DCC is sooooooo boring...

[olequa]

I have to vent.

Why is it that DCC manufacturers don't get it? There are features that should be included in all DCC systems and they just aren't. DCC gave manufacturers the chance to simulate real operation in ways previously unimaginable. Yet we are left with controllers that simulate our old DCC powerpacks, not an actual locomotive controller.

For example...
How about those throttles? Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it? That plus a little (or a lot, your choice) of momentum would make for very much more interesting and satisfying control of the locomotive. Instead we get knobs, and in the case of Digitrax we get knobs that you have to turn about 10 revolutions to go from zero to 60. And they tout it as giving 'extra fine speed control'. Actually I think I might build my own 8 notch throttle. It's easy to make a simple voltage divider circuit and hook it to the jump throttle input on my Zephyr. With a sound-equipped engine this would be very satisfying because the prime mover would immediately ramp up to the next rpm level when moving from one notch to the next.

And what about brakes? How come we don't have any brakes? How simple would it be to assign 2 or 3 function buttons to activate a brake? Cut the throttle and the train keeps right on going unless you hit the brake. How prototypical is that?

And how about a CV that would increase or decrease both acceleration and deceleration at the same time so we didn't have to fiddle with both CV3 and 4 whenever we make a change.

And I've mentioned here before what I think of the current straight-line velocity curve that is produced by all decoders today when using momentum. It shoudn't be that way. The actual velocity should approach the terminal velocity asymtotically (spelling may be off on that one).

Even a littlle bit of wheel slip might be simulated for steamers by applying very short bursts of full voltage to the motor.

End of rant. That's what I think. I'm wondering where the imagination went with others in this hobby.

george

[Anonymous]

UUUUmmmm, you might just have the wrong system, or not know how to use it to it's full function. My Digitrax does have momentum, and acceleration, and the sound equipped locos have throttle notches proportional to the speed, along with dynamic and air braking sounds when the functions are activated. Many decoders offer dynamic braking function, and most offer Kickstart that will give you some wheel slip. You can control the speed curve through programming CV's, the book even has values for prototypical operation of different kinds of locos. As for the throttles, I imagine Digitrax would like to hear input from people, and that could be the next product offered, I think the idea is pretty cool personally, and should market decently well, of course you're still going to have to have a digital screen and a whole crapload of buttons to offer all of the functions, and it'd be really hard to carry around in your pocket, but nonetheless it would be cool as a main control. Have you been in modern locomotives? The ones I've seen have no throttle lever, it's just a computer screen in front of the engineer that shows whatever they want, much like your Digitax handheld would (assuming you've added one to your Zephyr). The sound is really prototypical if you ask me, air activation on the bells, random air pumps, shutdown levels that even include the doors opening and shutting. The lights are pretty impressive too, alternating ditch lights at the touch of a button and directional head and tail lights that you can program to do whatever you want? I can't see how you can knock that.

Seems to me you need to pull out the instruction manual and get some more experience before you talk about how bad it is.

Okay, I'm done now,
Greg

[CP5415]

WOW!

This is why I like DC.
I use my imagination for the notches.
Sound? Again, in my head, unless I'm using an Athearn BB!
Brakes? Both of my power packs have brake controls on them.

I'm JOKING! Relax!!!!

I've never investigated DCC so I don't know, but one would figure that for the investment, you would at least have brakes! [:D]

Gordon

[jfugate]

Well, it's a cup half full or half empty situation. I just look at what was available in 1990 and where we are today 16 years later. It takes time, and I'm sure the "ahahs" will continue to hit as to what is possible with DCC.

Don't forget, the DCC manufacturers are first and foremost doing DCC as a business, not just to do something "cool". Any marketing research I've seen shows that "traditional throttles" with knobs far outsell throttles that have prototypical notches and brakes with lap, service and emergency.

And also remember the 1950s is the most popular era, so there's a fair amount of steam out there, and it doesn't have 8 notches on its throttle, further splintering the market.

Cool is one thing, but "what will sell the most?" is often another.

[Anonymous]

Well George, hopefully some day you be the one of the folks who get invited to a market research group for a DCC manufacturer and you'll get the opportunity to bring up those points. But most likely the agency that arranges these little Pow-Wows invite folks that know nothing technical about the product they are evaluating (or they just came for the free lunch). That's usually how it goes.

So keep up the steam. If everyone accepted the status quo, we wouldn't see much improvement.

