I run dc. I know most everything coming out is dcc and people are converting over the older items to dcc whenever possible, but if it aint broke why fix on somethings. I have had lot say i need to go over to dcc but I am on the fence.
Sean, the unknown train travler,
I use only Antique Direct Current (or ADC if you will ) here too.
My layout has 4 cabs and is strictly DC and will stay that way! Cramming engines full of decoders generates a large expense depending on the amount of engines and immediately restricts them from running on a DC layout. I currently have over 600 engines. I've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading. Most have no dispatchers and operators throw mainline switches on their own. That is totally rediculous! I retired after 44 years on the RR. If there was such a thing as an HO or any other scale FRA, these layouts would be shut down.
DAVID FORTNEYdave
Rick Abramson I've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading. Most have no dispatchers and operators throw mainline switches on their own. That is totally rediculous!
I've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading. Most have no dispatchers and operators throw mainline switches on their own. That is totally rediculous!
Rick AbramsonI've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading.
What´s that got to do with DCC?
Actually, DCC allows for more prototypical operation, as you can select your acceleration/deceleration parameters to simulate actual load. DCC puts you in the driver´s seat and not on a switchboard to direct the power.
I was hoping to read new "excuses" here for not going down the DCC route, but I have not found any. While it is perfectly to stay with DC if you have a large engine roster and/or an extensive layout, which is all wired-up for DC, I can´t understand those folks, who are just starting and stay with the horse-drawn buggy instead of driving a Porsche. Entry-level DCC command systems are not much more expensive than a decent power pack, and the cost of decoders (w/o sound) can be easily offset by the wire and switches you don´t have to buy if you want multiple train operation on your layout. Wiring a DCC layout is rather simple and you will have your trains up and running in a lot less time and effort.
Sir Madog Rick Abramson I've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading. What´s that got to do with DCC? Actually, DCC allows for more prototypical operation, as you can select your acceleration/deceleration parameters to simulate actual load. DCC puts you in the driver´s seat and not on a switchboard to direct the power. I was hoping to read new "excuses" here for not going down the DCC route, but I have not found any. While it is perfectly to stay with DC if you have a large engine roster and/or an extensive layout, which is all wired-up for DC, I can´t understand those folks, who are just starting and stay with the horse-drawn buggy instead of driving a Porsche. Entry-level DCC command systems are not much more expensive than a decent power pack, and the cost of decoders (w/o sound) can be easily offset by the wire and switches you don´t have to buy if you want multiple train operation on your layout. Wiring a DCC layout is rather simple and you will have your trains up and running in a lot less time and effort.
Rick Abramson I've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading.
Ulrich,
You are missing the point, as do many.
DCC puts you you more in the engineers seat - true. It allows you to be wrong, run red signals, move without proper clearance, etc.
Some modelers prefer to simulate the whole "process" of train movement on signal/CTC controlled trackage. That is a separate infrastructure above and beyond "making the train move".
DCC adds nothing to make that infrastructure easier to simulate/implement and well designed DC CTC/signal controlled layouts approach DCC in terms of the engineers "experiance" - without the cost - because you need the CTC/signaling infrastructure anyway, that same network can be used to direct track power at no measureable additional cost.
All of this applies mainly to large or moderate sized layouts designed to simulate the multi train movements on busy Class I railroads, typical of the US Northeast corridor and other high density locations.
It does not apply to the back woods branch line, etc.
To best understand it, one should read the articles in MR from the 70's about MZL control and about Bruce Chubb's original signal/control system.
Sure you have CTC and signaling with DCC - but having DCC will not save you one wire, or complexity over building a similar CTC/signaling system with DC.
So for some of us, CTC and signaling is way more important than the other features DCC brings to the table. And DCC adds potential complications some don't want or need.
Entry level DCC is worthless in my mind. My DC trackside radio throttles are better. My excuse is still the same, decoders/installs for 130 locos is money and time I don't want to spend that would add very little to my operational goals.
