Silver Pilot Use your layout as an example. How much distance must be between trains using the same route and how does control get changed from cab A to cab B.?
Use your layout as an example. How much distance must be between trains using the same route and how does control get changed from cab A to cab B.?
Since my layout, and train lengths, are different from Sheldon's, let me give you a slightly different outlook.
The Tomikawa Tani Tetsudo is operated by the staff-and-ticket system, so only one train may be on the railroad between stations/control points (not all of which are passing sidings, but all of which allow meets and passes.) This agrees with my prototype (JNR Katsuda-sen) which was still operating staff and ticket (with lower-quadrant semaphores and manual interlocking) in the 1960s. The TTT, as a pure point-to-point route, does not lend itself to continuous 'display' operation.
At present, trains operating in the netherworld can operate one per through route through each of the zones I have operational. This is sufficient to position trains where they need to be to operate the master schedule now, and will be sufficient when the JNR portion of the railroad is fully built out and operational. When visible track is built, the spacing of trains in the same direction will be two signal sections, which is also the total length of the single track between Tomikawa and Haruyama.
If two trains proceeding in the same direction will use the same track at station Alpha, but different tracks at station Omega, the following train is held by the auto-stop section at Alpha until the signal clears. The two tracks at Omega are set to different controllers (possibly at the Master, aka CTC, panel) and track power to the single track is routed by contacts slaved to the switch points. Sometime between arrival at Alpha and departure, the rotary switch controlling power to the Down track at Alpha will have to be turned to connect it to that train's arrival track at Omega - one click, by feel, possibly on the CTC panel. This will not change the controller powering the train, only the route by which power reaches the motor(s) of that train.
By no coincidence whatsoever, the distance between control points is just about three times the length of my longest train, the desired spacing if following the JNR's prototype practices on my chosen route in 1964.
If I simply wish to orbit a train in each direction to entertain mundane visitors, I can set six rotary switches for each train (12 total) and turn them loose under separate control. For each orbit, I will have to change four total switch positions, one at each end of the two single track sections. The rotaries, once set, will remain untouched. Total mainline length is about 50 meters - four scale kilometers or 20 fast-time kilometers (5:1 clock.)
Incidentally, the Japanese version of TTTO doesn't allow for trains to be run in sections. Each one has its very own timetable-authorized slot - even if it actually runs only once or twice a month. If a section DID have to be run (or a special movement such as the Imperial train) it would be given the number, and authority, of some 'not operating today' train on the timetable.
[EDIT: Yep, Paul, that's the monster I was referring to. Running a train with that thing would probably be enough to drive me back to modeling warships!]
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - TTTO, 24/30)
Paul and Silver Pilot,
Here are some photos of the system I built for a friends layout. It is a single track system works slightly differently, likely more like Chuck's discription but again with Aristo wireless throttles like mine.
The first photo is a picture of the panel for an intire town/passing siding area with industies, etc. Two opposing trains can approach the siding one takes the siding, The other can proceed through, then allowing the other to proceed. That whole operation requires pushing two buttons and throwing two ground throw turnouts.
The second photo is the under layout wiring required for that whole section. The only connections from that under layout panel to the layout arefour throttle bus conncections, four power feeds to track and two, two wire connections to contacts on the ground throws. The only connections between the under layout panel and the control panel are four CAT5 cables. these panels are built on the workbench and require only the hookups I discribed above, plus a control power feed.
Again, the only soldering is those little PB's on the control panel.
Sheldon
im not supersmart like some of you guys but whats all the fussin about. paul3 made good sense. dc and dcc have got good points and bad. i didnt like fliping atlas slide switches and buttons to set up bloks every time i run 2 trains and want to switch cars. another bugger for me was if i copled my atlas engines together with athern engines they fight each other! with dcc speed match now 3 of my engines can run copled without jerking and the headlites stay on. i learned how to do momentom. my engines take off slow and take time to stop. so now dcc makes me feel like a real train engineer.
I agree with DJ. After 5 pages let's just let it go and get back to enjoying the hobby, There is plenty of room for us all.
Joe
Mike C.
David,
First, Thank you.
I have never claimed it was easy to install, just easy to use.
But, its not as "complicated" as it looks.
That relay panel was built at a workbench in under 2 hours, and installed and connceted to the existing layout wiring in about 1 hour.