You never know what the future will bring. When I started in the hobby, controlling the train not the track was more or less in it's experimental stages. Now we have a revolutionary way to control the trains that's readily available.
Your right, there's a long way to go. Things can be done better. I invasion a day when controllers will be Prototypical. A camera in the loco will give you the view of your layout from your cab window on your big screen TV with synchronized full surround sound. How about a cab that sways, vibrates and rocks to sit in.

[Anonymous]

i once saw a layout with a real locomotive stand as the controller. well, at least panel with all the levers on it. the reverser made the little whining noise, the brakes hissed, and the throttle snapped to each of the 8 notches. the guy (look up peters rail meuseum in CT) was an ex-machinesest for amtrak i belive, and his basement is basicaly his railroad meuseum with a rio grande layout. check it out if youre in the area.
GEARHEAD426
[8]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa

.... Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it?

Got $5k for a RailDriver Full Sized AAR105 Control Stand?

[james saunders]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gsetter

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa

.... Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it?

Got $5k for a RailDriver Full Sized AAR105 Control Stand?

i'll take one [8D]

[Anonymous]

Geore, that's an interesting point.

QUOTE: Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it? That plus a little (or a lot, your choice) of momentum would make for very much more interesting and satisfying control of the locomotive. Instead we get knobs, and in the case of Digitrax we get knobs that you have to turn about 10 revolutions to go from zero to 60. And they tout it as giving 'extra fine speed control'. Actually I think I might build my own 8 notch throttle. It's easy to make a simple voltage divider circuit and hook it to the jump throttle input on my Zephyr. With a sound-equipped engine this would be very satisfying because the prime mover would immediately ramp up to the next rpm level when moving from one notch to the next.

An 8 notch throttle would be neat.

QUOTE: And what about brakes? How come we don't have any brakes? How simple would it be to assign 2 or 3 function buttons to activate a brake? Cut the throttle and the train keeps right on going unless you hit the brake. How prototypical is that?

My MRC Teach4 260 powerpack has that. Train hardly slows down if you close the throttle but you press the brake button and it slows and comes to a stop.

QUOTE: Even a littlle bit of wheel slip might be simulated for steamers by applying very short bursts of full voltage to the motor.

I can do that with my powerpack.

[scubaterry]

Check this out.. This was designed to run Trainsim however They now have software to run your layout via the RailDriver.




Terry
[8D]

[jfugate]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gsetter
Got $5k for a RailDriver Full Sized AAR105 Control Stand?

No, but $149 for the desktop cab above is *very affordable* for a DCC throttle ... too bad it's not available in a walkaround format. [swg]

[dacort]

I don't think I would want an 8-notch throttle, simply because model trains don't drive like the big ones. I've driven a real locomotive a couple of times. They're big and heavy, and will do neat things like coast for a really long time once they're moving, and all sorts of other things that models won't because they lack the mass. Even with momentum, I don't think a throttle with only 8 steps would do much in the way of approximating a real train. I think it would just limit the number of speeds you could use.

[jfugate]

da:

Yes, lots of realistic momentum in our models is a problem because we have to compress the distances so much. It gets ridiculous when the loco could coast the 5 feet to the next town if the momentum is set to realistic levels. [swg]

The operators on my HO Siskiyou Line don't like a lot of momentum, so I keep it at a minimum ... 4 or 5 is plenty in most DCC decoders. Just enough to give some feeling of mass and smooth loco performance, but not so much that they panic when they need to stop a train in a hurry.

[Anonymous]

Just looking at the hand-held controllers for DCC turns me off!
They are worse than most VCR Remotes!!!!
I just want to run my train, not spend all my time wondering if I hit the right button or not.
That's why I like my GML Walk-around throttle. Just a speed control and a direction switch!!!! That's all I need and all I want.
gtr

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
How about those throttles? Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it?

As dacort stated, the models aren't powered and controlled the same way real locomotives are. The problem here is in the decoder not the throttle. To get it to act like a real locomotive the decoder would have to sense the speed of the loco, load, wheel slippage etc. And then simulate the physics of a real locomotive. As others have said, on a selectively compressed model train layout this might NOT be a good thing.

QUOTE: With a sound-equipped engine this would be very satisfying because the prime mover would immediately ramp up to the next rpm level when moving from one notch to the next.

It is my understanding that's not how the prototype works. The prime mover only ramps up if the motors need the extra power the throttle is telling them to use. The throttle has no direct connection to the prime mover.

QUOTE: And what about brakes? How come we don't have any brakes? How simple would it be to assign 2 or 3 function buttons to activate a brake? Cut the throttle and the train keeps right on going unless you hit the brake. How prototypical is that?

A Digitrax Zephyr should be able to do this. I think all but the low end DCC systems can do this.