I don't have any interest in being the engineer of one loco on a 1/4 mile of branch line - I am the head operations chief for a busy sub division on eight miles of busy Class I railroad where train pass any given spot ever 5 minutes.
Sheldon
Sheldon,
isn´t it a great hobby! It offers so much for just about any interest! You´d like to be the chief of operations - great. I prefer to be an engineer, so that´s why DCC is my choice, even for the little layout I eventually will have, once I have overcome the limitations of a recent stroke.
Sir Madog Sheldon, isn´t it a great hobby! It offers so much for just about any interest! You´d like to be the chief of operations - great. I prefer to be an engineer, so that´s why DCC is my choice, even for the little layout I eventually will have, once I have overcome the limitations of a recent stroke.
Yes, it is.
And I have said over and over, for many modelers, and their specific goals DCC is the best choice. But it is far from the best choice for EVERY set of goals, especially when viewed from cost/benefit point of view.
Wish you well on your recovery.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Sir Madog Sheldon, isn´t it a great hobby! It offers so much for just about any interest! You´d like to be the chief of operations - great. I prefer to be an engineer, so that´s why DCC is my choice, even for the little layout I eventually will have, once I have overcome the limitations of a recent stroke. Yes, it is. And I have said over and over, for many modelers, and their specific goals DCC is the best choice. But it is far from the best choice for EVERY set of goals, especially when viewed from cost/benefit point of view. Wish you well on your recovery. Sheldon
Sheldon - I think that sentence sums it up nicely!
Bob Schuknecht Rick Abramson I've been to op sessions on DCC layouts and have never seen such non-prototypical railroading. Most have no dispatchers and operators throw mainline switches on their own. That is totally rediculous! Are they having fun? If so, maybe that is more important than following FRA rules.
Are they having fun? If so, maybe that is more important than following FRA rules.
Yes, everyone's idea of fun is different. I find being the engineer rather boring, much more interesting to be the dispatcher, or railroad vice president, or a railfan.
My layout is designed for good display running and group CTC/signaled operation - no DCC needed in either case.
I HOPE to run DC only soon on a "real" layout. I do have a tiny portable layout that runs DC only, from choice of a power pack, or a 9 volt battery when taking it to the wilderness. I dismantled my old "big" layout several years ago, and haven't gotten the room cleared yet to get the new layout ready to run at all. I have DC locos I bought 45 years ago that I am going to paint for my chosen RR and fit with MTL couplers some day. So I am not about to change to DCC. (Unless I get things halfway going and decide I want to...)
I run DC, AC, or DCC with a Deltang R/C receivers.
Bernd
New York, Vermont & Northern Rwy. - Route of the Black Diamonds
protolancer(at)kingstonemodelworks(dot)com
Rick,Ha! Not for nothing, man, but you could sell off a few of those 600 locos and easily afford the cost of DCC installations for the rest of them...and for your layout...and for several other people's layouts. What's the going rate for an EP-5? As you know, I'm a member of a large club (and Operations Chairman), and I don't expect Operators to be 100% realistic at all times. Why? Because it's a hobby, not a job. I'm lucky if I can get them to stop at a red signal. Sure, I want them to follow the club rules, but those rules are kept simple (about 2 pages of text) because there's a fine line between "fun" and "work". Just remember, Rick, the railroad had to pay you to work everyday. In our hobby, the "workers" have to pay to work, and maybe once a month to run trains. There's only so many rules that people will follow before they tell you to take a hike. My next door neighbor walked me through a real TTO experience on his layout once. It took a while. "To C&E Extra 1201 o-n-e-t-w-o-n-a-u-g-h-t-o-n-e, at Attleboro a-t-t-l-e-b-o-r-o...", etc. while I filled in the Form, then I had to repeat it back to him, etc. No way would my club put up with that.
