Lionel collector, stuck in an N scaler's modelling space.
you guys may think that until you realize you can pretty much recreate anything that REAL railroads do with DCC...
d
Hi. If a zombie can follow a locomotive that can run into another locomotive on the same "block" using DCC control, then he should be a happy zombie. No interlocking tower wannabee with DC block control every got two DC locos to kiss noses in the same block...unless he rewires the motors, of course.
I do see your point, especially in a yard. But the fellow acting like the interlocking tower guy doesn't get to play with trains, he just switches them. Mind you, with DCC, I can just as easily reach in and flick turnout points manually, or I can use a stationary decoder.
It is nice to see that more progress is being made in the DC world to get better realism. I don't see that as a waste of time or resources, and if it adds a late-life zing to DCers everywhere, great!
Signed
A happy zombie
i guess if i had a model railroad i'd want to recreate what actually occurs.
I think DCC rocks, but it can get you into trouble (and not just $$ trouble). I have to chuckle when the instructions say "You can operate up to X number of trains". I tried to run just two the other day (by myself) and it got ugly pretty quick! I know what the instructions meant to say, but it's tempting to operate a few at a time, and since most of us work alone, it can lead to trouble!
Personally, I have a mix of DC and DCC. Trains are DCC but everything else is DC (turnouts, etc.) I am not that electronically savy to wire all the accessories for DCC, nor do I want to. To me, I like the "personal" feeling of manually changing turnouts, etc. Also, it forces you to pay attention to what's going on.
I'd like to see that switch flipping guy run 2 switchers in the yard and also set up for the incomming freight on track 2-3?.
DCC allows the control of muliple locos, I can have 2 assingned on each knob of the DT400 for say working the yard. can align the turnouts for the incoming train and the operator can take it into the yard.
Years ago I used to enjoy sitting at a cab and flipping the block toggles. Does keep you on your toes. Once the train is out of sight from the cab the CTC is your only hope of knowing what's going on. Thought I would never get into DCC control, now I could never go back.
The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
i don't know if anyone here is familiar with the Belt Railway of Chicago, but they have remote control switches to cross over on the yard leads from the main line, and also on the west end of the west receiving yards. all ya have to do is "tone up" the switch, check the route, throw it if ya have to (from the radio!), and pull! does that make ME a zombie because my engineer can get us lined up while we're still outside the yard, instead of stopping an 11,000 ton train just to check one switch on the other side of a curve?? that's what's better with dcc-it saves you time and you CAN recreate almost anything in the world of railroading.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
I've had both types of layouts and would much rather run the train than run the layout. I've kept one of my old control panels around to explain the difference to the non-train types and remind me how much extra wiring and stuff I don't need with DCC.
Tilden
Big Beast wrote: A few days ago I watched a guy run a DCC train on a club layout. I watched him walk around following the train. I then looked over at the other guy working the yard with DC hearing the clicking from the switches turning blocks on and off flipping switches. I turned back to look at the guy with the DCC. As I watched I realised it wasnt for me. The guy working the yard looked like some tower dispatcher directing the yard while the guy with the (remote control ) looked like a zombie.
A few days ago I watched a guy run a DCC train on a club layout. I watched him walk around following the train. I then looked over at the other guy working the yard with DC hearing the clicking from the switches turning blocks on and off flipping switches. I turned back to look at the guy with the DCC. As I watched I realised it wasnt for me. The guy working the yard looked like some tower dispatcher directing the yard while the guy with the (remote control ) looked like a zombie.
I watch trains railside and most all of the switches are controlled by the Dispatcher, someplace in Omaha. Except for some local switching, the railroads are run by sitting on the engine. We cannot do that trick in HO, but we can follow it around. How the person acts is either to his credit or detracts from his credit. I really like following the models around and enjoy diming the headlights for meets, blowing the whistle for crossings and ringing the bell around stations or areas that require that action. We really only get out what we put into something.
Home layouts and large club layouts are really different in operating procedures. If you watched a club that can run a hundred plus car train with mid and rear DPU's, you would appreciate DCC. It can actually allows manned or DPU helpers on large trains. Don't try this in DC mode.
Most prototype mainlines are controlled by a dispatcher and most mainline switches are controlled from many many miles away.
Most high quality DCC controller models can be run at 1 mph or less, which is important to me.
No matter which you choose, you can still have a lot of fun in DC or DCC.
Enjoy / Cheers
Big Beast wrote:A few days ago I watched a guy run a DCC train on a club layout. I watched him walk around following the train. I then looked over at the other guy working the yard with DC hearing the clicking from the switches turning blocks on and off flipping switches. I turned back to look at the guy with the DCC. ... The guy working the yard looked like some tower dispatcher directing the yard while the guy with the (remote control ) looked like a zombie.
Let's see. There was a guy running a switcher in a yard, and a guy running a train out on the main line. I don't care who's running DC, who's running DCC or who's running wooden Brios with the good old 0-5-0. The guy running the switcher in the yard is going to be busier, like the engineer of a real yard engine, and the road engine guy will be, by comparison, not doing much more than watch mileposts go by. It's what they were doing, not how they were doing it, which makes up most of the difference.
If you've got 1 engine, then it doesn't matter operationally whether you're running DC or DCC. You can have 1 block, and you don't have to worry about other engines coming into it. As soon as you're sharing the space, though, then DCC starts to show its advantages. Also, a large club layout can have a lot of blocks, which allows for more independent train control under DC, but those of us with smaller home layouts don't have the luxury, realistically, of being able to block a layout like a large club.
And for those who say DCC is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Well, honestly, what do you see in sliced bread, anyway? Scratch-built bread is better in my book, even if I do have to cut it myself.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Big Beast wrote: A few days ago I watched a guy run a DCC train on a club layout. I watched him walk around following the train. I then looked over at the other guy working the yard with DC hearing the clicking from the switches turning blocks on and off flipping switches. I turned back to look at the guy with the DCC. As I watched I realised it wasnt for me. The guy working the yard looked like some tower dispatcher directing the yard while the guy with the (remote control ) looked like a zombie. Isn't it fortunate then that you don't have to buy DCC, run DCC, or evern look at it.Bob
Isn't it fortunate then that you don't have to buy DCC, run DCC, or evern look at it.
Bob
I went to the Chrysler Museum of Art and was very impressed by what I saw. I went to the arts and crafts store and bought some paint and canvas. So why don't my paintings look like what I saw in the museum? I used the same materials, so I should have the same results, right?
The same argument goes for DCC vs DC and this is in every scale. Either system run by a pro will look easy; both will be a handful if you don't have a clue. I use both ways on my garden RR as well as battery RC, either system gets a train down the line. DCC has advantages for multiple runs, DC is technologically simpler. I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable.
Apples to oranges, both taste good.
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
If you like flipping toggle switches better than running the engine then DC is the way to go!
But I would much rather run the engine and not have to worry if I had the track power on the track I was planning on using.
The real railroaders do not worry if there is track power on or not so I don't what to have to either.
And I can take any new visitor to my layout and in 5 minutes have them instructed how to run an engine and are able to take a train out on the line. No having to remember what toggle controls what track. That is worth more to me than anything, a new visitor to my layout having a ball!
BOB H - Clarion, PA
I went to my first show 2 years ago. Everyone was telling me the Digitrax system was the ONLY way to go. (just like the Mac people telling me Microsoft would go bust back in high school) There was a Digitrax "expert" there with a small layout. He had everything hooked through the Digitrax system. Trains, turnouts, signals. All run through a computer. I watched this guy off and on for 4 hours. He couldn't get ANYTHING to work. I didn't see the loco even move an inch, and he was supposed to be an expert with this stuff.
With that said, I will still be buying a DCC system just to run my trains. I probably WON'T be buying a Digitrax system. I just want to run a few trains, not become a programmer. It does not appear to be as simple as the companies make it out to be.
cmrproducts wrote: And I can take any new visitor to my layout and in 5 minutes have them instructed how to run an engine and are able to take a train out on the line. No having to remember what toggle controls what track.
Same on my DC layout. They simply need to ask the dispatcher for clearance, which is the same thing that they would have to do if it were DCC. The only toggles that the engineers on my layout throw is the one on the throttle to reverse direction.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
Besides the obvious DCC advantage of having independent control of each loco, so I am running the locos instead of having to "control the trackwork", let's not forget with DCC you can individually tune *each* loco's performance.
For each loco I can set the starting voltage, mid throttle voltage and top throttle voltage. I can also add in a kick start voltage spike to get the loco moving from a standing start more dependably, I can add some momentum appropriate for that specific locomotive, with a different setting for acceleration and deceleration. I can tune the speed for forward and reverse in case the loco happens to run faster one direction than the other.
You can't easily do most of the above on straight DC. What you can do to tune a given loco in straight DC will involve fiddling with the mechanism, and it's difficult to get precise results.
For example, with DCC I can tune a yard goat to have a really nice slow end with just a touch of momentum. I can tune a road engine to have a more consistent speed throughout, and give it more momentum to simulate pulling a heavy train. And if I have two locos I want to consist together, I can make their behavior simular to they run together reasonably well, where that would be impossible on straight DC.
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
jeffrey-wimberly wrote:DC for yard operations is fine - until you want to operate two locos on the same block at the same time doing different jobs. IMPOSSIBLE! You can do this with DCC with no problem.
Depends on the size of the yard. I have seen some double ended yards in DC that have a switcher assembling/breaking down Westbounds and another assembling/breaking down eastbounds with little or no "toggle flipping."
More difficult but not impossible.
Big Beast wrote:A few days ago I watched a guy run a DCC train on a club layout. I watched him walk around following the train. I then looked over at the other guy working the yard with DC hearing the clicking from the switches turning blocks on and off flipping switches. I turned back to look at the guy with the DCC. As I watched I realised it wasnt for me. The guy working the yard looked like some tower dispatcher directing the yard while the guy with the (remote control ) looked like a zombie.
Ya know, BB, I used to think the same thing about cruise control. I didn't want it or have anything to do with it because I thought it would make me lazy behind the wheel. Well...I actually found the opposite to be true.
Cruise control on the highway helps make me more alert and more relaxed because I don't have to constantly look down at the speedometer to see how fast I'm going. Since my foot isn't on the gas the whole time, I can actually stretch my leg out so that I'm more comfortable. (That's nice, since I'm 6'-4") And, I can glance around and enjoy the sights more and feel more refreshed at the end of a journey.
From the outside, cruise control wasn't appealing...until I got behind the wheel and tried it myself. BB, before you dismiss something completely, give it a try first before you come to any steadfast conclusions. You might find that the "zombie" running on the main was able to concentrate on other things come up that he wouldn't have if he were turning blocks on and off.
But, it's entirely your choice...
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
To each their own... I'm not really a DCC person either, though I own one DCC steam loco that I like to run once in a while, but seriously doubt I'll ever be into it anymore than that. The simpler something is the better off I am...
Tracklayer
Tracklayer wrote: To each their own... I'm not really a DCC person either, though I own one DCC steam loco that I like to run once in a while, but seriously doubt I'll ever be into it anymore than that. The simpler something is the better off I am...Tracklayer
If your layout gets very big, that means you will be wanting DCC. The DC is simpler thing is a fallacy, in my opinion.
