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.
Sheldon
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
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?
Mike C.
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
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.
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.
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:
Evidently my post was the one that has been referred to as the "Cheap Shot" post, and if so, I definitely apologize for the problems it has caused.
What I meant to state--and it was either mis-read or I didn't state it well--was that I'm very glad that DCC works for those who like it. It just doesn't work for my particular situation. Different strokes for different folks.
Sorry it caused all the ruckus.
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!
tomikawaTT,You mean this control panel?
And the back:
This is Cab 7 of 8 mainline DC cab panels we had at the South Shore Model Railway Club. This particular panel was built in the late 1970's along with cabs 5, 6, & 8 when the layout size was doubled. Cabs 1 to 4 were built in the early 1950's. They were in continuous use until 1998 when we moved to Hingham, MA. All 8 mainline cabs had around 50 toggles. Plus, we had 2 trolley panels, 1 narrow gauge panel, 12 yard panels, and 2 switching area panels. Most of these other panels averaged 10 to 20 toggles each.
Fun, eh?
I do respect the heck out of people who can do this stuff with DC. I know the kind of effort it takes. But I'd rather be doing other things...and I like working with electrical stuff.
Sheldon,MZL and it's like has been around for 70 years? Since 1940?And please don't bring in soldering tortoise machines. You have to do that regardless of the control system. With a DC layout, you have to do that and solder toggles/buttons. With DCC you can avoid this extra soldering if you wish to (obviously, hard-wired decoders are the exception here, but one can buy only DCC ready or DCC installed locos).While I have not operated a true MZL-like layout, I have seen DC layouts like the North Shore Model Railroad Club in Wakefield, MA and the Bay State Society of Model Engineers in Roslindale, MA. Both, before DCC, used tethered and wireless DC control systems (BSSME has three layouts: N, HO, & O). I've also been under the Museum of Science and Industry's HO layout which uses elevator control systems to run it's DC layout. I've used Aristo's radio system at the defunct & long gone Norton, MA club with rotary knobs. I don't have a lot of 1st hand knowledge in the more exotic DC systems I freely admit. But I do bring a lot of DCC and more basic DC knowledge to the table.
As to the "cheap shot"... You managed to stay out of it for 50 whole minutes...amd just 15 min. after the "cheap shot" post. And the supposed "cheap shot" was a statement of fact for many modelers. I believe that toggle flipping is more common than you think. Yet, I managed to keep from posting at all to the DC-only thread on the Electrical Forum here at MR despite numerous and real "cheap shots" from the DC users.
The big difference between a DT400 and your system is that once I plug my address into the DCC throttle, I don't have to push any more buttons no matter how long I run the train or how many other trains are running.
Paul A. Cutler III
Yeah, I'd hate for my cat to get loose and find a complex DC system. It would take forever to fix it. With DCC you just connect the 2 wires back up and you're running. A complex DC system actually sounds neat to me, but it's still limited to the configuration tha was set up some time in the past. The main difference with DCC is you can do the same things and more without any wiring, button pushing, or switch throwing except for the cab. Kind of reminds me of the Indiana Jones Scene when he confronts an swordsman who dazzles him with a show before attacking. Indiana does a duh look, pulls out his gun and shoots him. The Swordsman being the DC guy of course. Look at me and what I can do. DCC says Just do it and boom. (Here's the scene for those who never saw it)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DzcOCyHDqc
However If a complex DC system runs well and the user's are happy with it I see no reason to change it, unless a change of the layout is planned.
Springfield PA
Soooo, technically speaking you're not flipping toggle switches. Instead you're pushing buttons along the path of the train to make a cab selection. Semantics?
Your posts make it sound like having walkaround DC cabs so you're "not anchored to control panels" is some new, amazing technology. Its been around for 30+ years and wireless DC is not new either. You talk about being able to install an additional set of pushbuttons "at any logical place they would need to change a cab assignment" as some big benefit of such a DC system. I helped build a DC control system 30 years ago that allowed multiple control panels to control a block. It wasn't difficult to do, just a lot of wiring. It's called dispatching and part of the operating scheme design for a layout. The club I was in had 6 mainline cabs, mutiple dispatching panels etc. It's how it was designed to be operated.
Walkaround DC control is easy. With tethered control you can just add a set of plug ins any "logical place" they're needed. Wireless is just some additional hardware.
What it really sounds like is that you've traded one type of complexity for a more complex system that you believe is better because it means not flipping toggle switches. To each their own.