QUOTE: And how about a CV that would increase or decrease both acceleration and deceleration at the same time so we didn't have to fiddle with both CV3 and 4 whenever we make a change.

That would be less prototypical. There isn't much correlation between acceleration and deceleration in real life.

QUOTE: And I've mentioned here before what I think of the current straight-line velocity curve that is produced by all decoders today when using momentum. It shoudn't be that way. The actual velocity should approach the terminal velocity asymtotically (spelling may be off on that one).

Unless I am misunderstanding the point, I don't think I have any decoders that can't make the velocity curve almost any shape I want.

QUOTE: Even a littlle bit of wheel slip might be simulated for steamers by applying very short bursts of full voltage to the motor.

I would love this! But short bursts of full voltage won't do it, at least not like the prototype. The physics of wheel slippage don't scale down well.

QUOTE: End of rant. That's what I think. I'm wondering where the imagination went with others in this hobby.

I've been amazed at how easily people are impressed with the simple concept of having more than one train on the track at the same time. There are still a bunch of people who think that DCC invented the concept. I've often wondered why the "wow, I get it now" and snob factor seems to short circuit future inovation. There was actually an excellent thread about these things (the future of DCC or what ever it evolves into) about wo years ago. It might still be searchable. AHH found it http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=26496&

[Stevert]

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa

How about those throttles? Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it?

You aren't a long-time member of the Digitrax Yahoo group, are you? The UT4 was designed based on input and feedback from that group. If enough Digitrax users has requested it, I'm sure AJ would have built it.

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
That plus a little (or a lot, your choice) of momentum would make for very much more interesting and satisfying control of the locomotive. Instead we get knobs, and in the case of Digitrax we get knobs that you have to turn about 10 revolutions to go from zero to 60.

Apparently, not only have you not read the Digitrax group, but you haven't read the manuals enough to set momentum and/or speed tables either, have you?

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
And what about brakes? How come we don't have any brakes? How simple would it be to assign 2 or 3 function buttons to activate a brake? Cut the throttle and the train keeps right on going unless you hit the brake. How prototypical is that?

Gee, there's that pesky momentum CV again...

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
And how about a CV that would increase or decrease both acceleration and deceleration at the same time so we didn't have to fiddle with both CV3 and 4 whenever we make a change.

How about because a model loco behaves differently when accelerating under power than it does coasting? Not to mention that the same model of decoder may be installed in locos with very different operating characteristics.

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
And I've mentioned here before what I think of the current straight-line velocity curve that is produced by all decoders today when using momentum. It shoudn't be that way. The actual velocity should approach the terminal velocity asymtotically (spelling may be off on that one).

Dang it! Not only do we have to adjust those pesky momentum CV's, now we have to program curves into our speed tables to make our locos run the way we want them to. I just don't know what those wacky NMRA guys were up to when they gave us all these adjustments. Somebody should make a computer program or something to make it easy for us hobbyists who have it so bad. You know, something like this: http://jmri.sourceforge.net/doc/Manual/Comp_Speed.html

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
Even a littlle bit of wheel slip might be simulated for steamers by applying very short bursts of full voltage to the motor.

"Real" engineers work hard to avoid wheel slip, and you want to introduce it at will? How prototypical is that?

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa
End of rant. That's what I think. I'm wondering where the imagination went with others in this hobby.

george

Yeah, I hear ya! I know I sure don't have an imagination or sense of humor! [swg]

Steve

[mononguy63]

I can't comment on the various DCC features as I will be a DC user for the foreseeable future (and beyond).

I was just impressed that somebody was able to use a derivative of the word "asymptote" in conversation. The closest I ever heard was a Star Trek episode where they said "asymptomatically." Nice try, I suppose, for an actor.

Okay all, I'm done. You may get back on topic now.

[Anonymous]

I think it might be cool and fun to switch a yard with that Desktop Train Cab Controller.

I can't find any info on RailDriver's DCC Control Module. Does anyone have any info on it?

Greg

[IRONROOSTER]

You have to remember that DCC is still in its infancy. The really cool effect I am waiting to see is the system that keeps track of your water and if you run out, you hear a loud boom from the speaker and the engine goes dead. The Lionel guys will also have an exploding boiler to add to the fun.
Enjoy
Paul

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa

How about those throttles? Why wouldn't someone get the idea that maybe they should build a lever throttle that has 8 notches on it?

BAH! I don't want 8 notch throttles. I want a pull-out regulator handle, gauge glasses and trycocks, a butterfly door, a short-handle Pommy scoop, and singed eyebrows if I haven't got enough blower on! [:D]

Just pulling your leg. But I don't think simulated diesel controls would neccessarily appeal to those of us who run model steam locos...

