that pass red over red signals will just stop, the power routing thru the interlocking leaves the track unpowered on routes not selected.
Pretty simple really. The same basic motor control circuit and some yes/no sequence logic for the signals, all from info available on the relay panels, just repeated as needed.
Some inductive detectors, LED signals, and Aristo wireless throttles.
Wait until I tell you how two switchers can operate opposite ends of the 8 track yard independently, only occasionally requiring any button pushing.......
All with no little brains in the trains and no computers under the layout.
So don't build this unless you really have an interest in old fashioned electronics like the railroad used for signals back in the 20's, 30, 40's, 50's, 60's - in fact, electronis that they are just now finally fully upgradings and replacing......
But understand, if you want to add signals, CTC and advance turnout route control to DCC, it will be complex and expensive - even if it does not take quite as many wires as this.
SeeYou190The DCC layouts I have seen using signals have employed various optical sensors to get the job done. It seemed pretty simple to me
It seemed pretty simple to me
as Sheldon suggests, signals indicate the occupancy of a block by any part of the train. Even basic signaling systems will not only indicate STOP, but APPROACH if the next block is occupied.
but with dispatching or CTC, block occupancy must be communicated to the CTC machine (PC) and the dispatcher determines the aspect to indicate thru the CTC machine.
this communication between the CTC and signal could be a long set (red, green, yellow) wires or it could be in a packet of information sent of some serial communication path such as LocoNet to some stationary decoder or some other device (e.g. Arduino)
the CTC machine would also control nearby turnouts
The DCC layouts I have seen using signals have employed various optical sensors to get the job done.
It seemed pretty simple to me, though I do not know all the ins-and-outs.
And I would be happy to do that later, or with you directly off the forum, but right now I am rebuilding an 1885 porch.
ATLANTIC CENTRALBut you would still have to build and wire the panel? That's the hard work?
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL I would never have a computer CTC panel or a smart phone throttle. So there we are, back to devices that need wires going to them. because of your preference yes but a computer controlled CTC panel, even if it has mechanical switches and lamps would only need two connections to the layout the loconet cable to control the tortoise machines a single pair of wires connecting nodes for signaling, block occupancy and turnout feedback
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I would never have a computer CTC panel or a smart phone throttle. So there we are, back to devices that need wires going to them.
because of your preference yes
but a computer controlled CTC panel, even if it has mechanical switches and lamps would only need two connections to the layout
But you would still have to build and wire the panel? That's the hard work?
Greg, my wiring is decentralized just like your nodes.
Tower panels are located at each interlocking, with corresponding relay panels for cab selection, signaling and turnout control right there at the interlocking and panel.
Wiring between each interlocking is minimal.
Thre is a throttle buss for each of the 6 throttles that goes all around the layout from the Aristo throttle base stations.
The only really long runs are cat5 control cables back to the dispatchers panel.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI would never have a computer CTC panel or a smart phone throttle. So there we are, back to devices that need wires going to them.
A few more thoughts:
Yes, a lot of my statements are "I" statements. I'm not in a club, been there, done that.
Many elements of DCC were more expensive 20 years ago, like 145 decoders I would need.
And yes, my train propulsion is highly integrated into my turnout control. All interlockings are not separate blocks that need to be assigned. They are power routed X sections that are correctly powered automatically based on the selected route.
So every time I throw a mainline turnout, those relays power the turnout motor, power the frog correctly, direct the track power thru the interlocking, and provide the logic path for the interlocking signals.
This cuts the number of control blocks in half on the typical layout.
One last thought, even if I used DCC and solid state layout control logic, I (yes I) would still want throttles and control panels with tactile buttons and lights.
I would never have a computer CTC panel or a smart phone throttle. So there we are, back to devices that need wires going to them.
are you sure you're not getting it? -- you seem to be advocating that your approach(s) are better if not less expensive that DCC
here's a panel of PSXs and ARs at the club. not many wires. top wires are from a booster not shown on the left. bottom wires are the bus wires that run under the track.
this would replace the cab control wiring and i believe demonstrates that DCC wiring can be simpler that DC cab control wiring
ATLANTIC CENTRALAgain, ALL I AM SAYING, is that when you get into advanced DCC setups you ARE hooking up a lot of wires.
of course when you look under the layout, there is a wire run for the track buses. but just one single cable for the Loconet that connects the stationary decoders (DS64s) controlling the tortise machines at each "node".
yes there are relatively short (few ft) wires between the tortise machines and the DS64s, the machines are not connected to some panel 10s of ft away.
this approach using "nodes" significantly reduces the amount of wiring under a layout, at least the lengths of wire
i don't recall you explaining how you control your switch machines from panels, how far those panels are from the turnouts, how many panels you might have.