The bunnies are great.
I don't want to beat this dead horse, but some apparently were not around when we put him down the first few times.
The book will be finished soon, if things go at least close to the current plan and then I'll just e-mail them a copy.
My layout is a double track continous mainline that will be about 8 scale miles long when complete.
Train lengths are typically 18-25'. Each signal block (and primary electrcal section) is about 2-3 times that, some are longer. So the short answer is the following train will not get a green until the section ahead is empty.
At each interlocking along the mainline there is a panel for turnouts and cab selection which is all done with small lighted pushbuttons. All mainline turnouts, crossovers and diverging routes are selected with the touch of one button. In other words, with a complete interlocking of two oposite crossovers and a diverging route to lets say a yard or branch, one only needs to push one button and all conflicting turnout routes are cleared to the desired route.
With the touch of one more button, the wireless cab in your hand is assigned to the next section.
The trackage through the interlocking requires no cab selection, that is automatic based on turnout position. And is done in such a way as to create a buffer section that prevents a train for over running its assigned trackage.
If you fail to properly assign your cab or align the route, the train will simply stop in the interlocking. It will not be "taken over" by anyone elses throttle.
The layout is designed to support two east bound and two west bound trains on the main, and then has 6 other cabs used in yards, industrial areas and a single track branch line.
The key here is that the layout, signal system, operational scheme and physical configuration are intergrated and designed at the same time. I realize not everyone wants/needs/can do/is interested/etc/etc in doing this.
I have designed and installed this system on an existing single track layout replacing an old rotary switch/teathered throttle system. On that layout it works a little different. It is hard to explain in words, easy to demenstrate.
Back to my layout - operators can assign their cab to a section at the interlocking control panel on either end of that section. That is why its done with lighted pushbuttons. OR they can also be assigned at a central dispatchers panel.
This system uses less than half the number of what you would call "blocks" than any conventional toggle switch/rotary switch cab control system. And, operators are not anchored to control panels but rather walk around with their wireless throttle just like a DCC layout. At any logical place they would need to change a cab assignment, an additional set of buttons can be installed, there is no limit on the number of sets of buttons a section (block) can have.
The signaling, including complete working interlocking signals, is all intergrated into the cab selction and turnout route control functions. you have your choice of full blown 3 color signals with approach signals or simplified quasi three color (using only two woking colors on each head) for less expense and easier wiring.
This only begins to explain it. I am writing a book to document it all, hope to have it done this spring. Maybe you will see it a magazine.
davidmbedard ....dont make me bring out my dead horse. David B
....dont make me bring out my dead horse.
David B
OK Dave--
Having not seen this before--where did you find this lovely Gif--mmmm?
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Silver Pilot Sheldon, With the system you've described who far behind the 1st train can a second train operate along the same length of track, with the same route? Think of a passenger train in 2 sections. They're both going to the same destination, how far behind the first section is the second section, with independent speed control?
Sheldon,
With the system you've described who far behind the 1st train can a second train operate along the same length of track, with the same route? Think of a passenger train in 2 sections. They're both going to the same destination, how far behind the first section is the second section, with independent speed control?
Again, that is a function of layout design and layout operational goals. No answer I give you would be universally correct. On the prototype even a following section would be at least one signal block behind in CTC or ABS controlled teritory. That's the kinds of modeling I am interested in, I want working signals, above and more importantly than the other features DCC has to offer.
I understand those of you who have different goals, but fact is, with the system I use and the size/scope of the layout I am building, I can have all the control I need and signals for what it would cost just to control the trains with DCC, before you even thought about signals.
Not wanting sound, not needing consisting, and being happy with whatever other compromises, what I have gets me where I want to be for much less. And provides the type of user interface I prefer. I personally dislike most of the DCC handhelds on the market and the endless sequences of button pushing to assign, unassign, consist, etc,etc. you push buttons on a DT400, I push a few puttons on panels spread around the layout, not really much different from where I sit.
Paul3 Sheldon,Many people still flip toggles or turn rotary switches. Please don't try to pretend otherwise. I agree it's not a great way to run a railroad, but it's simple to understand and execute. As you know, it's been the subject of many books and magazine articles over the past 70 years or so. Toggle flipping, for many of us, was the best we could do at the time, and for those that won't change it will remain so. Not everyone is an electrical engineer or electronics hobbyists that enjoys creating circuit designs or even soldering. There's a lot of people in this hobby that just want to run trains and don't have access to almost free electronic gear, a 4-year electrical degree, or 10+ years experience in the electronics field. Somehow, I'm thinking that the electrical hobbyists are not the majority of model railroaders.