Actually the "hard" work is the planning, and I know this is the part most of these guys don't get, or don't want to do.
What I don't want is to just "wing it" as I go along. I have a very detailed plan for most aspects of my railroad, and except for adapting scenery as needed, I follow it pretty close.
I have no interest in the way many operate today with DCC, where three or four guys just pull trains out on the main and go where ever watching out for the train ahead.
I like CTC/ABS mainline running, I like that big railroad feel. Engineers on the prototype get their marching orders and follow signals, we do that here too.
AND, as I have explained, I do like "display" running. And dispite quite a bit of research into computerized block control, I decided the simplest and best solution to display running was some simple cutoffs that turned the mainline into 4 seperate deticated loops, turn them on and let them go.
OR, when I 'm by myself, a few trains can cruise the main while I switch the yard.
It suits my needs. Not to stir this up more, but I suspect many in the hobby today do not have a clear set of operational or layout goals. And that's fine as long as they are having fun.
The layout shown in the picture is operated at least once a month by our group. Many in the group have DCC at home, they all have remarked about how easy it is. Yes, it has a small learning curve as does any layout or control system. But, it really is easy and requires very minimum "input" as you walk around with your train.
With DCC, you push a number of buttons to "aquire" the loco. We push one and off we go. We push a few more as we walk around, you don't, but likely you still throw turnout switches by one means or another. We do that as well and it does at least 50% of our cab assignments with that one action you will be doing anyway.
So I hope this gives some of those new to this discussion some better insite into advanced DC.
And for those who don't know, I have looked at using DCC several times in the last 15 years. And everytime I got to what would be required on top of the DCC system for CTC/ABS features, I said what do I really need DCC for?
I have doubts that I would be in the hobby if I had to wire my current layout to operate under the system shown by you, Sheldon. I, too, admire your careful planning, your learning and understanding that led to your ability to figure out and construct this operating system for any layout, and the execution is waaaaaay better than what I can do...and have. But honestly, DCC made it so simple by comparison, and then the operation of a siding for me is simply to slide the leading set of point rails so that the closest train can take it, reline the points for the main, wait for the meet, and then line the next set of points to rejoin the main when the higher priority train has gone by. So, I am operating points as you do, but with a skewer, and I have to push no buttons.
-Crandell
One more thought,
Apples to apples - The layout shown in the picture fills a whole basement and has eight panels similar to the one shown. Four trains can move freely about the mainline and meet at any of five major towns. Trains begin and end in two stagging yards. There is also a branch and narrow/dual guage that has two additonal throttles. As well as a large stub end terminal with freight and passenger yards and industries. The two staging yards are connected by a helix for "display operation". It has six wireless throttles.
If this layout was Wireless DCC it would require way more than two wires, and, I'm sorry but the power bus connected to the layout in 15 or more places is more than two wires. not to mention that several power districts, circuit breakers and possibly boosters would be desired. Not to mention loco net connections, wireless tranceivers and the like. All which would need to be "wired".
And my own layout, 800 sq ft room, 8 scale miles of double track, 10 wireless thorttles, 25' long eight track freight yard, staging yards, CTC panel, signals, tower panels for turnouts at interlockings, etc,etc, was going to be a lot of wiring DCC or DC - I know that. No way two wires was going to do it.
OK, I know this is more than many of you have plans for, or, you plan to work up to it "slowly". I've been at this 40 years, this is my dream layout and I know excatly what I want. I don't need or want to go at it "slowly" or figure it out as I go. I have an intergrated plan and am under construction.
DC or DCC it would require a ton of hardware and wire. This way intergates the construction, costs less total and meets my needs without paying for features I don't need or want.
selector I have doubts that I would be in the hobby if I had to wire my current layout to operate under the system shown by you, Sheldon. I, too, admire your careful planning, your learning and understanding that led to your ability to figure out and construct this operating system for any layout, and the execution is waaaaaay better than what I can do...and have. But honestly, DCC made it so simple by comparison, and then the operation of a siding for me is simply to slide the leading set of point rails so that the closest train can take it, reline the points for the main, wait for the meet, and then line the next set of points to rejoin the main when the higher priority train has gone by. So, I am operating points as you do, but with a skewer, and I have to push no buttons. -Crandell
Crandell, I get it, if that works for you great! But many in DCC are spending big bucks on decoder controlled turnouts, computer interfaces for CTC, etc, etc. They have more than "two" wires.