Paul A. Cutler III
Paul3 Rick,Ha! Not for nothing, man, but you could sell off a few of those 600 locos and easily afford the cost of DCC installations for the rest of them...and for your layout...and for several other people's layouts. What's the going rate for an EP-5? As you know, I'm a member of a large club (and Operations Chairman), and I don't expect Operators to be 100% realistic at all times. Why? Because it's a hobby, not a job. I'm lucky if I can get them to stop at a red signal. Sure, I want them to follow the club rules, but those rules are kept simple (about 2 pages of text) because there's a fine line between "fun" and "work". Just remember, Rick, the railroad had to pay you to work everyday. In our hobby, the "workers" have to pay to work, and maybe once a month to run trains. There's only so many rules that people will follow before they tell you to take a hike. My next door neighbor walked me through a real TTO experience on his layout once. It took a while. "To C&E Extra 1201 o-n-e-t-w-o-n-a-u-g-h-t-o-n-e, at Attleboro a-t-t-l-e-b-o-r-o...", etc. while I filled in the Form, then I had to repeat it back to him, etc. No way would my club put up with that. Paul A. Cutler III
And that is the beauty of a system like mine. It does not "require" the engineers to know a lot about prototype operation, and the sytem is easy for new engineers to learn, especially in dispatcher mode. The throttles are simple, and if they over run their authorized territory, their train simply stops - nothing bad happens.
Sure the dispatcher must know the layout, but even his duties have been "streamlined" compared with the prototype. But it still has a very prototype feel for those who appreciate that.
As for selling off engines to fund DCC - I've recieved that comment as well in the past - but it takes all 130 locos/powered units on the ACR to protect the schedules of the 25-30 train in the session.
ATLANTIC CENTRALYes, everyone's idea of fun is different. I find being the engineer rather boring, much more interesting to be the dispatcher, or railroad vice president, or a railfan.
Sheldon,Just for fun(underscore that) I seriously doubt if many could switch cars on my ISL using one of my DCC/Sound or DC locomotives without getting into trouble.
Why is that?
I have momentum,speed step and start voltage CV set in my DCC/Sound locomotives where one doesn't simply start or stop by twisting the knob.
I can do the same settings in the DC mode of my MRC Tech 6.I program the T-6 by adjusting momentum and start volt and every DC engine I own will respond to those settings and again there's no simple knob twisting to stop or start...
Like a real engineer you have the weight of the cars and their momentum to overcome after the switchman gives a "that will do" or a stop hand signal and plan your coupling where it's a "kiss" coupling and not a crash coupling..Starting a move is slow as well.
That type of switching realism isn't for everybody but,its load of fun for me.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes, everyone's idea of fun is different. I find being the engineer rather boring, much more interesting to be the dispatcher, or railroad vice president, or a railfan. Sheldon,Just for fun(underscore that) I seriously doubt if many could switch cars on my ISL using one of my DCC/Sound or DC locomotives without getting into trouble. Why is that? I have momentum,speed step and start voltage CV set in my DCC/Sound locomotives where one doesn't simply start or stop by twisting the knob. I can do the same settings in the DC mode of my MRC Tech 6.I program the T-6 by adjusting momentum and start volt and every DC engine I own will respond to those settings and again there's no simple knob twisting to stop or start... Like a real engineer you have the weight of the cars and their momentum to overcome after the switchman gives a "that will do" or a stop hand signal and plan your coupling where it's a "kiss" coupling and not a crash coupling..Starting a move is slow as well. That type of switching realism isn't for everybody but,its load of fun for me.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes, everyone's idea of fun is different. I find being the engineer rather boring, much more interesting to be the dispatcher, or railroad vice president, or a railfan.
Larry,
Things are similar here. The Aristo throttles have a momenum that is preset at one of five levels. I have mine set on the lowest, or no momentum in theory, but in reality there is still a small momentum.
The push button controls for "faster" and "slower" have "ramp up/ramp down" speed even set on zero momentum. So the effect is similar to what you describe.
So just like you, and real life, you must "learn" the feel of each loco for switching, with and without a load.