Sheldon,Many people still flip toggles or turn rotary switches. Please don't try to pretend otherwise. I agree it's not a great way to run a railroad, but it's simple to understand and execute. As you know, it's been the subject of many books and magazine articles over the past 70 years or so. Toggle flipping, for many of us, was the best we could do at the time, and for those that won't change it will remain so.
Not everyone is an electrical engineer or electronics hobbyists that enjoys creating circuit designs or even soldering. There's a lot of people in this hobby that just want to run trains and don't have access to almost free electronic gear, a 4-year electrical degree, or 10+ years experience in the electronics field. Somehow, I'm thinking that the electrical hobbyists are not the majority of model railroaders.
And systems like Chuck and I use have been well documented in those same 70 years. And are in fact no harder to build than those with rotary switches or toggles for every "block", which is what we DON'T have or need with our type of systems. The only soldering I do in building my system is the connections to the very small lighted pushbuttons that control turnouts and cab assignments. All the rest is screw terminals and crimp sleeves with larger, easy to work with 16-18 guage wire or terminal strips with CAT5 cable. No more soldering than some guy with 50-100 slow motion switch machines and mini toggles and LED's on a DCC layout.
And, if you have never operated on a MZL layout, or a jumper plug layout or a multi cab sectional layout like the DC portion of K-10, how can you judge it? I have operated a number of DCC layouts.
Paul3twhite,Okay...but let me put it this way: This is a clearly titled DCC thread. Why are there the usual contingent of DC users like yourself, tomikawaTT, & Sheldon all posting here? What persuaded all of you to click on the link in the first place? Other than for the entertainment, that is.
I was a quiet observer until the DC/toggle switch cheap shot thing, after that I made one simple statement and then just answered comments and questions. And still gave full credit to the fact that DCC has specific advantages for some people/layouts/needs/wants.
Paul3jeffrey-wimberly,I don't see why reverse loops cannot be controlled automatically as with DCC. Most people never tried because of the work & expense involved, but using detector circuits of one kind or another wouldn't be that hard to trip a relay to reverse polarity. Even little infrared beams would work.
They can be, I've seen it done, and the orginal MZL makes them pretty seemless anyway.
Brother Bedard,
ROFLMAO!!!
In one not so long ago thread, a poster had a photo of one of his club's block assignment panels. I will be quick to admit that if I was faced by a 400-switch array of toggles I'd change systems in a New York minute!
My version of MZL differs from Sheldon's in that I do use rotary switches - but not many, and they don't have to be turned often.
I also use toggles - to control structure lighting, or as manual point throwers for non-powered switches. (Even manual switches need track power routing contacts - and not just for hot frog control.)
Note that I don't recommend MZL for new or inexperienced modelers, or for anyone who is happy with their present system, DC or DCC. Like my choice of prototype, my choice of control system was driven by a very personal list of givens and druthers.
Above all, have fun.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Silver PilotSorry Sheldon, but it seems that your comment about being able to run multiple trains in DC without flipping toggle switches is misleading, based on your response quoted above. Pushbuttons, toggle switches or a dispatcher at a CTC panel - some kind of switch is being thrown at some point in the process of running multiple trains. As the Mythbusters would say - "Myth: You can run multiple trains on a DC system without throwing switches - BUSTED"
Do you throw switches to align turnouts on your DCC layout? My turnout controls do most, and in some cases, all of the power routing for the cabs. This is a function of layout design and desired operational schemes, not a function of DC or DCC.
And, there are DC systems other than what I use, computerized block control for one, that do exactly that, run multiple trains without throwing any switches.
The point is this, the image of someone franticly flipping toggles on a central control panel to control several trains is an untrue image of many advanced DC cab control systems that have been developed over the years.
Fact is I can walk around with my train and push a few buttons at junctions and interlockings to align turnouts and route power without refering to or being at a central panel and without "doubling back". Another operator can follow behind me and ajust his routes as needed.
OR as an option, the CTC Dispatcher can assign those routes and the Engineers just run the trains and obey the signals. From the Engineer's point of view, how is that any different than DCC? If I'm all alone, the whole railroad can be asigned to my throttle and I can go anywhere with my wireless throttle.