Compairing their layouts to yours is the same as compairing mine to yours. Its not a DC vs DCC issue. Its do you want signals and remote turnouts and dispatcher control - all those things take wire, hardware and money with DC or DCC.
In fact, my secondary turnouts are all ground throws just like they would be on the prototype. But ones on the main, that would be tower controlled, are just that, tower controlled with complete interlocking signals and all. In fact, you can't even throw a turnout while the train in in the interlocking territory just like on the prototype.
Its all about different goals. But so many DCC users/supporters have come to believe it is the perfect solution to every layout. While I would look at many layout plans or their owners goal "list" and say they need DCC, that is not true in every case.
DJO im not supersmart like some of you guys but whats all the fussin about. paul3 made good sense. dc and dcc have got good points and bad. i didnt like fliping atlas slide switches and buttons to set up bloks every time i run 2 trains and want to switch cars. another bugger for me was if i copled my atlas engines together with athern engines they fight each other! with dcc speed match now 3 of my engines can run copled without jerking and the headlites stay on. i learned how to do momentom. my engines take off slow and take time to stop. so now dcc makes me feel like a real train engineer.
DJ,I'm sorry but,I am a mite confused here.
Why would you need to flip/slide a switch every time you switch cars?
Are you also saying a locomotive on DC can't creep from tie to tie or have smooth slow starts?
Are you saying by using "momentum" on a DC pack one can't have the same slow start/stop results as you do with DCC?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Crandell,I am a simple man that believes in simple ways and a firmed believer in the KISS method.
I can wire blocks on my layouts by using Atlas selectors and plastic rail joiners on the common rail..
How about one wire to each block?
It doesn't get any easier then that.
BRAKIEI can wire blocks on my layouts by using Atlas selectors and plastic rail joiners on the common rail..
That's fine if you're a noobie. But ALL of the modelrailroaders I grew up with moved on to toggle and rotary switches on the fascia. Then we found DCC and never went back.
Driline BRAKIEI can wire blocks on my layouts by using Atlas selectors and plastic rail joiners on the common rail.. That's fine if you're a noobie. But ALL of the modelrailroaders I grew up with moved on to toggle and rotary switches on the fascia. Then we found DCC and never went back.
Or if you're 70+ years old and are, to paraphrase Bobby Unser, an analog mind stuck in a digital world. Brakie, Sheldon & TT probably haven't figured out the whole digital TV thing yet either; We should all be impressed that they've figured out computers and the internet. Though we know that TT hasn't figured out digital cameras and how to post pictures yet.
Silver PilotOr if you're 70+ years old and are, to paraphrase Bobby Unser, an analog mind stuck in a digital world. Brakie, Sheldon & TT probably haven't figured out the whole digital TV thing yet either; We should all be impressed that they've figured out computers and the internet. Though we know that TT hasn't figured out digital cameras and how to post pictures yet.
Actually, I'm 52, a Residential Designer specializing in Historic Restoration. In a past life as an industrial electrical construction designer and project manager I designed and installed some of the first installs of Programable Logic Controllers in the early 1980's.
I have designed and built HiFi speakers systems and was on the cuting edge of surround sound in the early eightes as well. I am an accomplished Electrician, Carpenter, Plumber, HVAC tech, and darn good auto mechanic if it was built before 1985.
I don't fear technoligy and I'm not in love with it either. It's a tool. Newer is not always better, sometimes its just different.
And, I restored this house, orginally built in 1901, which has since appeared of HGTV's Restore America and did more than half the work myself. Technology? The house has X10 home automation and I have a killer home theater with speakers I designed and built.
And the trains are above the six car garage you can see part of in the background.
Silver Pilot Driline BRAKIEI can wire blocks on my layouts by using Atlas selectors and plastic rail joiners on the common rail.. That's fine if you're a noobie. But ALL of the modelrailroaders I grew up with moved on to toggle and rotary switches on the fascia. Then we found DCC and never went back. Or if you're 70+ years old and are, to paraphrase Bobby Unser, an analog mind stuck in a digital world. Brakie, Sheldon & TT probably haven't figured out the whole digital TV thing yet either; We should all be impressed that they've figured out computers and the internet. Though we know that TT hasn't figured out digital cameras and how to post pictures yet.