A little off topic, but in the early 50's in grammer school, Chgo. Bridgeport to be precise, I lived on a dead-end st. next to a Industrial area, which was less than a 1/2 mile from my house, right next to the South branch of the Chgo river, which had a gigantic covered grain elevator, which got the grain from covered river barges, in turn they loaded it into 40ft boxcars, many boxcars, the one's with the doors partially open and wooden grain planks covering 3/4 of the opening. Also there were many tank cars for the other industries, animal fat etc. Anyway to make a long story short..the Illinois Central with RS1's/2's used to switch that yard at nite mostly, starting at 9:00pm. I remember laying in bed and listening to the RS turbo's going to full power and then stop, back to idle and then count how long it would take to hear the bang when the cars they cut would hit the ones that were standing on the track. I guess that was switching on the fly and classification, another set of engines would come by in the morning and do more of a precise switching. I got to know the day crew very well and at times, if they were not real busy, they would let me ride in the cab. I remember a water cooler in the cab...for drinking and a very heavy oder of diesel fuel and exhaust. To this day...I will never forget those experiences. When I lived nearer to downtown Chgo. in the 40's. I saw 0-6-0's and 0-8-0's doing about the same thing...a lot more noisier though. Memories....
Take Care!
Frank
I also run DC only, mainly for the cost and simplicity of wiring. I am the sole operator, no complicated switching or scheduling - I just like to see a train running through my scenery. I use the Stapleton PWM throttle, and am not impressed by the scale-sized sound on most layouts. No matter how 'realistic' it sounds, it's still sounds 'small'.
Sheldon,My point to Rick (especially Rick...we're both in the NHRHTA and I've known him personally for years) is that using the "I've got hundreds of locos so I can't afford DCC!" argument is not justifiable. The argument used is that the lack of money is the big reason why one won't go DCC. My counter-argument is that folks who have hundreds of locos have the resources to go DCC, it's just tied up in physical assets.The real argument is that they aren't willing to go DCC for other reasons. And perhaps one of those reasons is that they prefer collecting locos over learning DCC. Instead of saying that, however, it's easier to just say "I can't afford it."
And there's nothing wrong with using DC, DCC, DCS, or AC (for all I care). But I do wish folks would be a bit more in depth in their reasoning. Sheldon, we've been down this road a lot, so I know why you're DC, but Rick is rather infamous in the NHRHTA for being anti-DCC (the catcalls from the peanut gallery at the various RPM shows have been amusing about the whole thing). So, yes, I'm yanking his chain a bit with this one...
Oh, and FWIW, I hated the Aristo radio throttle interface when I tried them out. The buttons are hard on one's fingers, or at least on mine. Give me a knob every time.
Interesting subject and good comments. I've read all the posts to this point. I'm DC all the way with a dozen or so brass engines, mostly steam and some plastic 1st generation diesels (HO). I've been putting my double track dogbone and branchline together for about 40 years; 5 years on, five years off...at this rate you can bet I'm not going DCC, might be a good choice for a newbie. I have a bunch of hobbies that divert me while the light on the horizon is steadily growing dimmer.
Ed
Paul3 Sheldon,My point to Rick (especially Rick...we're both in the NHRHTA and I've known him personally for years) is that using the "I've got hundreds of locos so I can't afford DCC!" argument is not justifiable. The argument used is that the lack of money is the big reason why one won't go DCC. My counter-argument is that folks who have hundreds of locos have the resources to go DCC, it's just tied up in physical assets.The real argument is that they aren't willing to go DCC for other reasons. And perhaps one of those reasons is that they prefer collecting locos over learning DCC. Instead of saying that, however, it's easier to just say "I can't afford it." And there's nothing wrong with using DC, DCC, DCS, or AC (for all I care). But I do wish folks would be a bit more in depth in their reasoning. Sheldon, we've been down this road a lot, so I know why you're DC, but Rick is rather infamous in the NHRHTA for being anti-DCC (the catcalls from the peanut gallery at the various RPM shows have been amusing about the whole thing). So, yes, I'm yanking his chain a bit with this one... Oh, and FWIW, I hated the Aristo radio throttle interface when I tried them out. The buttons are hard on one's fingers, or at least on mine. Give me a knob every time. Paul A. Cutler III
I don't mind a knob - if it has a stopping and starting point.......