I only run one train at a time OR have them on independent routes OR have a crew with an Engineer for each train. I have no interest in trying to operate two trains by myself on the same route.
My choices, I understand they are not for everyone.
tstage Time honored or not, the above sure begs the question whether DC is cheaper than DCC in this particular situation. Sheldon, you've noted several times in other similar discussion threads that the cost of outfitting a large amount of locomotives would get expensive. For $1,800, I could outfit 100 locomotives with NCE D13SJR decoders and buy a good DCC system and STILL have a good chunk of change left over in my pocket. (Thankfully, I only have a dozen or so locomotives. LOL!) ATLANTIC CENTRALTrack plans and control systems should be tailored to the needs/wants of the user. There is no perfect track plan and no perfect control system. I would agree with you totally on this.
Time honored or not, the above sure begs the question whether DC is cheaper than DCC in this particular situation.
Sheldon, you've noted several times in other similar discussion threads that the cost of outfitting a large amount of locomotives would get expensive. For $1,800, I could outfit 100 locomotives with NCE D13SJR decoders and buy a good DCC system and STILL have a good chunk of change left over in my pocket. (Thankfully, I only have a dozen or so locomotives. LOL!)
ATLANTIC CENTRALTrack plans and control systems should be tailored to the needs/wants of the user. There is no perfect track plan and no perfect control system.
I would agree with you totally on this.
I agree its not cheaper in this case and I made no such claim about K-10 or this type of system, I simply pointed out its an old idea that works well in some cases. For the type of operation K-10 is, its a good system, since they are a public layout where people bring their own stuff.
We don' wan' no stinkin' flame wars......okay?
Surely, a person can be pleased and compleat with a DC-operated and silent railroad. If he says as much, great! He's enjoying the hobby, which is hopefully everyone's goal. Complicated, expensive, simple and cheap, who cares...we all determine our way ahead.
Similarly, if DCC makes your experience 'the greatest', as the title of the thread says it is, then that is the judgement of those who are not squarely in the experience I described in the previous paragraph.
The bench is plenty long for all of us to enjoy the trains that pass in front of us, guys.
I have been reading on other forums for about two days now that MTH seems to be ready to offer their HO engines in DCC, or DCC-ready, beginning in April some time. This can only be true if they have reconsidered their original apparent position about sticking strictly to their DCS control systems.
It's about time....
ATLANTIC CENTRALcudaken K-10 model train has two DC loops on his layout. Each loop has around 10 MRC 9500's. Each one controls around 30 feet of track, then plastic rail joiners, then next 9500 picks up from there. Cuda Ken This too is a time honored method of DC control that works very well for some layout designs. Sheldon
cudaken K-10 model train has two DC loops on his layout. Each loop has around 10 MRC 9500's. Each one controls around 30 feet of track, then plastic rail joiners, then next 9500 picks up from there. Cuda Ken
K-10 model train has two DC loops on his layout. Each loop has around 10 MRC 9500's. Each one controls around 30 feet of track, then plastic rail joiners, then next 9500 picks up from there.
Cuda Ken
This too is a time honored method of DC control that works very well for some layout designs.
So, if my arithmetic is correct:
(2) loops with (10) MRC 9500 power packs @ ~$90*/ea (discounted) = $1,800.
*[Prices for the MRC 9500s actually were anywhere from $87.59 to $145.98 ea. That would give a total range of $1,750 - $2,920 for all (20) twenty.]
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I use a pushbuttion system that allows the few "cab asignments" that are needed, to be made from multiple locoations as you walk around with your train, just like wireless DCC. And, my throttles are wireless DC throttles from Aristo Craft. OR, on the mainline, as the Dispatcher aligns your route and gives you clearance, his actions at the CTC panel assign your power for you. All you do is run the train. Signaling and CTC operation is a big part of my model railroading goals. My signal/CTC system is built right into my control system and my turnout control system. It is all intergrated. OR, for display runnng during an open house, deticated routes are assigned and trains can just run, on their own. Sheldon
I use a pushbuttion system that allows the few "cab asignments" that are needed, to be made from multiple locoations as you walk around with your train, just like wireless DCC. And, my throttles are wireless DC throttles from Aristo Craft.
OR, on the mainline, as the Dispatcher aligns your route and gives you clearance, his actions at the CTC panel assign your power for you. All you do is run the train. Signaling and CTC operation is a big part of my model railroading goals. My signal/CTC system is built right into my control system and my turnout control system. It is all intergrated.