Actually I found computers,gaming systems,cell phones,my oild VCR,DVD, digital tv and my micowave easy to use.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL...Compairing their layouts to yours is the same as compairing mine to yours. Its not a DC vs DCC issue. Its do you want signals and remote turnouts and dispatcher control - all those things take wire, hardware and money with DC or DCC.
Okay, I can see that. I don't have signalling and block detection, so in that respect, I understand that you are using a DC system to largely automate a layout. It would be quite involved in DCC as well.
Thanks, Sheldon.
Why complicate the simple and end up with a rat nest of wires? One doesn't have to be newbie to use selectors since they make installing blocks easy..I even know of a club that uses 'em in their yard.
I found and use DCC for about a year and decided it was ok but,I decided for a 1 horse ISL DCC was overkill.I sold my Empire Builder II to another guy and he sold it after building a rather large ISL.
BRAKIE DJO im not supersmart like some of you guys but whats all the fussin about. paul3 made good sense. dc and dcc have got good points and bad. i didnt like fliping atlas slide switches and buttons to set up bloks every time i run 2 trains and want to switch cars. another bugger for me was if i copled my atlas engines together with athern engines they fight each other! with dcc speed match now 3 of my engines can run copled without jerking and the headlites stay on. i learned how to do momentom. my engines take off slow and take time to stop. so now dcc makes me feel like a real train engineer. DJ,I'm sorry but,I am a mite confused here. Why would you need to flip/slide a switch every time you switch cars? Are you also saying a locomotive on DC can't creep from tie to tie or have smooth slow starts? Are you saying by using "momentum" on a DC pack one can't have the same slow start/stop results as you do with DCC?
mikesmowers I hooked up my PSX-AR auto reverser yesterday and it is simply fantastic. I just can't get over how well it works, I do not understand how but it does. I simply wanted to brag a little on how well DCC works. Mike
I hooked up my PSX-AR auto reverser yesterday and it is simply fantastic. I just can't get over how well it works, I do not understand how but it does. I simply wanted to brag a little on how well DCC works. Mike
I'm assuming the OP's PSX-AR auto reverser automatically adjusts the polarity for reverse loops.
The DCC discussion y'all are having is entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out the part about wanting to have a reverse loop on a model railroad. Modeling the end terminal of passenger train operations, and the need to turn the train to keep the cars in the same order, I understand. Modeling a unit coal train while its under the tipple and on a balloon track, I understand. I never understood what other reasons there would be to turn an entire train, just to send it going back to where it came from.
Just avoid all the toggles and switches, then the need to invest time and money in DCC, by not having the reverse loop to begin with.
Doug
- Douglas
DrilineBRAKIEI can wire blocks on my layouts by using Atlas selectors and plastic rail joiners on the common rail.. That's fine if you're a noobie...
BRAKIEI can wire blocks on my layouts by using Atlas selectors and plastic rail joiners on the common rail..
That's fine if you're a noobie...
Reagardless of the complexity of the wiring or how complex the control circuits, you still can't put 2 DC engines in the same track block and control them independently. Ain't gonna happen. DCC its no big deal.
Anyway you cut it, in DC the control is divided into descrete track segments, in DCC the control is assigned to descrete vehicles.