Jeff But it's a dry heat!
Big Beast wrote:A few days ago I watched a guy run a DCC train on a club layout. I watched him walk around following the train. I then looked over at the other guy working the yard with DC hearing the clicking from the switches turning blocks on and off flipping switches. I turned back to look at the guy with the DCC. As I watched I realised it wasnt for me. The guy working the yard looked like some tower dispatcher directing the yard while the guy with the (remote control ) looked like a zombie. <>
<>
Well as someone pointed out, it sounds like the real point is you'd rather have a layout where you ran a yard, rather than ran a road train. In DC or DCC, the guy running a mainline train isn't going to be as busy as a yard guy.
As far as the yard guy looking like a tower operator, he may have looked that way, but he wasn't acting like one. Real tower operators control turnouts, not power blocks. A yard in DCC would operate much more like the real one - you could run several engines doing different switching tasks at once, have a mainline train come thru the yard (or arrive or depart) all without having to worry about going a few inches too far into the next block and losing control of your engine (which usually ends up with the engineer picking up his engine and moving it back to the correct block...something that rarely happens in the prototype.)
Tracklayer wrote:The simpler something is the better off I am...Tracklayer
Tracklayer,
True. But I've seen DC layouts that appeared to me more complex that using DCC. One could just as equally argue that DCC isn't that complex either.
Again, it's entirely your choice...
tangerine-jack wrote: I went to the Chrysler Museum of Art and was very impressed by what I saw. I went to the arts and crafts store and bought some paint and canvas. So why don't my paintings look like what I saw in the museum? I used the same materials, so I should have the same results, right?The same argument goes for DCC vs DC and this is in every scale. Either system run by a pro will look easy; both will be a handful if you don't have a clue. I use both ways on my garden RR as well as battery RC, either system gets a train down the line. DCC has advantages for multiple runs, DC is technologically simpler. I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. Apples to oranges, both taste good.
The bold line in true, to a point. The technology of DC is simpler. The implementation (except in a very simple case) with DCC is simpler (in my opinion).
When I was a kid we ran DC and it was enjoyable then again thats all they had, but as for the recent yrs when we (dad and I got back into it) we went DCC right away. Now we upgraded to a better systems more and mor elocomotives are becoming Decoderized. When I started the new layout I wanted something more hand son then use the buttons on the throttle to control everything so I planned on using tortises with DPDT switches to control them. DCC is nice in some area but when it comes to throwing a switch lets just say i have a childish attitude and want to do it. The sound of a switch flipping makes me feel well alive and not like a zombie as stated. You can always combine the new with the old in some areas but be careful so you dont short anything out.
Vail and Southwestern RR wrote:For throwing switches I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all answer. On the same layout anything from totally manual, to toggles, to DCC controlled might be appropriate.
I don't think that there is a "one size fits all" anything in model railroading. Locations, railroad, scenery construction, track gauge, scale, operation, siwtch operation, layout size etc. are all variables that we choose. None of them are "one size fits all" and the same goes for systems for controlling trains.
Having used DC way back when we used car batteries, I can relate to the change to DCC.
My particular case was that a neighbor who is a fabulus scenery guy has not a clue to which toggle to flip for anything.
After changing to DCC the neighbor is now running trains.
Of course as fate would have it he developed Parkinsons so not able to participate.
I just realized there is not a spell check on this page. Maybe DCC can cure that!
Clifsfrr
I have a DCC layout, and I would never go back.
Not long ago, I had a 25 car coal train stall on the grade, at the back of the layout. I was just ready to get on my knees and crawl under the layout, to give it a shove. Then I remembered DCC. I just sent another loco around to the other side of the layout, came up behind the stalled coal train, and gave it a shove up the hill. Try that with DC.
My layout is 24 feet long, with a double track, twice around, mainline. It's great to be able to run several trains, at the same time, at different speeds, blowing the horn on each loco separately. I have four crossovers between the mains, at various places on the layout. I can start two trains going, then run a third train, using two 24 car passing sidings. Try that with DC. And no switch flipping go'in on. I'm not into switch flipping.
My passenger trains turn on the bell as they approach the station platform. Freight trains activate the bell when passing through the passenger platforms, just like the real trains. Can't do that with DC.
If you can't run two or three trains at the same time, you probably can't walk and chew gum at the same time either.
" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. "
okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram...
Tracklayer wrote: The simpler something is the better off I am...Tracklayer
The simpler something is the better off I am...
This is exactly why one should *prefer* DCC to straight DC on all but the smallest of layouts.
Wiring is simpler, running trains is simpler ... on my layout for example, if someone comes to visit, I just hand them a wireless throttle with the loco cab number dialed up on it, and say, "have fun!"
Try that on a basement-sized DC layout.
DCC is simpler than DC, once you get comfortable with it. My layout is 8 by 24, double track, with over 40 turnouts and crossovers, and is just one giant block. No toggle switches. There are only five toggle switches on my entire board. Three turn off the power on the three coach tracks, so the lights in the passenger cars go out. The other two turn off power to the engine storage tracks. Most of my yard switches are manual, except the inbound, and the runaround, and the engine tracks. All mainline switches are powered, and use small push buttons from Radioshack. Simplicity.
jfugate wrote: This is exactly why one should *prefer* DCC to straight DC on all but the smallest of layouts.Wiring is simpler, running trains is simpler ...
Wiring is simpler, running trains is simpler ...
I wouldn't even include small layouts as being more simple to wire in DC - unless you are talking a 4x8 oval. Your average small space switching puzzle layout (which are really popular here in the UK) has to have loads of blocks or isolated spurs - unless you only run one loco at a time! Having wired one of these types of layout for DC I know which I'd choose any day ...
... and as for running a small layout DCC makes things so much more straight forward. You can pull off some moves on DCC that would simply be impossible on DC.
The *only* disadvantage of DCC I can now see is the cost, and like all electronics thats coming down all the time.
that happened on one of the guys in the MRR club i belong to. He has a huge (DC) basement layout. One time when we were there, we had two trains running, with a dead block in between - well except for one time when the owner of the layout forgot to flip cabs, so I had control of the one train, and the other guy operating had control of mine... that didn't work out so well...
It was just about then that I decided that when I can afford (both financially and spacially) to have a layout, I'm going to grab DCC straight away. However, I have DC right now just so I can see the locos I have run (not to mention DCC might be a little overkill for 3' of straight track).
His reason for not switching to DCC -> a lot of old (brass) locomotives that he likes to run, and the 10 miles of wire (ok, so it might not be that much...) beneath the layout that would have to be redone for DCC. Now, he did admit that if he was going to rip out this layout and build a new one, he would probably go DCC over DC, and that he was more against re-wiring everything than adding decoders to everything...
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
Oh, God, here we go again!
Let's just all get along and operate what we want, okay? Hello?
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!
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
While there is a learning curve to any DCC system, learning to operate trains with one is not as difficult as it is implied on these forums. If it was, DCC would have been dead on delivery.
Most current DCC 'starter sets' can be installed in just a few minutes. If the installer already has a decoder equipped locomotive or even a DC loco with some systems, he/she will be operating in just a few minutes more.
It took me less than 10 minutes to attach my Digitrax Zephyr to an earlier DC version of my BRVRR. My first 'cornfield meet' was a true revelation. There is no turning back!
To date, my turnouts are operated with ground throws or electrically with standard Atlas slide switches. I have no need for 'accessory' decoders. I have added a DT400 throttle for portability and recently a LocoBuffer and Decoder Pro for decoder programming.
Complexity breeds problems, particularly if the operator does not understand the system he is working with or if his/her expertise is granted rather than earned or learned.
Problems of any type with model railroading is the reason forums like this one exist. It is the first place I turn when I have a problem I can not solve for myself.
Whichever system of operation or control is used, DCC or DC, the object of the hobby is to have fun. Pursue the object everyone!
My 2-cents worth, sorry.
Remember its your railroad
Allan
Track to the BRVRR Website: http://www.brvrr.com/
Many new releases in motive power are coming with DCC already installed, and can also be used on regular DC. So we may not have any choice in the future, you are going to have DC locos whether you want it or not.
I have probably 100 or so older DC locos, I doubt if I'll convert them to DCC. I don't actually have a layout, do any operating on HO scale modules with our local club. But I have also been accumulating some On30 rolling stock, the latest have come with DCC and some with sound.
I hope to make a portable On30 layout in the near future, and look forward to being able to use my DCC locos and hear their sounds!
Bob Boudreau
CANADA
Visit my model railroad photography website: http://sites.google.com/site/railphotog/
dave 1194 wrote:" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. " okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram...
Nasty, no, not at all! A very valid point. I am forced at work etc. to use a computer, I don't like them, and they fail more often than they work. They certainly are not my preferred method of getting things done, but I have no choice if I want to interact with the modern world and conduct business.
My model railroad is not constrained by the modern world, I choose if I want to find a bad wire by looking, or spend hours diagnosing a DCC gremlin (is it the encoder, decoder, uploader, downloader, programming, PC, PCC, LSD, NBA or just a bad wire?). I don't have to be forced in my hobby to do anything I don't want to.
I take comfort in knowing, I mean positively knowing, that the #4 red wire to track 7 is soldered properly to the rail and when I throw the selector switch electricity will pass through to the loco. Sure, it can be a pain to route select with DC, but I do feel more connected to my layout that way and I can pretend to be an overpaid corporate sell out union dispatcher making 200K a year by throwing switches (no offence to real railroad workers, it's just my fantasy, that's all).
I am certainly not saying DCC is crap, I use it regularly and enjoy its benefits, but I don't feel comfortable with the technology. Last year a photo journalist with the Chrysler museum came by to do a photo shoot, I am now forever in print trying to get my DCC loco to communicate with transmitter. Had I used DC, the train would have been running for the photo shoot.
DCC makes wiring the layout very simple (a few feed blocks and some reversing loop tricks is all it takes), I'm not as sure about operations as a whole. What's the difference between throwing a switch on the DC panel as opposed to pushing buttons on the DCC control pad? I have to work either way, one to shunt electricity, the other to program a gizmo to communicate with a loco. I just feel more comfortable shunting electricity.
No harm, no foul. Some like technology, some like the old skool way. If you enjoy the hobby, then who really cares?
"how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block??"
Easy, it's called planning your operating session. It's like playing a game to me, I enjoy it a lot. Besides, I worry about my DCC engines stopping for no apparent reason, so what's the difference?
jfugate wrote: Tracklayer wrote: The simpler something is the better off I am...Tracklayer This is exactly why one should *prefer* DCC to straight DC on all but the smallest of layouts.Wiring is simpler, running trains is simpler ... on my layout for example, if someone comes to visit, I just hand them a wireless throttle with the loco cab number dialed up on it, and say, "have fun!"Try that on a basement-sized DC layout.
Hi Joe. As a matter of fact my layout is small, so it's really not an issue for me. Maybe one day when I have a larger layout I might have more of an interest in it. Until then I'll stick with DC.
simon1966 wrote:Does anyone else think this was an obvoious attempt to stir up the hornets nest and get a bunch of people buzzing? I am sure that our Beast friend is having a good laugh at some folks expense on this one.
