Forty NinerI guess since we didn't have the internet we didn't have anyone to tell us we were doing it all wrong...
My goodness, Mark! No one is implying that anyone is doing it "right" or "wrong". You choose DC. Terrific! I - and the majority of the other forum members here - have NO problem with that. I was just curious how well MUing works in DC.
My understanding (or misunderstanding) was that it was a little more challenging in DC because you had to match locomotives that ran well together. According to you and Sheldon, that doesn't appear to be the case.
With that said, please - don't feel you have to get into this "us against THEM" mentality when it comes to discussing both ways of operating a layout. We can learn and help one another. At least that's my position on the hobby. I guess I can only speak for myself though...
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Tom,
OK, I did not list all 130 locos and what will run with what - is that what you would like to see?
I model 1953-54, my railroad, and many protoytypes in that time period, still ran diesels pretty much as matched sets.
However, fact is all the following locos have basicly the same drive and will run together fine - Early to mid production Proto2000 BL2, GP7, GP9 (actually most all the GP series, but the rest are out of my era), and ALCO FA1 & FA2.
All Athearn Genesis F units have the same drive, so F3's and F7's readily interchange - that's about as much mixing as most prototypes were doing in 1954.
As for the steam, it is trial and error - BUT most manufacturers are using similar gear ratios - so locos with similar sized drivers often run fine together - regardless of brand.
I will restate the matchups I regularly use - Proto2000 2-8-8-2 with Spectrum 2-6-6-2, Bachmann 2-8-4 (now 2-8-2's on my railroad) with spectrum USRA Heavy 4-8-2's - and either of these will run with my BLI USRA Heavy 2-8-2's.
Actually at that point we have covered a large section of my loco fleet because it is made up of multiple copies of a select list of wheel arrangements and types.
With a little careful throttle work at startup, Spectrum 2-8-0's can be run with any or all of the steam listed above.
The above listed steam locos represent a total of 26 pieces.
Now we are left with only a few more steamers, two Spectrum 10 wheelers and three various Pacifics usually run alone on local passenger trains, two Reading T-1 Northerns, a 2-6-6-6 and a 2-6-6-4 that don't need helpers or doubles, and some switchers.
So out of 38 steam locos, 26 of them can be grouped in double or triple headers at will without regard for brand or wheel arrangement. and other matched sets like the 10 wheelers or Northerns can obviously be run together if needed.
Works fine for my needs.
Sheldon
Thanks, Sheldon. That's quite helpful. As mentioned in my previous response to Mark, I thought speed matching DC locomotives was more problematic - even among similar brands and makes of locomotives.
Doughless Thanks for your input Stein, As usual, you're trying to be helpful. And this response is more geared towards responding to the general reader, rather than specifically you. Even though I am pretty simple in my approach to the hobby, I've been involved in it for about 25 years. Relative the the vast experiences others have related here on the forum, I consider myself fairly uneducated in the more "sophisticated" aspects of the hobby. I am not really a beginner or a noob, but my simplistic desires on what I want to accomplish and choose to pursue probably makes it come off that way more so than reality.
Thanks for your input Stein, As usual, you're trying to be helpful. And this response is more geared towards responding to the general reader, rather than specifically you.
Even though I am pretty simple in my approach to the hobby, I've been involved in it for about 25 years. Relative the the vast experiences others have related here on the forum, I consider myself fairly uneducated in the more "sophisticated" aspects of the hobby. I am not really a beginner or a noob, but my simplistic desires on what I want to accomplish and choose to pursue probably makes it come off that way more so than reality.
Just to be clear - I was not in any way saying that running DC is inferior to running DCC (or by extension, that people running DC are inferior to people running DCC). Or the other way around - that people running DC are superior to people running DCC.
That is an underlying context that pop up way too often in these discussions - some people will get all steamed up and defensive, and act like you are calling them stupid (or unsophisticated) if you point out that there might be both weaknesses and strengths with whatever approach they have chosen.
My comments was not to imply that DCC is superior to DC. What I tried to point out was that some of the arguments you are using about why DCC is harder to use seem (to me) somewhat overblown.