Don't understand why the buttons would be hard on your fingers? You only push them to make changes in speed or direction?
I did not know if I would like it, a guy let me borrow one for a month - I was hooked.
Again, one of my big issues with DCC is all the handhelds are poorly designed in my view. But I do have built in prejudice since I have no interest in turning on lights, playing sounds, operating turnouts, and so forth.
I don't want or need two throttle wheels, 32 buttons and display I can't even see.
I can hold my Aristo throttle in one hand and without looking - go faster - go slower - go east - go west - stop in emergency.
Simple is better.
Paul, just to refresh, my biggest reason for not going DCC is lack of interest in sound, and little need for its other features. I could "aford it", I choose not to - it would be a big expense on my layout for very little gain.
With CTC and signaing you need a complex wiring infrastructure anyway - that can deliver the track power at no extra cost.
I don't like onboard sound in HO.
I'm not into helper service.
I model the 50's - loco lighting is not an issue - no ditch lights or other fancy lighting rules.
I model the 50's - most diesels still ran as matched sets.
I model the 50's - all my "plastic brass" steam locos that I would want to double/triple head, do that just fine on DC without consisting or speed matching - just like my fleet of diesels does.
So what would I gain from DCC - more flexible operation in the engine terminal - pretty expensive upgrade - easily $3,000 for me.
A handfull of $2 kill switches handles that problem.
And the biggest "cost" of DCC for me would be the time to install 130 decoders and possibly have to speed match dozens of sets of locos - that time is worth way more than the $3000 for decoders and throttles.
This discussion has remained friendly and respectful, even as some varying opinions have been presented. Hats off to ya gents!
I doubt DC will ever go away completely. I've enjoyed hearing the input since the last time this subject went this big, a couple years ago Dan
Hi, I am a DC railroader. There are several reasons I am staying with it as well. I have a very small amount of space available for my hobby (no basement in my house) so I have a 4' x 6' layout. Although I have managed to create a nice layout with the small space, I don't really see how DCC could be any advantage since all of my trains have a single locomotive and the average length is only 5-8 pieces of rolling stock. The only thing DCC might add for me is sound but since my layout is in a small spare bedroom next to all the other bedroooms, I don't thing my family would appreciate it since I am a nocturnal railroader. The other thing keeping me away from DCC is cost, I have a limited hobby budget (I run mostly Athearn RTR, Walthers Mainline and Atlas Trainman). I am happy with DC and plan to stick with it.
I have been DC since the mid 60s and I have so much invested, that adding DCC would add to the expense. Since I do not run on anyone else's layout, I am happy with DC and block selectors.
I agree with other posters on this subject that I have seen a lot of DCC operating layouts run stupidly, as if they were racing their trains. Model railroading can be a lot of fun, if you just run like real railroads do.
Staying with DC.
What does running trains stupidly, ie fast, have to do with wether or not the control system is DC or DCC? I believe the trains will go equally fast regardless of power source. Perhaps a shot at DCC users is more to the point. Which system to use is a personel choice based on the needs of the owner of the railroad. both systems allow for the railroad to be run the way the owner wishes.
Floridaflyer - you are off base. I have no issue with those that use DCC. But do it prototypically or at least not toy train like. At a show that happens annually, I see trains being run as if they were racing, ON THE SAME TRACK, SAME DIRECTION. In normal operation, two trains should not occupy the same block. What I saw was the train following the other one very close to the front trains caboose. Do all do that? probably not. But doing it at all is running trains stupidly and DCC allows that to happen. Any club should have rules.
Staying with DC as it is easy to understand. I have read the DCC column in MR and while it is interesting, I rather stay with something I understand as I am more interested in running my trains than getting screwed up in some technological nightmare that takes away from the hobby I enjoy. MY OPINION.
Ted