Simon,
I had the very same thought when I first responded to this thread. Seems more obvious now that it's on the 3rd page and no response from BB.
NeO6874 wrote:<> <>His reason for not switching to DCC -> a lot of old (brass) locomotives that he likes to run, and the 10 miles of wire (ok, so it might not be that much...) beneath the layout that would have to be redone for DCC. Now, he did admit that if he was going to rip out this layout and build a new one, he would probably go DCC over DC, and that he was more against re-wiring everything than adding decoders to everything...
<>His reason for not switching to DCC -> a lot of old (brass) locomotives that he likes to run, and the 10 miles of wire (ok, so it might not be that much...) beneath the layout that would have to be redone for DCC. Now, he did admit that if he was going to rip out this layout and build a new one, he would probably go DCC over DC, and that he was more against re-wiring everything than adding decoders to everything...
That myth about needing special industrial-grade wiring for DCC is pretty much baloney. Like most modellers, when I switched to DCC I just removed the two wires going from one DC power pack to my control panel and re-attached the two wires to my DCC unit. Each block was already set up with a center-off DPDT switch, so I just replaced one DC cab with a DCC one. That way each block could be either DC or DCC. That's it, except for hooking up one block with an extra DPDT switch so it could be used as a programming track.
Plus, almost all new engines at the LHS are made for "plug and play" or "drop-in" decoders, about as easy as it gets to convert to DCC - pull out the dummy plug, plug in a decoder!!
wjstix wrote: NeO6874 wrote:<> <>His reason for not switching to DCC -> a lot of old (brass) locomotives that he likes to run, and the 10 miles of wire (ok, so it might not be that much...) beneath the layout that would have to be redone for DCC. Now, he did admit that if he was going to rip out this layout and build a new one, he would probably go DCC over DC, and that he was more against re-wiring everything than adding decoders to everything... That myth about needing special industrial-grade wiring for DCC is pretty much baloney. Like most modellers, when I switched to DCC I just removed the two wires going from one DC power pack to my control panel and re-attached the two wires to my DCC unit. Each block was already set up with a center-off DPDT switch, so I just replaced one DC cab with a DCC one. That way each block could be either DC or DCC. That's it, except for hooking up one block with an extra DPDT switch so it could be used as a programming track. Plus, almost all new engines at the LHS are made for "plug and play" or "drop-in" decoders, about as easy as it gets to convert to DCC - pull out the dummy plug, plug in a decoder!!
I understand that, and I bet he does too. Now, I'm no expert in DC (or DCC) wiring, but from the looks of the wiring he had exposed, he also had turnout throws directly wired to the power bus. Provided I was understanding him correctly, he would hav had re-run some (or all) of his power lines because of the way in which it was originally wired (10ish years ago if I remember right).
Anyway, it really doesn't matter in his case. While I agree that DCC would probably be beneficial in that layout, but since he's had it working on DC so well (and has had the time to perfect the control) I don't blame him for mot wanting to swap over to DCC.
I don't really see the point of arguing DC vs. DCC for old/established layouts. I eman the owners of those layouts have probably had the time to perfect everything and get it working "just so". However, I would argue the benefit of DCC over DC on a newly built/under construction layout (except for like an oval with no sidings... then DCC is overkill)
The thing that frustrates me about DCC is that it takes away all the fun I used to have tracing hundreds of feet of wiring to find a short. I sure miss that. And I miss having to run back and forth to a bank of toggle switches to make sure the power in the next block is on before my train gets there.
And who can forget the fun of accidentally running past your block so now someone else has control of your train? Boy, what a treat that always was.
Yeah, now I just waste time watching my trains run smoothly around the layout, Usually two or three at a time. It's so dull doing that from the same hand-held throttle. I hate it... really I do.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
What a silly thread!
The OP watched two operators, one with DCC and one with DC, and decided from that to write off DCC. Seems to me that folks who are pre-disposed to not want DCC are going to find it to be "sour grapes" regardless. I actually tried DCC on other layouts before I swicthed from DC. But hey, why do research?
Honestly, I remember a club from another state (which shall remain nameless) who had DCC and did a rotten job promoting it. Bad trackage, bad trains, bad wiring... The DCC system did what it's supposed to do when there's a short; it shut down to protect the electronics. So the layout was down half the time. And operators yelled "Digitrax is down again!" No, it should be "Our crappy wiring and/or oversized metal wheelsets and/or poorly laid track caused another short!" I use Digitrax and have never had it "go down." It does do the 1-second shut down if I do a dumb thing like drop a screwdriver across the rails, but I lay my track well.
DCC may be a little unforgiving of bad track, bad wiring, and out-of-gauge-oversized-flange wheels, but then, proper tracklaying, wiring, and rolling stock maintenance fixes all of that. It also makes operating much more enjoyable no matter what system you use.
As for operating, you just can't beat controlling just your train instead of a whole section of track.
I recommened those on the fence about DCC consider, next time they're at a club or show with a well-operating DCC layout, to ask to give it a shot. Try it; see if you like it. If not, drive on!
This November, my layout will be at the NC State Fairgrounds in Raleigh for the Neuse River Valley Moel RR Show. If you're there, you're welcome to try out Digitrax DCC on my layout.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
People said the same thing about Thomas Edison and his new-fangled light bulb -- "Who needs it? We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"
cacole wrote: We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"
We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"
DC for layout power has been king for many, many years. But, DCC isn't the first control system to have come out for model railroads. Anybody remember 'Astrac'? The Astrac system sent radio signals through the rails to special recievers in the locomotives which could each be controlled independantly of each other, even in the same block. Sound familiar? The problem was that each reciever had to be specially tuned (which was a PITA!). The new system (DCC) took what was already there and improved it and made it much simpler to use.
Some people hate to admit it, but they are afraid of anything new. Others are totally intimidated by electronics or anything they even "think" is electronic. So, they quite naturally will shy away from DCC. If they are happy with that....so be it, have fun, it is OK, it is your life and you have a perfect right to do as you please with this hobby.
What I prefer to do is help those who "want" to learn DCC or basic electronics, by not talking "down" to them...that is a real turn-off to many people, so we must always remember that communication via the PC is very impersonal......choice of words and how we present our opinions is critical if we wish not to "turn someone off".
Have a great day everyone...it's Friday!
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE wrote:Well this morning I recommended DCC over DC due to the size of the layout and multiple train operation solo of course..I could not phantom the solo operation he wanted in DC.At best it would be a 2-3 man operation...DCC shines in this application.
Larry for President!!!
NeO6874 wrote: His reason for not switching to DCC -> a lot of old (brass) locomotives that he likes to run, and the 10 miles of wire (ok, so it might not be that much...) beneath the layout that would have to be redone for DCC. Now, he did admit that if he was going to rip out this layout and build a new one, he would probably go DCC over DC, and that he was more against re-wiring everything than adding decoders to everything...
Well, the old brass engines probably would be difficult to convert to DCC, and might not run well enough to be worth it. I'll take that one as a valid excuse. From my experience, running a DC engine on DCC as Engine Zero works very poorly.
But, the wiring thing really doesn't fly. You can take a DCC system and plug it right into the wires for one cab of a DC system, and then just set all the blocks to that cab. Done. Yes, things would be better if you pulled out the mass of linguine that supports DC block wiring. (Even more important if you're using Angel Hair, because the thin wires are causing unacceptable voltage drop.) But the point is that you can put DCC on to a DC system very easily.
First, I want to point out that the original post in this thread is retarded and doesn't seem to be based on anything.
wm3798 wrote: The thing that frustrates me about DCC is that it takes away all the fun I used to have tracing hundreds of feet of wiring to find a short. I sure miss that. And I miss having to run back and forth to a bank of toggle switches to make sure the power in the next block is on before my train gets there.And who can forget the fun of accidentally running past your block so now someone else has control of your train? Boy, what a treat that always was.Yeah, now I just waste time watching my trains run smoothly around the layout, Usually two or three at a time. It's so dull doing that from the same hand-held throttle. I hate it... really I do.Lee
You know what frustrates me about DC. I hate that when I start an ops session I don't have to crawl under the layout to find out what engine is on track 3 of my hidden staging yard, with DC all I do is route power to track 3 and turn on a throttle, it takes all the fun out of it. I also hate the fact that with DC if someone misses a red signal his train just stops at the block boundary instead of getting in a head-on collision, thus destroying 2 brass locomotives and costing me thousands. Destruction is way more interesting. I hate the fact that I can easily diagnose and fix any electrical problem on my layout and get replacement parts from home depot or radio shack. I would much rather send electronic components in for warranty work. I hate the fact that I don't have to clean my track on an hourly basis. I hate that when I buy a brass steam loco I can just put it on the track and run it. It would be way more prototypical to open it up first and install a bunch of electronic components in it. Then, three weeks later put it on the track.
Please just take my post as sarcasm. I realize why you guys enjoy DCC but alot of these posts really seem condescending, as if those of us who CHOOSE to use DC are not understanding something. We get it. We understand. We like DC. It's not a step down. We just like it better.
And as far as the "toggle flipping" term that has been thrown around here, hasn't toggle flipping been replaced with "button pushing" for DCC? I would really be intrigued to compare the total amount of "flipped toggles" to "buttons pushed" in a typical operating session.
Now that I think of it, I use rotary selector switches. I guess I don't need to "flip toggles" on my DC layout.
LOL. This guys obviously from the DC thread and tried to start a flame war. He got you guys hook, line and sinker. Well I didn't fall for it
And the comment from "Redneck"....well obviously he is one.
MisterBeasley wrote:...But, the wiring thing really doesn't fly. You can take a DCC system and plug it right into the wires for one cab of a DC system, and then just set all the blocks to that cab. Done. Yes, things would be better if you pulled out the mass of linguine that supports DC block wiring. (Even more important if you're using Angel Hair, because the thin wires are causing unacceptable voltage drop.) But the point is that you can put DCC on to a DC system very easily.
I think you hit the nail on the head there Mr. B. The wiring I saw was (wild guess) 20AWG (sub)mains with 22AWG feeders. Although this was just the wiring within a block. I don't know if he had 18/16 (or heavier) AWG mains from the power source(s).
I hope that for our club we decide with DCC, or at least wire it in such a way as to run either/or. I hate to think what might happen if we wire it for DC, and then decide to go to DCC and find that all the wiring is sub-par for DCC... I think DCC would be really sweet to see in a yard/engine terminal/passenger terminal (and I mean a big one, like NYC's Grand Central), with locos all over the place going every which way, coming in from their most recent run, getting ready for their upcoming run, switching cars as the express passes through, etc...
jeffrey-wimberly wrote: cacole wrote: We've been using candles and kerosene lanterns for years and years, and don't need no 'lectric light!"We've come a long way since the nay-sayers of 1879 trying to write off the improved incandescent light bulb. That's right, the incandescent light bulb was already out there. Edison took what was already there and improved it. It was through direct marketing that Edison made his bulb popular.DC for layout power has been king for many, many years. But, DCC isn't the first control system to have come out for model railroads. Anybody remember 'Astrac'? The Astrac system sent radio signals through the rails to special recievers in the locomotives which could each be controlled independantly of each other, even in the same block. Sound familiar? The problem was that each reciever had to be specially tuned (which was a PITA!). The new system (DCC) took what was already there and improved it and made it much simpler to use.