For instance - you seemingly keep coming back to the idea that a typical application of DCC would be one operator juggling his or her attention between three trains all moving at the same time.
A person picking DCC in the belief that it will allow him to split his attention more easily between many trains moving at the same time (in a situation where you actually will need to interact with the trains - ie not in a situation where you have four parallel continuous run loops and trains running around and around and around like crazed rodents) will probably be in for a rude awakening, and quickly come to the realization that the limitation is with the operator, not with the way the motors in each engine get their power from the tracks.
To me, if someone had wanted to create a layout where multiple trains will be moving at the same time on intersecting paths, under the control of a single operator, DC, cab control with multiple throttles, partial automation (stopping at signals etc), and a central control desk, would be a far more obvious technical choice than a single DCC throttle, swapping desperately between trains.
One operator, multiple trains moving at the same time is more a matter of automation than a matter of DC or DCC.
And as I tried to point out, it does not take any more knowledge of electronics for a new modeler to deal with DCC than DC.
The "have to learn electronic" argument is fairly irrelevant when it comes to choosing DC or DCC. Basic wiring is simpler in DCC. While some forms of automation may very well be simpler in DC.
Doughless My main issue with DCC is not the language or the concepts involved, it is the impracticality of it in my particular situation, and I think A LOT of hobbyists situation's (more so than even they would admit), as well as the general redundancy of learning a new system.
My main issue with DCC is not the language or the concepts involved, it is the impracticality of it in my particular situation, and I think A LOT of hobbyists situation's (more so than even they would admit), as well as the general redundancy of learning a new system.
The "general redundancy" argument is (most likely) just a way of saying "I already know how to do this in one way, so I don't want to learn another way of doing it". I.e. plain old resistance to change.
That is very relevant for an experienced hobbyist who already have a working layout with DC control that works well.
Very few of us like to start over, deliberately replacing something we know how to do with something we do not know how to do. It is irrational to create extra work for yourself, especially if it is work you don't enjoy, and if you feel that the result doesn't give you anything useful new - that it is just change for change's sake.
But that argument is not very relevant for someone just starting out in the hobby - who will have to learn a lot of MR related things with very limited applications in other walks of life anyways - curve radii, turnout numbers, power handling around frogs, replacing couplers, what a switchback lead is, and so on and so forth.
Whether it in that situation makes most sense to learn to just turn an engine selector knob on a DCC throttle before giving commends to a second engine, or whether it makes most sense to learn enough to create a sensible number of sidings wired with on/off switches, cab control selectors or whatever depends on the inclinations of the new modeler.
To me, hard wiring a bunch of spurs with an extra on/off switch to create places where a second switcher can hold on an urban switching layout is far more work than it is worth. And it creates a system where you have to plan further ahead, and where changes take more time and effort - i.e a less flexible system.
Again - if you already have a functional system (that supports your existing and never changing operational scheme) in place, then it makes little sense to replace it if you do not get anything worthwhile from the change.
Hopefully most of us are smart enough to understand that.
But that is not an argument against DCC as such. Or an argument against choosing DCC for a new system. It is an argument against changing a existing system that already works for you.
Doughless Not getting into the vast differences of how one modeler operates his railroad from another, but you said yourself that typical one or two train control can be done just as easily with DC or DCC. When you add the third train, DCC becomes advantageous.
Not getting into the vast differences of how one modeler operates his railroad from another, but you said yourself that typical one or two train control can be done just as easily with DC or DCC. When you add the third train, DCC becomes advantageous.
No. The critical point is when you add a second engine. One engine - doesn't really matter whether you go DC or DCC. Especially if you don't give a hoot about playing with lights and sounds on that engine.
When you add a second engine, you will have to decide how to control two engines independent of each other. How you can have one engine standing still somewhere on your layout while the other one moves. Or how you can have two people each controlling their own engine.
That is the decision point where it makes sense to think about whether DCC would be a sensible option.
It is not at all a given that it is the most optimal choice for your layout and operating style.