For the vast majority of model railroad operation you can make the DC track segments small enough that its a non-issue or you can mange the situation to avoid getting two engines into the same track segment. With DCC its not something that has to be considered at all.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Reading this discussion reminds me of a couple of visits I made to a relatively famous large layout for operations sessions about 7 years ago. This layout is extremely well done and was a DC system the first time I operated on it. It has been on the cover of MR and RMC. It had a large master control panel and one person (who was the designer of the panel) manned it for the entire operating session. I had a lot of fun operating on the railroad. Afterward we had a long discussion about DC vs. DCC. The owner concluded he was going to stick with DC for all of the usual reasons sited in this thread but particularly the problem of owning a large number of beautiful brass steam engines that he didn't want to install decoders in loomed large. Fast forward to 2 years later and he had converted to DCC. The same guy who had designed the main control panel was now installing decoders. The master panel was still there but it was disconnected and unmanned. It was the same beautiful layout but everyone agreed that the switch to DCC had enhanced the operations potential of this railroad. I think that one can have a very good DC model railroad that is fun to operate, but DCC definitely enhances the fun operations potential IMO. - Nevin
NevinW Reading this discussion reminds me of a couple of visits I made to a relatively famous large layout for operations sessions about 7 years ago. This layout is extremely well done and was a DC system the first time I operated on it. It has been on the cover of MR and RMC. It had a large master control panel and one person (who was the designer of the panel) manned it for the entire operating session. I had a lot of fun operating on the railroad. Afterward we had a long discussion about DC vs. DCC. The owner concluded he was going to stick with DC for all of the usual reasons sited in this thread but particularly the problem of owning a large number of beautiful brass steam engines that he didn't want to install decoders in loomed large. Fast forward to 2 years later and he had converted to DCC. The same guy who had designed the main control panel was now installing decoders. The master panel was still there but it was disconnected and unmanned. It was the same beautiful layout but everyone agreed that the switch to DCC had enhanced the operations potential of this railroad. I think that one can have a very good DC model railroad that is fun to operate, but DCC definitely enhances the fun operations potential IMO. - Nevin
Neven:
One question--how did that large number of brass locos work with DCC decoders in them? Not trying to be argumentative (I've gotten in enough trouble on this thread, LOL!), but I've heard horror stories of smooth-running brass locos turning into jerky, quirky prima donnas because of pickup problems once converted to DCC.
In my case, I've got close to 50 brass locos that I've spent a lot of time fine-tuning to run extremely well on my DC layout, and the thought of retrofitting all of them (because I run ALL of them) with decoders not only sounds prohibitively expensive, but pretty darned 'iffy' once I get into them to do the retrofitting.
I suppose if I were modeling the present era instead of the 1940's and running nothing but diesel, I'd be prone to try DCC, but at my age, the thought of literally 'starting all over again' with the fleet that I've got just doesn't sound worth it.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
When I was there he was much farther along with converting the diesel fleet than the steam. The steam that had been converted tended to be rather large and articulated , but ran very well. I would say about 30% of the steam fleet had been converted. Both the owner and his friends are clearly exceptional modelers who have spent a lot time taking apart and improving brass locomotives. So these were really tuned engines to begin with.
I have had some problems when I have converted a small HO 0-6-0 to DCC so I know what you are describing. I went to track sliders to improve pickup. My layout requires small steam so dealing with electrical pick-up issues is going to be a problem for me either way. - Nevin
Nevin:
Small or large, track-sliders are an absolute boon to we steam runners, especially locos that only pick up from one side of the rail. All of my brass--locos and tenders-- have been equipped with them, from my 4-6-0 clear up to my big articulateds, and the result in response and smooth running has been absolutely remarkable.
For a while, while I was converting, I almost got the feeling that I was keeping Tomar Industries in business, LOL! Best thing I ever discovered.
dehusman Reagardless of the complexity of the wiring or how complex the control circuits, you still can't put 2 DC engines in the same track block and control them independently. Ain't gonna happen. DCC its no big deal. Anyway you cut it, in DC the control is divided into descrete track segments, in DCC the control is assigned to descrete vehicles. For the vast majority of model railroad operation you can make the DC track segments small enough that its a non-issue or you can mange the situation to avoid getting two engines into the same track segment. With DCC its not something that has to be considered at all.
The biggest area that you see the difference between DC and DCC that Dave is talking about is in an engine terminal or facility. There is no way that DC can compare to DCC when it comes to storing, moving or hostling engines around a servicing facility. 2,3, or 4 locos on one storage track. Pick the one (call them A, B, C & D) you want to move, select it on your throttle and move it. If you want to move Engine B from the fuel track to a train in the yard, then select A, move it of the way from Track 1 to Track 2, then select B and move it to the train in the yard. If both A and B and C are parked on the same track 1 inch apart you'll have a difficult time doing it in DC, but not in DCC.
davidmbedard twhiteIn my case, I've got close to 50 brass locos that I've spent a lot of time fine-tuning to run extremely well on my DC layout, and the thought of retrofitting all of them (because I run ALL of them) with decoders not only sounds prohibitively expensive, but pretty darned 'iffy' once I get into them to do the retrofitting. Tom Poor argument. If one can afford 50 brass locos, there is no reason they cannot afford decoders for them. Consider for the price of one of them, you are into a top-end DCC system and many decoders. David B
twhiteIn my case, I've got close to 50 brass locos that I've spent a lot of time fine-tuning to run extremely well on my DC layout, and the thought of retrofitting all of them (because I run ALL of them) with decoders not only sounds prohibitively expensive, but pretty darned 'iffy' once I get into them to do the retrofitting. Tom
Poor argument. If one can afford 50 brass locos, there is no reason they cannot afford decoders for them. Consider for the price of one of them, you are into a top-end DCC system and many decoders.