OR, for display runnng during an open house, deticated routes are assigned and trains can just run, on their own.
Sorry Sheldon, but it seems that your comment about being able to run multiple trains in DC without flipping toggle switches is misleading, based on your response quoted above. Pushbuttons, toggle switches or a dispatcher at a CTC panel - some kind of switch is being thrown at some point in the process of running multiple trains. As the Mythbusters would say - "Myth: You can run multiple trains on a DC system without throwing switches - BUSTED"
John (UP 4-12-2),I would agree that DCS is more advanced than DCC, but better? Last week, an experienced DCC user (he's got NCE at home and uses Digitrax at our club) was simply trying to change the address on an MTH SD70Ace using the club Digitrax system. It took him 6 attempts before the number was changed. This is better?On a DCC sound decoder, my individual sound levels can be adjusted to suit my needs. On DCS, you get all or nothing. On DCC, I can move my sound & lighting effects around so if I want the coupler clank on F3 or F7 I can put it there. On DCS, you can't move a thing. On some DCC sound decoders, I can upload custom sound effects to represent any prototype I want. With DCS, what they give you is what you get...no more. If I want DCC in my 1970's-era brass steam loco, I have a multitude of choices to pick from. There are economical DCC decoders to fully involved sound systems. With DCS...you can't do anything about that old engine because DCS decoders don't exist outside factory installed units. All this is better?
While I want a simple control system, I don't want simplistic. To me, DCS crosses that line.
tomikawaTT,Cheap shots abound from both camps. The recent DC controls thread on the Electrical Forum proves that.
twhite,Okay...but let me put it this way: This is a clearly titled DCC thread. Why are there the usual contingent of DC users like yourself, tomikawaTT, & Sheldon all posting here? What persuaded all of you to click on the link in the first place? Other than for the entertainment, that is.
jecorbett,One can do various control systems without DCC or toggles and still run many trains at once. The simplest way is the Northlandz way...just have a seperate loop for every train and you're done. The other is to have your track switches throw power for you, so as each route is aligned, the power flows, too. Then there are more exotic control systems like progressive block (I think MIT uses something like that) and MZL.
jeffrey-wimberly,I don't see why reverse loops cannot be controlled automatically as with DCC. Most people never tried because of the work & expense involved, but using detector circuits of one kind or another wouldn't be that hard to trip a relay to reverse polarity. Even little infrared beams would work.
For those interested in more info on alterative DC systems, I refer you to this thread, or send me a PM.
It includes pictures of a similar system to mine that I built and installed on a friends layout.
http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/thread/1801092.aspx
EMD F7A jeffrey-wimberly cudaken twhiteWhat the Heck are Toggles, anyway? Tom, don't they live under bridges and start flame wars? Cuda Ken Hahahaaaaa!!! Where the heck are all those wires going?? I love this picture- subliminal nonsense, like a horse with a fuel filler cap on its ***!
jeffrey-wimberly cudaken twhiteWhat the Heck are Toggles, anyway? Tom, don't they live under bridges and start flame wars? Cuda Ken
cudaken twhiteWhat the Heck are Toggles, anyway? Tom, don't they live under bridges and start flame wars? Cuda Ken
twhiteWhat the Heck are Toggles, anyway?
Tom, don't they live under bridges and start flame wars?
Hahahaaaaa!!! Where the heck are all those wires going?? I love this picture- subliminal nonsense, like a horse with a fuel filler cap on its ***!
Actually come to think of it plug and play toggle switches for model railroading would be nice..
A P/P toggle switch could be used on DC or DCC layouts.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
cudaken Far as running 4 trains on DC with no switches or toggles, that easy! K-10 model train has two DC loops on his layout. Each loop has around 10 MRC 9500's. Each one controls around 30 feet of track, then plastic rail joiners, then next 9500 picks up from there. When I was DC, I could run two trains at the same time. Only switches I had where to kill power to spurs so engines could sit. Time to get out of here before there is incoming! Cuda Ken
Far as running 4 trains on DC with no switches or toggles, that easy!
When I was DC, I could run two trains at the same time. Only switches I had where to kill power to spurs so engines could sit.
Time to get out of here before there is incoming!
Track plans and control systems should be tailored to the needs/wants of the user. There is no perfect track plan and no perfect control system.