Smile, Stein
Same situation for me, Tom, albeit on a smaller scale. (Still HO, just not so many locos. )
While I've sold off most of my diesels, I used Bachmann 2-8-0s, Athearn 2-8-2s and re-motored Athearn switchers in any combination, double or triple heading, or as pushers and/or mid-train helpers. Most of this activity was just to see how it would work, as my layout is mostly hills and curves. A long train can be stretched out over several curves (not all in the same direction, either) and on various grades, with parts of the train going uphill while other sections are going downhill. Slack action can be "interesting", to say the least. I've operated trains in excess of 70 cars, with multiple locos spaced throughout the train and was confident enough in their running compatibility to run them up the hill pictured below. The drop to the concrete floor ranges from 4' up to about 5' at the top of the grade, and with scenic landforms not yet in place, a derailment to either side finds the abyss. Since the track currently dead-ends at the top of the grade, the train was backed down the hill, too.
Normal operation sees trains with one loco and a car or two, other ones with 10 or 15 cars and either one or a pair of locos. Most trains switch all of the town through which they pass, and most trains over 15 cars are doubleheaded. I keep tonnage ratings for all locos and know how much power is required to get any particular train over the line. With simple doubleheading, it's nice when both locos run well with one another, but if the only second loco available is one of the exceptions, it's generally still used - whatever extra power it can provide will be needed. I wouldn't, however, run such a loco as a pusher.
I've also found that if more than one loco is required to move a train, you'll have fewer problems than if that extra loco is "just for show".
Wayne
It is a little sad that this thread with its nearly "innocent" question has drifted into a DC vs. DCC thread again, though this time in a more civilized manner.
Each system has its own benefits and disadvantages, and it finally boils down to a matter of personal preference and taste, which way you are heading down. DC is still fine for many of us, especially those, who are successfully operating elaborate layouts built with DC controls - why should they change? DC, IMHO, will remain the entry level into the hobby, perfect for those, who just want to "play a little" with trains" and are still undecided as to which way to go in terms of controls. In Japan and, to a degree, also UK, DCC is not very wide spread. Japanese locos hardly come DCC equipped, not even DCC ready!
To quote Mark Twain - Rumors of the death of DC are greatly exaggerated!
Sir Madog In Japan and, to a degree, also UK, DCC is not very wide spread. Japanese locos hardly come DCC equipped, not even DCC ready!
In Japan and, to a degree, also UK, DCC is not very wide spread. Japanese locos hardly come DCC equipped, not even DCC ready!
Guess why? DCC doesn´t make much sense to have in the display-case
Or more seriously; the small space available in especially Japan and in some cases the UK, makes most layout sizes in the "Carl Arendt" range possible.
And to have DCC on a "plank" thats maybe 50" long doesn´t really compute, if you don´t want sound of course.....
The DC sound controllers, as good as they might be, can´t hold it´s own against the user friendliness of DCC.
Swedish Custom painter and model maker. My Website:
My Railroad
My Youtube:
Graff´s channel
My LHS is a mix. Most of their display models are straight DC, but it also seems that half their HO displayed locomotives are custom brass models. Last time I was there 99% of there N display models were DC. However it seems that all HO shelf models are pretty evenly split with DC and DCC models (straight DCC or DCC w/ sound). There 'clearance' rack also seems to be split pretty evenly.
They do have a small shelf built, full sceniced 15 inches wide and I think about 5 feet long, that is wired for DCC to show of their newest sound units (ex. they had an HO Little Joe w/sound out IIRC a month before the MRR Nov. issue came out with its review), But it also has push-button Tortious turn out control and working grading crossing that blinks lights, lowers gates, and automatically comes on/shuts off, along with a passenger station that has lighting. It's really pretty neat. They also have a giant display track that runs around the walls of the sales floor hung from the ceiling that runs HO scale train, O scale train, and Large scale train, but I don't know if they run DC or DCC with that. I have never asked and the controls are out of site some wheres. Next time I stop in there (probably Thu to pick up an MRP issue) I will have to ask.
tstage Forty Niner: I guess since we didn't have the internet we didn't have anyone to tell us we were doing it all wrong... My goodness, Mark! No one is implying that anyone is doing it "right" or "wrong". You choose DC. Terrific! I - and the majority of the other forum members here - have NO problem with that. I was just curious how well MUing works in DC. My understanding (or misunderstanding) was that it was a little more challenging in DC because you had to match locomotives that ran well together. According to you and Sheldon, that doesn't appear to be the case. With that said, please - don't feel you have to get into this "us against THEM" mentality when it comes to discussing both ways of operating a layout. We can learn and help one another. At least that's my position on the hobby. I guess I can only speak for myself though... Tom
Forty Niner: I guess since we didn't have the internet we didn't have anyone to tell us we were doing it all wrong...