Cheers,

Mark.

[brothaslide]

I like the flexibility that DCC offers for running trains, but. . .It's the programming that's a real PAIN!!!

From my perspective, DCC is like where personal computers were at in the late 1980's - using DOS. We need an Apple Computer for DCC - some company that can make it super user friendly. (Please, no Mac vs. PC quarrels here - I own a computer based business that uses all PCs but I do see the advantages of Mac for the general consumer.) Maybe there are a few Model Railroaders at Apple who have some ideas - hmmmmm?

[olequa]

Well that certainly brought the snoozers back to life. Thanks for the comments. Most of you guys really don't understand what I'm talking about, especially those of you who suggest that I haven't read the manual, or don't know that there is momentum in the decoder.

By the way, speed tables in the decoder are not for programming in an acceleration curve. Because if you think about it a typical acceleration curve for self powered objects (not rockets) is the mirror image of its deceleration curve, more or less. That is the rate of acceleration slows as top speed is approached, but the deceleration rate is maximum at the top speed end and least at the low speed end. The curve programmed in the decoder would simulate one or the other but not both. Back around 1990, before I knew about DCC, or anybody knew about it, I got the idea of putting a computer in the loco and built one. It had proportional acceleration/deceleration and worked very well in that regard. It's simple enough to do.

And yes I was only talking about a diesel throttle. A steam throttle is different isn't it? Bet it's not a little 10 turn knob.

george, grumpier than ever

[twhite]

Well, not understanding the concept behind DCC (I just thought it was something that allowed you to run multiple trains on the same track and control them individually), it seems to me that those of us who run one-operator railroads somewhat smaller than something like Joe Fugate's VERY admirable Siskyou Line--what a BEAUTIFUL layout, BTW--and only run one or two trains at a time, might just NOT need all the bells and whistles--and complexity-- that DCC entails.

Now I'll probably get bonked for this--and I'll probably deserve it, so if I do, it'll be a learning experince for me--but it seems to me that the way DCC is headed is exactly like what happened to Lionel Lines in the late 'fifties, when everything became so 'automated' that the fun of 'hands-on' railroading got lost in the button-pushing.

Sorry, but I don't like that idea. I'd really rather follow a train around my layout with my Controlmaster 20 and the flexible throttle and the 20 feet of phone cord that I'm forever flicking out from under my shoes. I'm not co-ordinated enough to run two or three trains on my layout at different speeds while trying to make up a fourth in my yard. I'd really rather concentrate on the beauty of one thing at a time. In other words, I want to WATCH my 2-10-2 with a coal train and take in the sight of those driving wheels and those hopper cars, and then later, see that long reefer extra hauled by a 2-8-8-4, but I want to concentrate on ONE THING AT A TIME. I don't do multi-tasking well, and I run my railroad by myself. If I'm going to make up a train in the yard, I'm going to concentrate on THAT, not the Limited running by on an adjacent track that I hope I can get stopped in time before it runs past the station.

I don't wanna push buttons, I just want to run a couple of trains at my leisure (on a shedule, of course) and watch them tug cars through my scenery. DCC? Nah, I'm having too much fun the way I am.

Okay, start throwing the bricks, guys. I may be old, but I can still duck, LOL!
Tom [:p]

[twhite]

QUOTE: Originally posted by davidmbedard

Wow......these anti -DCC loonies are just that....loony.

How can you mock a technology that you havent tried. DCC is in the present and future. There will be a time when you WONT be able to buy a DC only locomotive.

David

David--I"m 66 years old and I have about 70 locomotives, mostly brass, which I run all the time, so really, if the time comes that I can't by a DC locomotive, I think I'll have enough to keep me happy.
Loony? Of COURSE I'm loony, I'm a musician, it comes with the territory, LOL!
Tom [:D]

[AntonioFP45]

TWhite,

I hear ya, but I'm going to be a " two train" operator myself. It's the freedom and features of DCC that can offer small layout operators the "extra" fun; especially with sound equipped units.

I like to run trains prototype style and enjoy the ability to turn headlights on once a locomotive is ready to pull out with it's train, dim them down to "Rule 17" lights while idling, turn on Mars/Gyra lights on and off as called for when mainline running, and enjoy ALL of the sound effects from sound equipped units. (Even the BLI locomotives run much better on DCC).

I've always disliked looking at my locomotives in DC mode and watching the lights increase and decrease in intensity as I crack open or turn down the throttle. Yuck! The real ones don't do that.