They are working on light emitting chemicals that you paint onto a wall and retire the old light bulb as we knew em at some point in the future.
At first I did not want to participate in this thread because it seemed to be such a silly declaration to make and nothing but trouble.
El-Capitan states: And as far as the "toggle flipping" term that has been thrown around here, hasn't toggle flipping been replaced with "button pushing" with DCC?
Yes, but actually there are Far fewer buttons to push.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
tangerine-jack wrote: dave 1194 wrote:" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. " okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram... Nasty, no, not at all! A very valid point. I am forced at work etc. to use a computer, I don't like them, and they fail more often than they work. They certainly are not my preferred method of getting things done, but I have no choice if I want to interact with the modern world and conduct business. My model railroad is not constrained by the modern world, I choose if I want to find a bad wire by looking, or spend hours diagnosing a DCC gremlin (is it the encoder, decoder, uploader, downloader, programming, PC, PCC, LSD, NBA or just a bad wire?). I don't have to be forced in my hobby to do anything I don't want to. I take comfort in knowing, I mean positively knowing, that the #4 red wire to track 7 is soldered properly to the rail and when I throw the selector switch electricity will pass through to the loco. Sure, it can be a pain to route select with DC, but I do feel more connected to my layout that way and I can pretend to be an overpaid corporate sell out union dispatcher making 200K a year by throwing switches (no offence to real railroad workers, it's just my fantasy, that's all).I am certainly not saying DCC is crap, I use it regularly and enjoy its benefits, but I don't feel comfortable with the technology. Last year a photo journalist with the Chrysler museum came by to do a photo shoot, I am now forever in print trying to get my DCC loco to communicate with transmitter. Had I used DC, the train would have been running for the photo shoot. DCC makes wiring the layout very simple (a few feed blocks and some reversing loop tricks is all it takes), I'm not as sure about operations as a whole. What's the difference between throwing a switch on the DC panel as opposed to pushing buttons on the DCC control pad? I have to work either way, one to shunt electricity, the other to program a gizmo to communicate with a loco. I just feel more comfortable shunting electricity. No harm, no foul. Some like technology, some like the old skool way. If you enjoy the hobby, then who really cares?"how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block??"Easy, it's called planning your operating session. It's like playing a game to me, I enjoy it a lot. Besides, I worry about my DCC engines stopping for no apparent reason, so what's the difference?
well said. if whatever you do provides a respite from the stress and strains of today's world, go ahead and do it! i'd sure have choice words for anyone that told me how to spend my free time, let alone micro-manage it...
djt out
I'm going to ad something from the perspective from a relatively new guy in the hobby(soon a year) and someone who can't even find the battery in his car(almost, I do now). So with this in mind bear with me!!
When I came back into the hobby after a 20 year hiatus I started with DCC straight away. I didn't find it that more expensive even though each new loco of course comes with a higher price tag. But it's so simple to use. When I built my first layout last summer I didn't do any wiring at all. I just plugged it in and off I went on a magical journey with my trains and my kids. My son is three years old and he is very excited about running his own engine. He presses the sound buttons(to much) and is thriving with the easy options that DCC have given us. When I start working on my second layout shortly I will do so with utmost confidence that my low, very low technical skill won't stop me from running several engines along my kids and just plain having fun. And for ME, I want to emphasize that this is ME and my kids this wouldn't been possible with DC because I just wouldn't have the skill to pull it off.
Anyways, in such a small hobby we should care for each other and respect each others decisions. What works for me might be hell for someone else. Who am I to tell someone what to like.
Best regards, Magnus
One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
BRAKIE wrote:Randy,You have no idea how a real CTC board works..DC CTC comes the closest.
I don't either, but I do see real trains running together on the same track. DCC is the closest thing we have now to reality. Its just obvious.
Driline wrote: BRAKIE wrote:Randy,You have no idea how a real CTC board works..DC CTC comes the closest.I don't either, but I do see real trains running together on the same track. DCC is the closest thing we have now to reality. Its just obvious.
Theres all kinds of toggle switches on a reall CTC board
As far as 2 trains running on 1 track we do that twice aweek at the club on our point to point layout.
rrinker wrote:One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops. --Randy
Randy nailed it exactly. After running with cab control on some large club layouts, I quickly decided command control was the only way to fly on a large layout. Setting up a basic DCC system is no more complex than your average HD TV and DVD player. With most new locos having a decoder socket and being plug and play, most of the complexities are removed.
Like going from VHS tape to DVD, going from DC to DCC is similar in that you have to learn some new terminology and a few new skills. But two are about similar in the level of conceptual switch. Once you make the switch, however, few ever want to go back. DCC so simplifies things overall that most later wonder why they waited so long.
I think I saw this one before.
I'm going ta bed. G'nite.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Not being able to see the engine in your staging yard is more a function of bad layout design than your control system.
I generally run my layout by myself, so having all the "buttons" at my fingertips (and not someone else's) does a pretty good job of minimizing the opportunities for "cornfield meets." I've also found that having some scenery in place helps keep the trains from falling more than a half inch or so if you do slip up...
Look... I fought going with DCC for years. The club I belong to has a Digitrax set up that might as well have been developed by NASA. I've been a member for almost 10 years, and I still don't know how to call up a locomotive on that thing. Every throttle they make is different from the other, and I find the number of control modules, boosters or whatever they call them to be a bit mind boggling. I also ran the Lenz system on the N scale layout there, and found its manual just as confusing, especially since it was badly translated from German. "Push now the button left side of ... blah blah blah." While setting up and getting started were a mystery to me, running with DCC was a joy. When MRC Prodigy Advance was introduced, I jumped in with both feet. It was cheap, easy to set up and understand, and was installed within 5 minutes of signing the UPS ticket.
I think what we'll be seeing in coming years will be ever smaller yet more powerful decoders, more equipment that has factory installed chips, chips showing up in things like passenger cars, cabooses, cars with FREDs, and any of a number of trackside accessories that can be programmed to do something. The more that become available, the lower the price will go.
DC will never die completely, it's way too versatile, inexpensive, and easy to rig up for a simple starter layout. But that will be because DCC chips will be more transparent running on DC, not because DC is better.
jfugate wrote: rrinker wrote: One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops. --RandyRandy nailed it exactly. After running with cab control on some large club layouts, I quickly decided command control was the only way to fly on a large layout. Setting up a basic DCC system is no more complex than your average HD TV and DVD player. With most new locos having a decoder socket and being plug and play, most of the complexities are removed.Like going from VHS tape to DVD, going from DC to DCC is similar in that you have to learn some new terminology and a few new skills. But two are about similar in the level of conceptual switch. Once you make the switch, however, few ever want to go back. DCC so simplifies things overall that most later wonder why they waited so long.
rrinker wrote: One comment: What if there was a second train coming at that lone operater out onthe main? Now someone has to take a siding to let the other guy past. With DCC, someone (maybe a tower operator or a CTC dispatcher) lines the turnouts and the two engineers simply run their trains. With DC, someone has to do a bunch of toggle flipping to direct power, which is NOT in the least bit prototypical (unless this is a model of an electrified railroad, in which case it's somewhat prototypical to direct power to layotu sections). That so-called 'zombie' was being a locomotive ENGINEER. Not a towerman, not a dispatcher, not a power director.Withotu some rather complex hardware, you can't just 'run your train' with DC, you or someone has to worry about setting the block power to your cab as you run along. There is no such thing in DCC. Internally DCC might be rather complex, but liek many other appliances we use, it can be treated as a black box. You do NOT need to understand what's happening indise the box to be able to effectively use it. Whereas with a DC cab control setup, you always have to be aware of how it works, even if you are out there all alone running a train. Drive into a block where you forgot to set the power and your train suddenly stops. --Randy
Joe,DCC will never work in our club..We have operation melt downs as it is when one yard gets backed up.We have a bottle neck at West Dayton where the Newark Sub joins the main.
DCC can't do the impossible and its not the cure all..In the club's position it won't even be a aspirin to ease the DS's headache.
Oh indeed I do know how a real CTC board works, both the classic US&S types and the modern computer versions. DC power routing is NOTHING like lining routes with CTC, although I suppose you could configure the hardware so that it sets the proper cab to the block as you line the routes. But the hardware to accomplish this would make DCC look like a simple battery and light bulb circuit in comparison. I recommend you take a look at JMRI and Railroad and Company and see what can be done in DCC. No where on a real railroad does the DS connect the blue cab to block 5 and the red cab to block 6. With DCC, not having to worry abotu cab/block assignmetns means you actually CAN make realistic interlockings because like the real railroad all you need to worry about is the detection and signals.
With software like JMRI or RR&Co, you can build either a classic type machine or duplicate the modern computer screen types. That really has nothign to do with DC vs DCC, but if you then run DC power, SOMEONE is goign to have the task of assigning cabs to blocks so the trains can make the meets and passes lined by the dispatcher.
Looking ahead of your train and moving a multi-position rotary switch to connect your cab to the next block isn't realistic railroading.
Randy,We use a real US&S board..I am not to sure what railroad but,believe it to be a either old NYC or Erie board.
It looks like this but,longer:
http://www.cliftonforgediv.com/signals.htm
All our road engineers need to do is run their train and obey the block signals.
So Brakie, what you're saying is along the same lines as what I said... It doesn't matter what control system you're using if your layout is poorly designed.
I dare say that DCC does offer a bit more flexibility, though. I had rigged my layout for simple DC with a couple of blocks to hold trains before I bought my MRC Prodigy Advance. It was a pain, because in some instances I would have to back a train up, or use the 0-5-0 to fix a bottleneck. With the DCC, and without changing the track plan at all, I can re-route trains anywhere I want to avoid problems.
May I ask a few Qs?
How easy is it to install decoders in things? What tools do you need?
If I am to get DCC, all I want it for is to have my Blue Box athearn run side by side with my new Kato unit. I dont need any of this or that, just to be able to run a 4 unit consist with an Atlas,P2k,Athearn, and a Kato and not worry about problems with speed. Can anyone here give me a link to a starter kit with just the necessities?
Alec
BRAKIE wrote: Randy,We use a real US&S board..I am not to sure what railroad but,believe it to be a either old NYC or Erie board.It looks like this but,longer:http://www.cliftonforgediv.com/signals.htmAll our road engineers need to do is run their train and obey the block signals.
So you've attached a lot of extra circuitry to route the cabs according to the cleared routes? Or what? Do you use route cab control? I have a lot of the odl issues of MR where Linn Westcott explained various cab control systems and presented circuits for them - and wow was that one complex. Easy for the engineer to run a train, sure - but there's a huge penalty in complexity. Yes it can be argued that the microcontroller inside a DCC command station is far more complex than any number of miles of wire and relays and switches, but like I said, you cna effectively treat the DCC system as a black box, you do NOT need to know the detaisl of how it works inside to connect it up and use it. But you can't just go out and buy a box and connect an input and and output and make a route cab control system.
wctransfer wrote: May I ask a few Qs?How easy is it to install decoders in things? What tools do you need?If I am to get DCC, all I want it for is to have my Blue Box athearn run side by side with my new Kato unit. I dont need any of this or that, just to be able to run a 4 unit consist with an Atlas,P2k,Athearn, and a Kato and not worry about problems with speed. Can anyone here give me a link to a starter kit with just the necessities?Alec
Alec,
This may be helpful to you. Click or type in this link:
http://litchfieldstation.com/lobby/u_what.htm
Hi all,
Seems like we have a few DCC brains here so I have a few questions from a person sitting on the fence, contemplating the jump from DC to DCC.