Tom,Mark may have a point..Shortly after joining the Atlas forum back in 2001 I was basically told my method of modeling wasn't up to today's "standards" and the Atlas forum was for "serious" modelers...
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
DCC is right for me, and it's right for my layout. But, it may not be right for you and your layout. Pretty simple, really.
My LHS seems to be firmly in the DCC camp. The store layout is DCC, and most of the engines on the shelves these days seem to be equipped with DCC and sound. Because of the higher price, I'd imagine that the store makes a bit more from selling those, too. There are DCC systems on display, too, but no DC power packs at all. And, there is a whole wall of decoders behind the counter for those wishing to upgrade.
Remember, too, that decoder and sound additions can be a substantial part of a shop's business. So, an LHS probably would rather see its customers in DCC than in DC - there is more potential business. I'm not sure if this is causing shops to "push" DCC over DC to their customers, but it certainly would be in their best financial interests to do so.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Hey Larry,
That's why I used the term "majority" to describe those who have no problem with others operating with DC, as I know that there are those here (or who used to be here) who do/did think to the contrary. I just hate seeing the conversation fall into a "wagon-train stance", as it were, when it comes to discussing the two methods - if that makes any sense.
Tom,I agree there shouldn't be a circling of the wagons..Its a matter of choice like sound,modeling style,choice of road name etc,etc and as forum members we should respect each others choices. .
Brakie, I'd be willing to bet that the ones who told you that hadn't been into MRR anywhere near as long as you had at that point, in other words "still wet behind the ears".
I really feel that Mark Twain said it best when he stated that "when I was 14 I thought my Dad was the dumbest person on earth, then by the time I had turned 21 I was amazed at how smart he had become in only 7 years".
That was over 100 years ago and apparently nothing much has changed, each generation thinks they have reinvented the wheel, I was guilty of the same thing when I was that age. I'm still trying to decide if age gives a person "wisdom" or "patience" as I find myself saying "uh-hmm" a lot these days just because it's not worth the bother. I figure the smart ones will eventually figure it out and as for the other ones, well, as Ron White says "Ya can't fix stupid" so what's the point in arguing with them.
I think a lot of people look at the DC vs DCC thing as DCC being a replacement for DC when it's really not as I see it. DCC is an enhancement of DC much as the cell phone is to the standard telephone. My wife couldn't live without her cell phone since she got one about 7-8 years ago. I refuse to own one of them and she thinks I'm still living in the stone age. Truth is I figure if someone "really" needs to talk to me they know how to contact me, any more than that is just another irritation in my life. Doesn't mean I have anything against cell phones but the people using them in traffic or blocking the aisles in the supermarket while they discuss nothing on the cell phones irritates the crap out of me, but that isn't the cell phones fault.
So we get back to the main question, is DC or DCC a problem, NO. Are some of the people involved in it a problem, without a doubt the answer is yes.
As I've said before I personally think the manufacturers should offer all of their equipment as a DCC friendly item as they call it so the DCC user or the non DCC user doesn't have to yank out decoders to either replace it with a good one of their choice or in the case of the DC user remove it altogether. There are a lot of so-so DCC decoders laying in junk boxes because they either weren't needed or they didn't or wouldn't do what the user wanted them to do.
I think, again, just my opinion, that BLI has a pretty darn decent solution in their "Blue Line" series, they offer sound without a decoder but it's ready to accept the decoder of your choice, or run it "as-is" without one. Personally I opt for the "Stealth" versions as I'm not really into the sound thing unless it's some George Shearing on my turntable, you know, the old style that takes those "vinyl" disk thingies.....then just sit back and watch my trains run and let my imagination drift off into the days of my youth.