Oh yes:
1. Constant lighting kits are available;
2. You can wire a constant lighting cirucuit yourself,
3. Plus you can pay $20 to $30+ for Mars lighting circuit boards.

But DCC decoders ALREADY have these features available! Since constant lighting is "automatic" due to the presence of 12+ volts on the track, the functions can be used for the "fun stuff" lighting.

So, for my narrow, along the wall layout in which I'll be operating two trains at the most.........it's going to be DCC via a Digitrax Zephyr. hands down. My old, reliable MRC 2500 will be plugged into the "Jump Port" feature so that a visiting operator can have fun as well.,

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by olequa

And yes I was only talking about a diesel throttle. A steam throttle is different isn't it? Bet it's not a little 10 turn knob.

george, grumpier than ever

No George, it's not. Depending on the age and origin of the loco, it can be a handle rotating through 90 degrees or so from a gland on the backplate, a pullout handle on a moving quadrant on top of the firebox, or a "grapevine" handle on a fixed quadrant suspended from the cab roof. Don't forget the reverser, which may be either a handwheel driving a screw, or a lever and quadrant - the famous "Johnson bar".

Don't be grumpy, I was only having a lend of you.[:)] I tend to agree with you up to a point about DCC controller/handsets. But from my point of view, US-style diesel controls would not be any improvement over what's currently available - I'd feel silly running my model steamers and Japanese multiple units with one!

All the best,

Mark.

[Anonymous]

Or hitching a real live firebreathing steam engine weighing several hundred ton to a 10 car heavy weight passenger consist. All of that has mass, weight and needs room to run.

Once you get it going down the rail at 50 mph you are going to have a great deal of rolling mass on your hands. Dont spill the beverages in that diner now or wake the sleepers.

Hard to do with a HO scale T-1 and 10 1 foot long heavyweight models plus head end freight taking up about 15 feet of track. Especially if that track ends in a sharp curve 2 feet from a wall that is higher than the washington monument in DC.

Many of the others have said thier peice in this thread. I point to my Tech DC throttle power pack and say I got momentium, brakes and power. Or to the DCC and say this engine will move while that engine sleeps at the water tower.

I am intrigued by the computer control stand. Anyone have a direct link to the product itself?

[marknewton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by twhite

Well, not understanding the concept behind DCC (I just thought it was something that allowed you to run multiple trains on the same track and control them individually), it seems to me that those of us who run one-operator railroads somewhat smaller than something like Joe Fugate's VERY admirable Siskyou Line--what a BEAUTIFUL layout, BTW--and only run one or two trains at a time, might just NOT need all the bells and whistles--and complexity-- that DCC entails.

Tom, I'm not throwing bricks, but I think you've underestimated the potential benefits DCC has for small, one-operator railroads. My current "obsession" is a small module, based on a Japanese private railway. The scenicked part is 8' by 18", fed at either end by simple traverser staging. The basic operating scenario is the interchange of freight traffic between the JNR and the private line. The other main operating theme is the division and amalgamation of electric multiple units in commuter service.

During the design phase, and before starting construction, I had a long brainstorming session with a modelling mate whose day job is as a signal electrician. I don't have any requirement to run multiple trains singlehanded, but I *do* want to run trains and switch/shunt them prototypically*. After examining my proposed operating scenario, and working out roughly what wiring and controls would be required to do everything I wanted in conventional 2-rail DC, he recommended DCC without hesitation. As he put it, "You want to build a layout, or a bloody substation?"

In my case, DCC allowed me the bells and whistles I wanted, without any great electrical complexity. I freely acknowledge that my situation is probably not typical, and that your requirements may be best met by conventional DC. [:)]

Mark.

* There are too many operating compromises inherent in DC for me to accept. Unfortunately, I think many of these compromises are accepted in general because many modellers don't understand how real railroads operate.

[beegle55]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CP5415

WOW!

This is why I like DC.
I use my imagination for the notches.
Sound? Again, in my head, unless I'm using an Athearn BB!
Brakes? Both of my power packs have brake controls on them.

I'm JOKING! Relax!!!!

I've never investigated DCC so I don't know, but one would figure that for the investment, you would at least have brakes! [:D]

Gordon

Im with you there. I still go with regular DC and it suits me juuuust fine! Its usually alot cheaper too!

[SpaceMouse]

One of the guys at my club had an interesting idea for an operations program that I am embellishing. It would use a car card-type system and would match locomotive towing capacities with car weight both full and empty and limit/increase the power to the locomotive accordingly.

Operators would have to match engines with loads and towing capacity and stage helpers accordingly.