2566
richhotrain York1 Any over/under bets on how many pages this will go? Yeah, it's a fairly open ended topic, getting started with DCC, so it just invites everyone, including you and me, to post comments. But, in the end, you have to wonder how helpful this will all be to the OP. I look at this topic in very simplistic terms. If you want independent control over locomotives and you want sound, that is essentially what DCC provides. Wiring in either DC or DCC is quite simple if you restrict your layout to an oval. It gets complicated in DC when you install blocks, and it gets complicated in DCC when you install reversing sections, occupancy detection, and prototypical signal systems.
York1 Any over/under bets on how many pages this will go?
Any over/under bets on how many pages this will go?
Yeah, it's a fairly open ended topic, getting started with DCC, so it just invites everyone, including you and me, to post comments. But, in the end, you have to wonder how helpful this will all be to the OP.
I look at this topic in very simplistic terms. If you want independent control over locomotives and you want sound, that is essentially what DCC provides.
Wiring in either DC or DCC is quite simple if you restrict your layout to an oval. It gets complicated in DC when you install blocks, and it gets complicated in DCC when you install reversing sections, occupancy detection, and prototypical signal systems.
jjdamnit York1 Any over/under bets on how many pages this will go? I should have taken that at even-money!!!
I should have taken that at even-money!!!
Yeah, this thread has gone off the rails, so to speak, but not necessarily off topic. It is just waaaay more than the OP was looking for.
My own experience with DCC wiring is that it can be simple, but it does get more involved and tedious as the layout becomes more complex. But, the wiring itself is not that complex. As Sheldon points out, it is still a two-wire protocol for each device or, at least, a two-wire protocol for each function on each device. It would probably be more beneficial to start a separate thread on the topic of DC Versus DCC Wiring.
Greg, You still don't get it.
I'm not suggesting anyone should use my system or my approach.
Yes, when someone with your talents designs and builds stuff, it is just as afordable as what I do, but off the shelf plug and play DCC hardware as taken decades to come down in price.
My position, based on my experiance wiring PLC's years ago in industry, helping others wire large DCC layouts with lots of power districts, stationary decoders, wireless throttles, etc, is that the point to point wire count is pretty high - much like what I do.
You build a circuit board on the bench and install it with whatever connections necessary. I build a modular relay panel on the bench and install it with whatever connections are necessary.
If we each have 20 turnouts and 20 pushbuttons, the field connection count will be the same. You have to get 2 wires to each of those devices and so do I.
Agreed, some of the basic hardware has been around a while, but the unified programing and control systems for it have been in constant evolution and was much harder years ago.
Many of my circuits are repetitive as well, used over and over. Only the multi turnout route control and the relaterd signal logic in a given interlocking is custom to that location. And even that is a building block system of the same circuits.
I have seen the photos you have posted of some of your projects. I see lots of wires.
Here is a sample of my system, this is from a layout I wired with my system for one of my friends.
This wiring handled 4 control blocks and 6 route determining turnouts. This layout did not have signaling or CTC and used manual turnouts that had position feedback to the control circuits.
The relay boards you see handle the one most connection intense part of my system, the push button cab selection circuit.
Again, ALL I AM SAYING, is that when you get into advanced DCC setups you ARE hooking up a lot of wires.
I think any photo of the underside of ANY DCC layout with advanced turnout control, signals and CTC with prove me right.
DCC costs were much higher 22 years ago when I developed my system, prices have come down, in real numbers and in inflation adjusted terms.
Again, I'm not arguing pros and cons of programing vs hard logic, I'm just saying, you put in a buttom, you have to get two wires to it. You put in a switch machine, you have to get two wires to it. You put in a signal, you have to get some number of wires to it - SAME AS ME. You put in a stationary decoder, it needs power, just like my relays - two more wires.
Propulsion circuit - YES, the throttles. In my system each throttle has its own power supply and it reaches the track in a totally discrete circuit. Detection is done inductively. When trains are stopped and no power in on the track, a high frequency signal that will trip the inductive detector is in the circuit. So my detection does not use any kind of voltage loss circuit.