Mark
MisterBeasleyMy LHS seems to be firmly in the DCC camp. The store layout is DCC, and most of the engines on the shelves these days seem to be equipped with DCC and sound. Because of the higher price, I'd imagine that the store makes a bit more from selling those, too. There are DCC systems on display, too, but no DC power packs at all. And, there is a whole wall of decoders behind the counter for those wishing to upgrade.
And the three LHSes that I support would still be firmly in the DC camp. Although each as a good to very good selection when it comes to trains and train-related items, they have a broad base of customers that they want/need/desire to cater to. Although DCC is offered, it's still a small offering compared to other items available at each store.
Would I love to be able to go to my LHS and pour through the lastest DCC offerings, or pick up a decoder on the fly? Absolutely! However, I go to my LHSes for a variety of other reasons and can get what I need DCC-wise from either train shows or the Internet.
For me, until someone figures out how to get all the power from a Tech 4 dual power pack into a compact size like the Tech 4 Dual Power pack, I will stay DCC.
Although the sound would be nice.
Do they make a one-piece compact DCC system that can be easily transportable?
tstage Hey Larry, That's why I used the term "majority" to describe those who have no problem with others operating with DC, as I know that there are those here (or who used to be here) who do/did think to the contrary. I just hate seeing the conversation fall into a "wagon-train stance", as it were, when it comes to discussing the two methods - if that makes any sense. Tom
I agree. It can come off like the "circling-of-the-wagons" when it comes to this...and it is good that we are not seeing the kinds of conversion scenarios that used to pepper this forum at times...
All the LHS's up here...or rather..at least the ones here in London are DCC WITH a fair representation of DC as well...no bigs here...
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/
DCC and the computer interface along with sound locos are 3 distinct yet complimentary technologies that have encouraged my 12 year old son to get involved in the hobby.
Richard
Mark,
I think your cell phone analogy is a very good one. Although I do own one, I seldom use it. I find them irritating for the same reason you do - especially when I'm at a baseball game and the folks around me are more interested in texting or carrying on long conversations on their cell phones than watching the game. That's another story.
I agree with you, too, about BLI's Blueline concept. Like you or Sheldon, who would rather remove electronics to achieve what you are trying to accomplish, I love the idea of adding a motion decoder (of my choice) to a locomotive in order to get the low-speed response that I desire. For me, I see it as the best of both worlds.
Lastly, you have good taste in music. George Shearing is pretty decent pianist - albeit CD or vinyl.
gatrhumpyDo they make a one-piece compact DCC system that can be easily transportable?
gatrhumpy,
I guess it depends on your definition of "compact". The NCE Power Cab is a command station, booster, and throttle all rolled-up-into-one. It's roughly 2-1/2 x 9", with the "head" ~3-1/2" wide. You can program with it either at your layout or at your bench top. (To program at your bench top, you'd need another power (PCP) panel and wall transformer.)
Although the Power Cab is a tethered system, it does come with a 7' cable so that you have some walk around capability. For complete freedom, you can always go radio.
If you're interested, gatrhumpy, there's a link to an initial review of the NCE Power Cab from this web page. You can click either the picture or the name to access the review.
I really don't understand why more manufacturers don't do their engines that way except of course it's still about "money" and how to transfer ours from our pockets to their pockets.
Not much irritates me more than to be forced into buying something I "don't" need in order to get something I "want", the Bachmann 2-10-2 comes to mind. Beautiful engine, great detail and a smooth runner but it really chaps my butt to be forced into buying their decoder just to get it home an remove it and throw it in the parts box. I guess they were trying to please "everybody" and of course that just never works out to well.
Now of course there are those that will instantly say "nobody is forcing you to buy it".............well DUH!! That's not the point and I've heard that comment for years and it's as stupid now as it was 40 years ago.
I buy the plastic/cast engines to use for my fictional Sierra Pacific, a line from Sacremento to Salt Lake jointly owned by the UP/SP/AT&SF. My brass doesn't get any private road decals as I just can't bring myself to paint them in a private road as silly as that may sound.