Question 1: I see an article in May 07 MRR about modifying points for DCC, do I need to do this, some of you have described the conversion as just plugging in the new DCC unit? I have used insulfrog points by peco. I think I have about 60 points, I really don't want to be pulling these all up to modify each one!
Question 2: The reversing loop, I have a loop but it goes from one main line to another but it does reverse the direction, do I need a reversing loop module still?!
Question 3: lighting, I would need to rewire all the lights in the locomotives to the Decoder on my older locos?! Do I need different bulbs because of this?!
Question 4: On some of the really old locomotives some tend to use the direct contact of the wheels to one side of the motor as part of the chassis, how do you wire a decoder in that situation?
Question 5: Turntables, the voltage changes direction in DC depending on the side that comes into contact with the rail, how do you overcome that problem?!
I finished the wiring not too long ago and it is working fine, I just don't want to go backwards and have to pull up points to cut power connectors, and rewire too many areas and find some locos impossible to run in DCC. I read an article recently that suggested leaving the control panel in, as it allowed any short circuits to be found more easily by isolating sections but otherwise just turn all the switches on and have fun!
Hope there weren't too many questions, these are a few that are preventing me making leap, I program Programmable Logic Controllers to Operate Coal Mines for my work, the programming side really doesn't phase me at all!
Regards,
Nigel
ngartshore350 wrote: Hi all,Seems like we have a few DCC brains here so I have a few questions from a person sitting on the fence, contemplating the jump from DC to DCC.Question 1: I see an article in May 07 MRR about modifying points for DCC, do I need to do this, some of you have described the conversion as just plugging in the new DCC unit? I have used insulfrog points by peco. I think I have about 60 points, I really don't want to be pulling these all up to modify each one!Question 2: The reversing loop, I have a loop but it goes from one main line to another but it does reverse the direction, do I need a reversing loop module still?!Question 3: lighting, I would need to rewire all the lights in the locomotives to the Decoder on my older locos?! Do I need different bulbs because of this?!Question 4: On some of the really old locomotives some tend to use the direct contact of the wheels to one side of the motor as part of the chassis, how do you wire a decoder in that situation?Question 5: Turntables, the voltage changes direction in DC depending on the side that comes into contact with the rail, how do you overcome that problem?!I finished the wiring not too long ago and it is working fine, I just don't want to go backwards and have to pull up points to cut power connectors, and rewire too many areas and find some locos impossible to run in DCC. I read an article recently that suggested leaving the control panel in, as it allowed any short circuits to be found more easily by isolating sections but otherwise just turn all the switches on and have fun!Hope there weren't too many questions, these are a few that are preventing me making leap, I program Programmable Logic Controllers to Operate Coal Mines for my work, the programming side really doesn't phase me at all!Regards,Nigel
It sounds to me that you have a good operating DC layout and are finding excuses not to go DCC. Its OK..........you don't have to. If you are comfortable and happy with your existing layout then don't. I'm sure you know the advantages of DCC and apparently they are not important to you. Again....no big deal. The DCC police arn't going to take you to jail
I'm not going to answer each of your questions as I'm sure someone else will with better instructions than me will do so.
Suffice to say all of your questions can be addressed with little to no modification to go DCC.
ngartshore350 wrote:Hi all,Seems like we have a few DCC brains here so I have a few questions from a person sitting on the fence, contemplating the jump from DC to DCC.Question 1: I see an article in May 07 MRR about modifying points for DCC, do I need to do this, some of you have described the conversion as just plugging in the new DCC unit? I have used insulfrog points by peco. I think I have about 60 points, I really don't want to be pulling these all up to modify each one!Question 2: The reversing loop, I have a loop but it goes from one main line to another but it does reverse the direction, do I need a reversing loop module still?!Question 3: lighting, I would need to rewire all the lights in the locomotives to the Decoder on my older locos?! Do I need different bulbs because of this?!Question 4: On some of the really old locomotives some tend to use the direct contact of the wheels to one side of the motor as part of the chassis, how do you wire a decoder in that situation?Question 5: Turntables, the voltage changes direction in DC depending on the side that comes into contact with the rail, how do you overcome that problem?!I finished the wiring not too long ago and it is working fine, I just don't want to go backwards and have to pull up points to cut power connectors, and rewire too many areas and find some locos impossible to run in DCC. I read an article recently that suggested leaving the control panel in, as it allowed any short circuits to be found more easily by isolating sections but otherwise just turn all the switches on and have fun!Hope there weren't too many questions, these are a few that are preventing me making leap, I program Programmable Logic Controllers to Operate Coal Mines for my work, the programming side really doesn't phase me at all!Regards,Nigel
Nigel,
check out www.wiringfordcc.com for in-depth answers.
Hi NeO6874 & Driline!
Thanks for the advice, no not looking for excuses just don't want to spend more time playing with wires to change to DCC. If it as easy as they say that is great with a little mods for the Turntable and loop!! Just being cautious, I have the plywood plains at the moment and the last thing I need is to re-wiring the layout! I'm sooooooooo tempted but still a little cautious.
Currently I'm adding signaling with detectors so there is a little wiring going on but I have almost completed the backdrops with the exception of clouds and I'd like to move on, but if DCC requires wiring mods it is much easier now before I start balasting track!
Nige.
PS: Like the Yoda Comment!
I thought about switching to DCC, but as soon as I saw sound locomotives in DC--I have no desire to switch to DCC. Maybe someday way down the road--like 20 years--I will switch to whatever is the new technology at that point.
wm3798 wrote: Not being able to see the engine in your staging yard is more a function of bad layout design than your control system.
So anybody with a hidden storage yard has a poorly designed layout? This is laughable.
wm3798 wrote: So Brakie, what you're saying is along the same lines as what I said... It doesn't matter what control system you're using if your layout is poorly designed.Lee
Lee,It was DESIGN that way..Even real railroads have bottle neck spots where trains need to wait for a slot to open before they can proceed..This may be alien to many but,we wanted to emulate prototypical operations as realistically as possible.While running a local I have waited at West Dayton for several train to pass before I could reenter the main from West Dayton Industrial Park.That was about 20 minute (real time) wait..
So no,the layout is not poorly design as it does exactly what it was designed to do-emulate prototypical operation on a single track main line with sub division traffic joining the main.
rrinker wrote: BRAKIE wrote: Randy,We use a real US&S board..I am not to sure what railroad but,believe it to be a either old NYC or Erie board.It looks like this but,longer:http://www.cliftonforgediv.com/signals.htmAll our road engineers need to do is run their train and obey the block signals. So you've attached a lot of extra circuitry to route the cabs according to the cleared routes? Or what? Do you use route cab control? I have a lot of the odl issues of MR where Linn Westcott explained various cab control systems and presented circuits for them - and wow was that one complex. Easy for the engineer to run a train, sure - but there's a huge penalty in complexity. Yes it can be argued that the microcontroller inside a DCC command station is far more complex than any number of miles of wire and relays and switches, but like I said, you cna effectively treat the DCC system as a black box, you do NOT need to know the detaisl of how it works inside to connect it up and use it. But you can't just go out and buy a box and connect an input and and output and make a route cab control system. --Randy
Randy,The joy of running trains,making meets with 1 or more trains makes it worth while.
Let me repeat myself..In the club's position DCC won't even be a aspirin to ease the DS's headache when it comes to operation and I know 42 guys who will fully agree.
Brakie,
You're saying that DCC won't be the club's "aspirin" or won't make the operating situation any better? And there are 40 guys that agree.......
O.K, but will it not make overall operations easier? Add to that it's likely that some of your members have never tried the special lighting effects or sound through DCC. Is it possible that some of them may enjoy controlling their locos headlights, Mars/Gyra lights, and sounds?
Like the group I belonged to, they might have a change of heart once they try it. We went "Ga-Ga!" That's what happened at my club's 20 year old layout once the switch was made. No one wants to go back...including the members that were originally anti-dcc. Membership also increased, rather quickly.
Respectfully, to each his own and DC is fine, but it just makes me wonder though if your membership's resistence to the idea is more out of "don't shake the status quo" and "If it's not broken, don't try to fix it" type of mood.
Exactly what I've been thinking all along, Antonio. No, DCC will not fix an operational bottleneck caused by track arrangement and/or traffic flow in the operating scheme, but it surely makes operation easier. Brakie's club seems to have some sort of route cab control or other scheme that does not require the engineer to handle the block/cab assignments, which means under DCC they should see minimal if any change. The dispatcher(s) though, would see their role change to JUST lining routes on the CTC panel. There is apparantly a full signalling system involved, so granted a move to DCC would not be cheap. Since the engineers do not assign cabs to blocks I am assuming the signal system is highly integrated with the control system, thus this would not be a situation where the DC cabs could be disconnected and DCC connected in its place, leaving the signal system until later to upgrade, if required. Sounds like with Brakie's club it would have to be all or nothing.
Randy,It would be all or nothing with a possible wiring rebuild.While it sounds complex its not.Detection for the signals is done by locomotive and end car.The end car has its axle painted with resistance paint.Power routing is done by the DS through block toggle switches for track polarity.Left equals West bound while Right equals East bound.We have arrows above each block to show the DS which way the train is heading.If the arrow is white on the right its a Eastbound..White on the left a Westbound.
We use walk around control and the signals tells the engineer what to expect at the next signal.We have signals from clear to slow clear and Medium-Approach Slow-used for yard entrance.
Dispatching is not very complicated but,one needs trained under a experience DS.
We have 2 dispatchers.One for the main line and one for Newark Sub.
skerber wrote:I thought about switching to DCC, but as soon as I saw sound locomotives in DC--I have no desire to switch to DCC. Maybe someday way down the road--like 20 years--I will switch to whatever is the new technology at that point.
skerber,
Switching to DCC just for sound would not be a wise reason for doing so. However (as Crandell likes to put it), if you want your locomotives to be able to "kiss" one another ANYWHERE on the same track, DCC is the way to go.
Yes, that is true. Or, how about this: on the same stretch of contiguous track (powered track between gaps), you have two locomotives, one parked, the other nudges slowly up to the rear coupler of the first, couples, and then you form a nearly perfect MU digitally by pressing a few buttons. Oh, one of the locos is a Challenger with 69" drivers, the other is a 4-8-4 variant with 80" drivers.
Try doing that in DC.
AntonioFP45 wrote: Brakie,You're saying that DCC won't be the club's "aspirin" or won't make the operating situation any better? And there are 40 guys that agree.......O.K, but will it not make overall operations easier? Add to that it's likely that some of your members have never tried the special lighting effects or sound through DCC. Is it possible that some of them may enjoy controlling their locos headlights, Mars/Gyra lights, and sounds?Like the group I belonged to, they might have a change of heart once they try it. We went "Ga-Ga!" That's what happened at my club's 20 year old layout once the switch was made. No one wants to go back...including the members that were originally anti-dcc. Membership also increased, rather quickly.Respectfully, to each his own and DC is fine, but it just makes me wonder though if your membership's resistence to the idea is more out of "don't shake the status quo" and "If it's not broken, don't try to fix it" type of mood.