David B
David:
If you think I bought all 50 of those brass locos yesterday, you are definitely in need of a Reality Check. I'm 70 years old, I bought my first--and still operational--brass loco at the age of 20. Fifty years ago. Which averages out to about one a year, if you do the math.
One locomotive per year is a LOT less expensive than fifty decoders in one fell swoop.
Get real.
I think Dave hit it. With DCC, the operational aspect of the layout is completely independent of any track wiring or power distribution. If you model a specific prototype and you design the DC system to support that, great, it will work just fine. But for someone who is more of a freelancer, what if you do this, and then after several years of satisfying operating sessions decide to try something different? Either you rewire, or you work within the limitations established by the fixed block locations. So there you have it - building 'the big one' or the 'last one' and have a fixed operating scheme in mind, well, then the more rigid design of DC control won't be a problem. But not set for life, the flexibility of DCC will come in handy should you want to change operating schemes sometime down the line.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
DJO BRAKIE DJO im not supersmart like some of you guys but whats all the fussin about. paul3 made good sense. dc and dcc have got good points and bad. i didnt like fliping atlas slide switches and buttons to set up bloks every time i run 2 trains and want to switch cars. another bugger for me was if i copled my atlas engines together with athern engines they fight each other! with dcc speed match now 3 of my engines can run copled without jerking and the headlites stay on. i learned how to do momentom. my engines take off slow and take time to stop. so now dcc makes me feel like a real train engineer. DJ,I'm sorry but,I am a mite confused here. Why would you need to flip/slide a switch every time you switch cars? Are you also saying a locomotive on DC can't creep from tie to tie or have smooth slow starts? Are you saying by using "momentum" on a DC pack one can't have the same slow start/stop results as you do with DCC? brakie i was talking about flipping for the blok on my main tracks and sideings. all of my engines creep on dc but i cant run atlas and atherns together on dc without them bucking like cranky horses in a barn. something about the gear size i think. but on dcc its a peace of cake! the momentom for dcc is better than the dc powerpak because you can ajust it from super long take off to quik take off. my engines got hot after a while on dc momentom. with dcc i can set my engines to take off pulling a 30 car train and when i turn the control down to 0 it still takes the train over 1 minute to stop. like i said it makes me feel like a real engineer. on dcc i run engines not track bloks. i used to bad mouth dcc. now it lets me have fun.
DJ,Like I said I was a mite confused because I have done all of what you mention.
You do know the higher you set the speed knob the longer it takes for the engine to start moving.I am probably among the few that likes momentum.
Atlas and Athearn uses a 14:1 gear ratio..The difference is in the motor's circuit draw..However,I seen Genesis and Atlas locomotives play very well together.
One big problem with DC is the modeler.Way to many times I seen block overkill on small to medium size layouts..There is no real reason to block a industrial siding or every 36" piece of flex track...Many blocks can be eliminated by using power routed turnouts..Of course that goes against the magazine "experts" but,it does work..
On some of by 12"x12' ISL the whole layout is one big block with no bus and feeder wire since there is no need.
DC can be very simple or complex just like DCC.
My DCC operation was very basic.2 wires to the track and other then consisting no CV settings.
The only reason I went DCC was for sound.When sound came available for DC use with a Atlas Quantum Engineer Controller that killed DCC on my 1 horse ISL..However,I no longer have a sound equipped locomotive or a HO ISL since changing my primary scale from HO to N so I could hve a home layout and I still don't have any need for DCC...
Now,I was the hostler on a DCC layout..I handle roughly 70 locomotives and by the time the ops session was over I felt like a accountant!
That was the last time I signed up for that job!!!
twhiteOne locomotive per year is a LOT less expensive than fifty decoders in one fell swoop. Get real.