Anyhow, grew up with George Shearing on the stereo and just never outgrew him to this day, like a broken drum, he's pretty hard to beat!!!!
Anyhow, I suspect if more people just accepted things the way they are and stop making sarcastic comments we would all probably find life an easier process. After all, there are more important issues on the plate these days than whether or not you use DC or DCC.
Now lets all go gang up on those poor guys who use 3 rail HO!!! That's just plain un-American!!!! ;-)
Forty NinerNow lets all go gang up on those poor guys who use 3 rail HO!!! That's just plain un-American!!!! ;-)
Although not my cup of tea, I've learned to enjoy even a 3-rail layout.
Yes Mark it is silly not to letter your brass for your private road :-)
I only have two brass locos, but they both now have plastic tenders and say ATLANTIC CENTRAL.
But, admittedly, I don't believe in the collector value of any of this stuff.
By the way, the Aristo Train Engneer you have is the "Basic". It does not have pulse width modulation, but it is a "transistor throttle", so there isa pulse power "effect".
I guess by todays standards it could be considered almost an "antique" now but it still works just fine and as the old saying goes "why fix it if it ain't broke"??
Thanks for the reply. Would the booster and command station be compact enough to attach to the fascia of my layout? If so, would it also power my lights on my layout?
Fascinating, reading this thread. What becomes readily apparent is the widely different requirements people have for their system. For example, I have no need for signaling (Ma & Pa was "dark"), but for others it is essential.
As to the original question, I don't think DC layouts are all disappearing. New technology has the potential, of course, to totally displace the established technology, but DCC, as it currently exists, won't do it. It adds another option for people which is good. But DC can be a better choice depending on what you are trying to do and what your circumstances are.
Personally I use what works best for me. I converted to DCC because I wanted wireless walk around and at the time NCE's DCC offered the best solution. Frankly until wireless, I had no interest in DCC - it just didn't offer enough benefit for the cost for me. If Aristocraft's wireless had been as advanced then as it is now, I might well have chosen them.
Enjoy
Paul
The command station and booster of the Power Cab are all contained inside the throttle enclosure - as one unit. The Power Cab then plugs into the LEFT connector port of the PCP panel, where it receives its power from the wall transformer.
As far as powering lights, technically you could tap off the Power Cab's wall transformer to do that. However, depending on the number of lights (and their total amperage), that may have an effect on how many locomotives you can run simultaneously. The Power Cab only has 1.7A of total output.
gatrhumpy, if you have any more questions, please feel free to drop me a PM so that the thread doesn't get sidetracked. Thanks.
tstage Forty Niner: Now lets all go gang up on those poor guys who use 3 rail HO!!! That's just plain un-American!!!! ;-) Although not my cup of tea, I've learned to enjoy even a 3-rail layout. Tom
Forty Niner: Now lets all go gang up on those poor guys who use 3 rail HO!!! That's just plain un-American!!!! ;-)
Those 3-railers are beyond any discussion of DC vs. DCC
And they can also build nice layouts - here is a pic from a layout currently built by my friend Pascal in Switzerland:
I hate to jump in at the end, but I thought I'd share my thoughts. My interest in model railroads is almost strictly building my little world. I have a big interest in trains as well, but I don't care to model the actual railroad practices. I'm a roundy rounder! DC is an inexpensive way to add trains to my little world. Being less expensive, it allows me to spend less on locomotives and more on kits and scenery products. Some day I may regret my indifference to operations, but for now it suits me. I imagine there are others out there that share my feelings that DC is good enough to start in.
Edit: I mean it's good enough for my limited needs.
Now, I want to know which is better, HO or N!
So I'm looking at at least $160 for the DCC system, about $70 for the DCC decoder + sound module (for two SD40-2s from MRC), another DCC + sound decoder for a Kato SD-40, and I'm at about $350.
Whoa.
gatrhumpy So I'm looking at at least $160 for the DCC system, about $70 for the DCC decoder + sound module (for two SD40-2s from MRC), another DCC + sound decoder for a Kato SD-40, and I'm at about $350. Whoa.
Lou