Antonio,First every member is well aware what DCC can do after all we are not cave men coming out of the cave for the first time..
We see NO real advantage to DCC on the club's layout as far as operation.Also we decided not to have sound due to the racket it would cause.Imagine 20-30 locomotives on the layout blowing horns,the prime mover sound etc.Not a very pleasant thought is it?
Then as a CLUB we must take in other considerations such as members with older brass steam locomotives,older brass diesels and other not so DCC friendly locomotives such as old Penn-Line,Hobbytown and Varney many still have brass wheels.
We looked at the overall cost for the members throttles,decoders,etc and then we put the REAL facts and figures base on MRSP and DISCOUNT prices before the membership and it was open for discussion and carried forward to the next months meeting for thought and more discussion.
At the third meeting the vote was taken and DCC was defeated by a 40-7 margin based on the presented facts,discussion and that it would not help operation.The 7 pro DCC'ers kept bringing the subject up till it was permanently tabled by popular vote..
As far as membership growth we have 47 members and 2 probationary members that recently joined.We have no problems getting and keeping new members because we are a DC layout..Of course in this area the closest DCC club is in Sandusky or Lima.Then there that small group in Tiffin that uses DCC but,its not a club.
selector wrote: Yes, that is true. Or, how about this: on the same stretch of contiguous track (powered track between gaps), you have two locomotives, one parked, the other nudges slowly up to the rear coupler of the first, couples, and then you form a nearly perfect MU digitally by pressing a few buttons. Oh, one of the locos is a Challenger with 69" drivers, the other is a 4-8-4 variant with 80" drivers. Try doing that in DC.
Nobody is contending that DCC provides better multi-train operation.
Understood Brakie,
However, I must degree with the view that sound would cause a racket.
It baffles me how various modelers have made similar claims.................
As has been basically stated so many times before: whether it's 5 locomotives or 50 locomotives...........................
If everyone keeps the sound level turned down to a low or very low volume level then sound can be an enjoyable feature that "accents" a modeling session much like a gourmet sauce does to an Italian Pasta meal.
A rule of thumb for sound volume that that seems to work well is that other than "faintly" audible whistles or horns, sound equipped units (diesel or steam) should be barely audible once they're more than 15ft. linear distance from the modeler.
Just as in real life, once prototype diesel locomotives pass you at a grade crossing, the prime mover sounds fade into the distance and the horn is a distant echo.
A club that runs sound equipped units should not have a problem at all if the membership votes to stick with the "low volume" rule. Many of us have very nice home stereo systems with powerful amplifiers, yet it's likely that, with few exceptions, we don't BLAST them at full volume.
These are just my thoughts but I notice that a lot of modelers share similar views because sound has become so popular.
Antonio,I may get ream for this if its read by a club member..Anyway..There is a lot of older locomotives on the layout that whines(Tenshodo),growls,(Hobbytown and older steam locomotives including Varney,Penn-Line and of course brass steamers.
We believe that is enough racket for our ears to endure but,would never ever complain to the owners of those locomotives after all they have their rights as club members and the majority of us older guys doesn't mind after all we are use to those locomotives having coming up through the hobby in those years..
We have also thought of the rights of those members that wanted sound so,like all things sound was put to the vote and was defeated by a 37-10 vote.I suspect as more DC locomotives come with sound we will need to reopen the matter of sound and like always the members will have their say and vote.
Thanks for all your forceful input, though.
Midnight Railroader wrote: dave 1194 wrote:" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. " okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram... After reading all the fine posts such as this one enumerating the reasons why I simply must switch to DCC (as if the posters would ever know, given the fact they've never been in my basement), I just wanted you to know that I would use DCC, except for one important reason:I don't want to.Thanks for all your forceful input, though.
What simply amazes me is how we operated for years without DCC..My goodness we couldn't run multiple trains,couldn't work the yard..I guess all of the early operation thinkers was wrong headed because they didn't have DCC to operate with.
What a load of arrogant(ignorant?) crap some DCC users will use to wave their silly DCC flag!
Midnight Railroader wrote:After reading all the fine posts such as this one enumerating the reasons why I simply must switch to DCC (as if the posters would ever know, given the fact they've never been in my basement), I just wanted you to know that I would use DCC, except for one important reason: I don't want to.
I don't want to.
Midnight,
And that is your perogative...
Good, stick with your cheeseball DC, makes one less person buying decoders so there is more for us in the computer age to use in our gear. Plus while both your hands are busy flipping toggles, my free hand is kicking back with a cold beer.
Ok, everyone, lets keep this civil. Peeps are starting to flame/rant.... Really, this is a personal choice. I love the discussion, but lets not get brutal. Both DC and DCC have advantages...and disadvantages.
Brian
SunsetLimited wrote: Good, stick with your cheeseball DC, makes one less person buying decoders so there is more for us in the computer age to use in our gear. Plus while both your hands are busy flipping toggles, my free hand is kicking back with a cold beer.
Please, at least come over to my house and operate my layout before you call my operating system cheesball. You are welcome at any time.
From my experience people who make ignorant posts like this one have little or no experience, skills or talent and only come on here to criticize others.
Also, if you are so far into the computer age, please post a link to your website or photo site so we can view your model railroad.
I agree with ShodowNix.. flame wars get nothing accomplished (except the locking and/or deletion of a thread)
I've seen DCC used really well (specifically on club layouts at trainshows), but DC does have its advantages (I don't have to do as much work to get an older loco to run).
I'm going to be using DC for the forseeable future - I can't afford a DCC system... yet. However, as soon as they arrive, I'm putting decoders into my fleet of locomotives. Partially because some of the members of the club I belong to have DCC layouts, and also so that I can prove to the other guys of the club (who are proposing - AFAIK - to wire our under construction layout as DC only) that DCC isn't really that hard to wire up. If it works the way I hope it will, the club layout will be DCC (using a Digitrax, or other system that can run DC on 00) and the club will provide one (1) simple decoder (eg the NCE D13SR) to each member who doesn't have any DCC-equipped locos so they can run on our layout. Or we'll just wire for both control schemes... Either way, I'm using my locos (and decoders) as the guinea pigs for the dual-mode running capability (Tom/tstage beat me to asking about them here).
Now, I don't hate DC (or DCC) - but I do like the advantages that DCC has over DC, especially with regard to being able to pick any loco and "assign" it as a helper to a struggling freight, or when weaving a locomotive through the servicing facility, without having to worry about whether or not I can cross this turnout here because that loco over there was just in the block I would be entering...
SunsetLimited wrote: Midnight Railroader wrote: dave 1194 wrote:" I normally run straight DC because it's what I grew up with and I am comfortable. " okay... following that logic, why do you have (or use at a library or work, or whatever) a computer and obtain access to the internet? chances are that if you grew up without DCC you grew up without the internet, so why such a luddite when it comes to enhancing your model railroad experience? worrying about throwing switches and all that nonsense for electrical "blocks" simply detracts from the fine art of yard switching. how can you think five or six moves ahead of time when you're worried about your engine losing power in the next block?? just my two cents, and i hope this doesnt seem like a nastygram... After reading all the fine posts such as this one enumerating the reasons why I simply must switch to DCC (as if the posters would ever know, given the fact they've never been in my basement), I just wanted you to know that I would use DCC, except for one important reason:I don't want to.Thanks for all your forceful input, though. Good, stick with your cheeseball DC, makes one less person buying decoders so there is more for us in the computer age to use in our gear. Plus while both your hands are busy flipping toggles, my free hand is kicking back with a cold beer.
Why are DCC-users so threatened by the idea that someone might not want to use DCC?
Midnight Railroader wrote:Why are DCC-users so threatened by the idea that someone might not want to use DCC?
I'm not threatened, nor do I want to push DCC down someone's throat. I personally like it because it makes MRRing more enjoyable for me.
Whichever system one chooses - DC or DCC - that's their choice and I can respect that. The problem lies when one starts criticizing another's choice or preference. It seems that we've sorta crossed that line.
Discussion and free dialogue are healthy and sometimes edifying. As others have said, let's keep this discussion civil and please stop making it such a personal one.
el-capitan wrote: SunsetLimited wrote: Good, stick with your cheeseball DC, makes one less person buying decoders so there is more for us in the computer age to use in our gear. Plus while both your hands are busy flipping toggles, my free hand is kicking back with a cold beer.Please, at least come over to my house and operate my layout before you call my operating system cheesball. You are welcome at any time. From my experience people who make ignorant posts like this one have little or no experience, skills or talent and only come on here to criticize others. Also, if you are so far into the computer age, please post a link to your website or photo site so we can view your model railroad.
Lighten up there a little El Capitan. It was a funny comment and I for one appreciate his humor. Unlike the liberal DC zealots I see lurking here.
Have a cheeseball on me
I must have missed the humorous part. Seems like a flame to me.
And I didn't think my post was offensive but if it was I appologize.
I'm a DCCite, but I also have doubts about sound. I am concerned about how having four or five trains with sound running in a 12x14 area is going to sound. I'm thinking that in the real world, I can hear one, or sometimes two (when I'm lucky) trains at a time. And the location of the sound makes sense. In a layout that surrounds me I'm wondering if the effect will be lost. Then again, I'm in N-scale, and on a buget, so maybe this is all just sour grapes!
Cap, i never called your layout itself cheesy at all, i was calling DC cheesy and thats my opinion, just like the opinion of the original poster was that he wasn't impressed with DCC, thats his opinion.I also never said anyone had to use DC, i actually said the opposite, i could careless what you use. People who want to stay with DC thats fine, no problems with that, i used it for a very long time also, i just saw that i would never fully get the potential out of my layout with DC and switched. In my opinion there are only two real good excuses to not switch and they are a lack of money to upgrade and the other is the decoder install issues and that can be over come by doing a dual dc and dcc layout.
SunsetLimited wrote: el-capitan wrote: SunsetLimited wrote: Good, stick with your cheeseball DC, makes one less person buying decoders so there is more for us in the computer age to use in our gear. Plus while both your hands are busy flipping toggles, my free hand is kicking back with a cold beer.Please, at least come over to my house and operate my layout before you call my operating system cheesball. You are welcome at any time. From my experience people who make ignorant posts like this one have little or no experience, skills or talent and only come on here to criticize others. Also, if you are so far into the computer age, please post a link to your website or photo site so we can view your model railroad.Cap, i never called your layout itself cheesy at all, i was calling DC cheesy and thats my opinion, just like the opinion of the original poster was that he wasn't impressed with DCC, thats his opinion.I also never said anyone had to use DC, i actually said the opposite, i could careless what you use. People who want to stay with DC thats fine, no problems with that, i used it for a very long time also, i just saw that i would never fully get the potential out of my layout with DC and switched. In my opinion there are only two real good excuses to not switch and they are a lack of money to upgrade and the other is the decoder install issues and that can be over come by doing a dual dc and dcc layout.
If I were to make a wild generalization like "Stick with your cheesball PRR railroad, it leaves more ATSF stuff for me to buy" I would expect some PRR fans to be upset with this comment. Even if I wasn't talking about their layout specifically.
There are crappy DCC layouts and crappy DC layouts. There are good ones as well. Your post seemed to imply that all DC layouts are cheeseball. Which would be like saying all PRR layouts are cheeseball. It's sometimes true, but usually not. Im happy that you like DCC and that it works good for your situation. It does not work as good for my situation so I have not switched yet (I have a longer list that I will not get into now). Maybe in the future I will.
Regardless of what I like better, I just state what I prefer. When you call somebody elses equipment, railroad, benchwork, scenery, etc.. cheeseball, you have to expect some backlash.
SunsetLimited wrote: In my opinion there are only two real good excuses to not switch and they are a lack of money to upgrade and the other is the decoder install issues and that can be over come by doing a dual dc and dcc layout.
In my opinion there are only two real good excuses to not switch and they are a lack of money to upgrade and the other is the decoder install issues and that can be over come by doing a dual dc and dcc layout.
Since those are the only 2 reasons you can think of to not use DCC, I assume that by "cheesy" DC systems, you really mean the owners are "cheap" or "lazy". IMHO, "cheesy" is a poorly defined adjective with pretty negative connotations. If you don't care which system the others use, then why describe their choice negatively (twice)?
FWIW, my reasons for not using DCC for the present include decoder install issues in tiny 19th century engines in HO and HOn3, but also include that
1) my layout assumes solo operations
2) in the event that there is another operator, the layout design has very limited sharing of trackage in close time proximity. Each operator is normally working his particular area and section of the layout without intefering with the other.
3) I have a thorough understanding of DC (and DCC) wiring, and can easily make my DC system fit my operational needs.
Given the above environment, DCC's strengths will seldom be realized in my situation. At present, I simply have better things to do with my hobby time and money than to convert to a system that offers little advantage over what I already have.
If I rebuild to incorporate a Free-mo module or two, then I will have to change to DCC (or at least dual mode).
yours in informed choice
Fred W
\Now lets see..DC'ers can't drink beer while operating..
Geesh! DC'ers been doing that for years..Where do you think the idea came from?
BTW..Your unlearned childish comments is not winning you any points in fact they show your ignorance on how DC can work.
Can we move on...?!?
fwright wrote: SunsetLimited wrote: In my opinion there are only two real good excuses to not switch and they are a lack of money to upgrade and the other is the decoder install issues and that can be over come by doing a dual dc and dcc layout.Since those are the only 2 reasons you can think of to not use DCC, I assume that by "cheesy" DC systems, you really mean the owners are "cheap" or "lazy". IMHO, "cheesy" is a poorly defined adjective with pretty negative connotations. If you don't care which system the others use, then why describe their choice negatively (twice)?
I never said i couldn't think of other ones people have used, i said to me there were only 2 good ones. Why don't you re-read what i said, a lack of money is so not even the same thing as being cheap im not even sure how you got that out of that comment, cheap people usually refers to someone that has some money, i don't care the amount, but is very tight with it, a lack of money is usually due to some other outstanding financial obligations that makes justifying DCC tough. I also never said or implied that not wanting to install tons of decoders makes one lazy, it means some people hate to solder or deal with electronics, trust me, i know, i hate soldering.
As far as cheesy goes, you can interpret its meaning however you wish, im still going to use it when describing my opinion of operations with DC. Again, i really could careless what system YOU use to make your trains run, when i use the words i do about DC is from my own experience with it, feel free to describe it however you wish also.
tstage wrote: Can we move on...?!?
No, we need to wait until somebody's head pops up.
el-capitan wrote: tstage wrote: Can we move on...?!? No, we need to wait until somebody's head pops up.
Actually, if you look at the picture, BOTH heads are popped up because nobody is the winner in this discussion...
My apologies to the forum for feeding the troll. Inflammatory, ill-defined adjectives used repeatedly - I should have been smarter.
It really is too bad that we can't all be in the same room, around the same table, and have this conversation. I think that we would probably be somewhat more restrained in our hubris and barbed comments....and that goes for both sides of this issue. Seems like a few of us are flying off the proverbial handle and jumping to conclusions. Still, I like the tone so far, and I must say that I am happy no one has gone to sharply into the personal attacks...it is so easily done on this forum.
To address the question of DCC and sound, I have said numerous times in other threads that the decision to include a mute function (F8) was at the very least clever. I let my QSI decoders drift into a self-imposed quietude by disuse if I don't bother to use F8 with them. The QSI's pout, for want of a better word, and I believe the Tsunami's do as well. If you power the layout and do not engage that decoder before power-down, the decoder goes to a corner and sulks, quietly, until you call it by name/number in a subsequent session. I happen to like that feature because it means only three or four engines are making sounds at any one time. When an entire layout is abuzz, it is a real cacophony, and I don't think very pleasant.
Also, I would advise all would-be sound users to consider reducing the master volume on their systems, somewhere by near 50%. As stated a few posts earlier, no locomotive should be heard above others closer, and the further away they are, the less obtrusive the must be, otherwise all you have is a racket. So, sound is a double-edged sword; great if you got 'em, but not great when they're all sounding off.
And, not to sound disingenuous, I tip my hat at all you DC guys who stick to it. You know what works, you have built it yourself, and you get pleasure out of what you have. What else can this hobby or its membership encourage every modeler to do? Besides, the new BLI DC line is coming with sound on board, so much of this topic will be mute....er, moot.
There is room for everone, luddite, dilettante, master, designer, artiste, operator, craftsman, learner, historian, zealot,..aach, what's in a name, anyway!
selector wrote: To address the question of DCC and sound, I have said numerous times in other threads that the decision to include a mute function (F8) was at the very least clever. I let my QSI decoders drift into a self-imposed quietude by disuse if I don't bother to use F8 with them. The QSI's pout, for want of a better word, and I believe the Tsunami's do as well. If you power the layout and do not engage that decoder before power-down, the decoder goes to a corner and sulks, quietly, until you call it by name/number in a subsequent session. I happen to like that feature because it means only three or four engines are making sounds at any one time. When an entire layout is abuzz, it is a real cacophony, and I don't think very pleasant.Also, I would advise all would-be sound users to consider reducing the master volume on their systems, somewhere by near 50%. As stated a few posts earlier, no locomotive should be heard above others closer, and the further away they are, the less obtrusive the must be, otherwise all you have is a racket. So, sound is a double-edged sword; great if you got 'em, but not great when they're all sounding off.
I agree, things would sound alot better if everyone lowered the volumes on their gear a bit. I think it also depends on the layout size and such, we have a really large club layout so having a few sound locos on the tracks isn't that bad since everyone is usually spaced pretty far apart. We do also have a large exahust fan near the layout that gets kinda loud and really dampens the noise so a little higher volume is needed when the fan is on, overall i find the experience enjoyable though.
BRAKIE wrote: Antonio,I may get ream for this if its read by a club member..Anyway..There is a lot of older locomotives on the layout that whines(Tenshodo),growls,(Hobbytown and older steam locomotives including Varney,Penn-Line and of course brass steamers.We believe that is enough racket for our ears to endure but,would never ever complain to the owners of those locomotives after all they have their rights as club members and the majority of us older guys doesn't mind after all we are use to those locomotives having coming up through the hobby in those years..We have also thought of the rights of those members that wanted sound so,like all things sound was put to the vote and was defeated by a 37-10 vote.I suspect as more DC locomotives come with sound we will need to reopen the matter of sound and like always the members will have their say and vote.
Guys, Midnight Railroader. come on. Why do we want to turn this into a silly flame war? We're all modelers in a discussion, not an argument. NOT ALL DCC users try to ram the technology down DC users throats. NOT ALL DC users are "anti-DCC". There are always a few "extremists" in both groups. Why let them poison the mood?
O.K, back to the discussion................
I see your point, however, I have to disagree with the issue regarding sound. As you stated a number of members own older units that are noisy; fair enough. However, the sound-equipped DC locomotives on the market offer "Volume Control". A typical BLI unit with the sound turned down to a very low setting is still quieter than untweaked, older Athearn BB units and import brass locomotives. ( Remember the brass U50 from the 1970s? So noisy it was nicknamed "Rock Crusher")
So even with volume control available, if a member wishes to run his new BLI steamer or E-unit, the sound must be turned off? No disrespect to your club, but "WoW!" that seems pretty stern. When this was brought up, did your club leadership "experiment" and allow members with sound units run them to see how if it negatively impacted the session? Or was it just voted "flat out" without checking it out first?
Just makes me wonder because the common rule of thumb for sound equipped locos in a club is basically: Sound equipped units at a low volume should be barely audible at approximately 15ft. linear distance. The horn or whistle should sound "faint" and distant.
With prototype locomotives, once they pass you at a grade crossing, the diesel engine or steam chuffs quickly fade into the distance. The above method allows you to simulate that in a "non-annoying" manner.
Peace
Antonio,You are bound to get me hung yet by my fellow club members if they happen to read this." border="0" width="15" height="15" />" border="0" width="15" height="15" />
Well with the grinding,whining,growling etc we suspect the volume would to turn up to drown out the other noise and if you recall how noisy club operations was years ago you get my drift about the volume being crank up instead of down.
I fully agree had updated models the volume could easily be turn down.
I will tell you this..Sound will come up again as more DC sound equipped locos comes available and as a club we will need to work out a compromise.I already have a happy suggestion for this problem that will benefit everybody.
As to date nobody has a sound equipped loco..It was brought up by a question by a younger member discuss and voted on by the membership.
Driline wrote:the liberal DC zealots I see lurking here.
O.K, I understand Brakie.
Just made me wonder a bit. I'm assuming that the majority of your club's members (or the leadership) are in the "over 40" category. Onboard sound for HO was one of those "dreams" that so many of us (me too) had back in the 70s and 80s. Now that it's here I had assumed that many of the baby-boomer generation modelers would be "gung-ho" about onboard sound inspite of some of its limitations. Especially now that they can enjoy sounds that are either extinct or very rare such as: Fairbanks Morse, Baldwin, Alco, GG1 electrics, EMD 567 diesels as well as a variety of steamers. That is what a number of the more senior members at the club I was at were enjoying about onboard sound.
At my LHS sound units have been selling pretty well for the past three years. A number of "boomers" have been making the purchases. One gentlemen that I know purchsed six BLI GG1s!
But it does appear that sound units will eventually roll on your club's rails.
High Greens
BRAKIE wrote: Antonio,You are bound to get me hung yet by my fellow club members if they happen to read this." border="0" width="15" height="15" />" border="0" width="15" height="15" /> Well with the grinding,whining,growling etc we suspect the volume would to turn up to drown out the other noise and if you recall how noisy club operations was years ago you get my drift about the volume being crank up instead of down.I fully agree had updated models the volume could easily be turn down.I will tell you this..Sound will come up again as more DC sound equipped locos comes available and as a club we will need to work out a compromise.I already have a happy suggestion for this problem that will benefit everybody. As to date nobody has a sound equipped loco..It was brought up by a question by a younger member discuss and voted on by the membership.
Maybe someone should travel there and make a demonstration with a sound equippted engine.
Safety Valve wrote: BRAKIE wrote: Antonio,You are bound to get me hung yet by my fellow club members if they happen to read this." border="0" width="15" height="15" />" border="0" width="15" height="15" /> Well with the grinding,whining,growling etc we suspect the volume would to turn up to drown out the other noise and if you recall how noisy club operations was years ago you get my drift about the volume being crank up instead of down.I fully agree had updated models the volume could easily be turn down.I will tell you this..Sound will come up again as more DC sound equipped locos comes available and as a club we will need to work out a compromise.I already have a happy suggestion for this problem that will benefit everybody. As to date nobody has a sound equipped loco..It was brought up by a question by a younger member discuss and voted on by the membership.Maybe someone should travel there and make a demonstration with a sound equippted engine.
Actually every member is aware of sound equipped locomotives and the majority has heard them...We are not cavemen ya know nor are we a bunch of old geezers.Recall I had DCC/Sound..
Midnight Railroader wrote: Driline wrote:the liberal DC zealots I see lurking here. What about the conservative DC zealots?
Dangit you're right. How unpolitically correct of me. My apologies to all you conservative DC zealots
Vail and Southwestern RR wrote: I'm a DCCite, but I also have doubts about sound. I am concerned about how having four or five trains with sound running in a 12x14 area is going to sound. I'm thinking that in the real world, I can hear one, or sometimes two (when I'm lucky) trains at a time. And the location of the sound makes sense. In a layout that surrounds me I'm wondering if the effect will be lost. Then again, I'm in N-scale, and on a buget, so maybe this is all just sour grapes!
You are correct there about having too much sound. My layout is an 11X7 HO shelf pike and I can only handle one maybe two sound engines at a time. I still like running non-sound units too and listening to the click clack of the wheels over the track.
I will still buy sound locomotives because there is just no substitute, but I also like being able to turn off the sound when it gets to be too much. So you'll see 4 or 5 sound units on my layout, but I'll only have one at a time usually.
el-capitan wrote: I must have missed the humorous part. Seems like a flame to me.And I didn't think my post was offensive but if it was I appologize.
I am the idiot you're talking about. Your layout offends me too. It looks nicer than mine. I like the way the track flows. Do you have any recent pics of the layout? I'd like to see it. Mine is just an around the wall shelf unit and has gotten boring rather quickly. I am in the process of adding some staging tracks though.
Old layout pic....
El Capitan wrote:Why are DCC-users so threatened by the idea that someone might not want to use DCC?
Took a few days away from forum land...
Yes, to my way of thinking (read: opinion) hidden staging tracks are a bad design. I have two left hands, both of which are all thumbs, so I opt to minimize the risk of something bad happening where I can't see it, so I don't put things where I can't see them. I have a "hidden" staging yard in that it is below the scenicked portion of the layout, but the yard ladders and 75% of the track are easily seen from the aisle through gaps I cut in the fascia. I can get away with this since I work in N scale, which is a lot more forgiving of space constraints than HO or O.
Once that yard is fully operational, I plan to stage particular trains on particular tracks, with particular lash-ups powering them. In the event that something gets shuffled, I have a pack of sticky notes that I can apply to the track assigments... significantly cheaper than 9 million toggle switches, 4 power packs, and several miles of wire...
Operational bottlenecks that are intended to spice up operations are not necessarily bad, unless they are created as an unintended consequence to a design element that wasn't thought out very well. Either way, I can't see how DCC can't address any operational situation. At the HO club I operate with, We have several such choke points, one being a fairly complex wye at the main yard. Sometimes we have to wait in the aisle for the track to clear, which can take 10 minutes or more.
When the yardmaster is ready to receive the train, the road crew pulls it in to an A/D track. At that point, the ET Hostler dials up the locomotive address and takes the power back to the shop for fueling etc, and the Yardmaster takes the train apart using the switchers. This dismemberment takes place on the same length of track, with two different operators working each end of the train. At no point does a toggle switch get thrown, or power get turned off to the track. I think I can say with confidence that this procedure cannot be done in DC without gaps cut somewhere, two (or more) power supplies, and a bunch of toggles getting handled to make a fairly complex wiring set up work.
My yard at home consists of 1 staging track, 3 A/D tracks, 6 classification tracks, an engine terminal with a 5 stall roundhouse, turntable, several shop and servicing tracks etc. etc. etc.
At any given moment there is a train coming in with 2-3 units, a train getting ready to go out with 2-3 units, two yard switchers, and about 20 locomotives between the roundhouse, shops and ready track. While this is going on, there are two trains out on the main line, and a mill switcher drilling the paper mill. There is constant power to every inch of rail, yet the only locomotives that move are the ones I tell to move.
There's a black wire on the right rail, a white one on the left, and the only insulator is on the wye track that leads to the yard. I currently run that on a micro switch to reverse polarity, but once I spend about $20, I can install an automatic reverser, making it hands free.
There isn't a DC set up in the world that can run my layout that simply. When I think of the control panels I've seen just to run a roundhouse in DC, I know I've made the right choice for me...
marknewton wrote: El Capitan wrote: Why are DCC-users so threatened by the idea that someone might not want to use DCC? If you're going to reduce this thread to sweeping generalisations - probably for the same reasons DC users are threatened by DCC.
El Capitan wrote: Why are DCC-users so threatened by the idea that someone might not want to use DCC?
Those of us who happily use DC don't care either way who else does or doesn't; but DCCers seem to care a whole lot that we acknowledge the Greatness That Is DCC.
I don't know why this is.
Just a thought....
What really is the point on this discussion? granted, i've seen some good arguments from both sides, but is this really important? this type of subject is a personal decision. Each person is different (no Duh!) and we all have different opinions. lets just respect eachother's opinions and leave it at that.
I honestly think we should end this topic and move on to something more productive, like...
What era do you model? and Why?
I'll start:
I model the late fifties-late sixties, mainly because i like the equippment in that broad era, plus there is a good mix of first generation & second generation diesels. as a plus, this is the most popular era, so it is easy to find equippment for it
your turn....
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot Visit my blog! http://becomingawarriorpoet.blogspot.com
marknewton wrote: El Capitan wrote: Why are DCC-users so threatened by the idea that someone might not want to use DCC? If you're going to reduce this thread to sweeping generalisations - probably for the same reasons DC users are threatened by DCC.What I reckon really happens is that the majority of both DC and DCC users get along quite happily ignorant of what the other group is doing, and not caring about it either. The only time I've ever encountered impassioned DC vs. DCC arguments are online. A few who get involved are genuinely zealots, the rest I think are merely stirring the pot. As far as I'm concerned, people should use whatever system suits them, for whatever reason. What does bother though is when zealots from either camp tell lies to support their position.Cheers,Mark.
I try to avoid generalizations. I never made this comment that you are quoting. Somebody else did.
I don't think DCC is for everyone. Installing decoders in older locomotives takes some courage, and a bit of technical skill. Not everyone has that.
That said, I'll also say that wiring a DC system for multiple cabs requires the exact same qualities, so that's not intended as a slam at all.
For me it came down to trying DCC on a club layout, and liking the flexibility it offers. Once the virtually idiot-proof MRC system came out, I felt comfortable making the leap.
Midnight Railroader wrote:The thing is, I have observed many times on this board that many DCC users are adamant that everyone must switch to the DCC system to operate their layout.
The thing is, I have observed many times on this board that many DCC users are adamant that everyone must switch to the DCC system to operate their layout.
(Remember, I said I didn't want to use DCC--that's ALL I said--and my layout was called 'Cheeseball.')
Here we are approaching page 8 of the thread. The originator who stirred the pot has not contributed one dot of additional verbiage. He must have a huge grin on his face by now!
marknewton wrote:I personally can't fathom why anyone would persist with a control system that I regard as archaic, user-unfriendly and unrealistic, but I don't care if people do make that choice.
marknewton wrote: Midnight Railroader wrote: The thing is, I have observed many times on this board that many DCC users are adamant that everyone must switch to the DCC system to operate their layout.If I were to ask you to quote or cite some of these adamant DCC'ers, I wonder how many you could come up with? I ask because I don't recall seeing many posts of this nature, if any at all. I rather suspect this is no more than a strawman argument... (Remember, I said I didn't want to use DCC--that's ALL I said--and my layout was called 'Cheeseball.')No, it wasn't - the comment made was "Good, stick with your cheeseball DC", which is a very general reference to a widely-used system, rather than one specific to your layout. I believe you chose this interpretation because you're one of those pot-stirrers I referred to earlier. Nothing wrong with that, but you can't expect to have a sook when people respond in kind. Those of us who happily use DC don't care either way who else does or doesn't; but DCCers seem to care a whole lot that we acknowledge the Greatness That Is DCC. You reckon? I'm a DCC user, and I don't care whether you're even aware of it's existence, let alone acknowledge it. Most of my modelling mates share that attitude. So where's the evidence to support your assertion? Apart from a few deliberately inflammatory remarks posted in this thread, I don't think people care either way.I'll admit, I personally can't fathom why anyone would persist with a control system that I regard as archaic, user-unfriendly and unrealistic, but I don't care if people do make that choice. Each to their own...Cheers,Mark.
Midnight Railroader wrote: The thing is, I have observed many times on this board that many DCC users are adamant that everyone must switch to the DCC system to operate their layout.
just my
Driline wrote: I am the idiot you're talking about. Your layout offends me too. It looks nicer than mine. I like the way the track flows. Do you have any recent pics of the layout? I'd like to see it. Mine is just an around the wall shelf unit and has gotten boring rather quickly. I am in the process of adding some staging tracks though.
My most recent pics are on a photo page that you can get to by clicking on the www button at the bottom of this post. There are a few pics on the title page and then more on the "layout pics" sub folder.
I was going to try to get some more recent ones up this weekend but it depends on my schedule. The Red Wings managed to get past round one of the playoffs this year.
Midnight Railroader wrote: marknewton wrote:I personally can't fathom why anyone would persist with a control system that I regard as archaic, user-unfriendly and unrealistic, but I don't care if people do make that choice. You managed to undermine your entire argument by including this line, and make my point in the process. (Not that you would ever admit it, of course.)
SunsetLimited wrote:Are alot of you guys that are still using DC, using the Quantium Engineer from Altas and Broadway for your sound locos (assuming you have some) or are you just using the powerpack for the horn and bell? That can be a good alternative for clubs that don't want to switch from DC so the people with sound can still control the sound functions. I had one for awhile before i switched and i loved it. Its not walk around but still cool. Sorry a tad off topic, just curious.
I've never liked sound. I hear enough huffing and puffing at work all day long. Working on the railroad is my quiet time. I was thinking about getting one loco equipped with this though, just for the kids. But it's pretty low on the list of priorities right now.
el-capitan wrote: SunsetLimited wrote:Are alot of you guys that are still using DC, using the Quantium Engineer from Altas and Broadway for your sound locos (assuming you have some) or are you just using the powerpack for the horn and bell? That can be a good alternative for clubs that don't want to switch from DC so the people with sound can still control the sound functions. I had one for awhile before i switched and i loved it. Its not walk around but still cool. Sorry a tad off topic, just curious.I've never liked sound. I hear enough huffing and puffing at work all day long. Working on the railroad is my quiet time. I was thinking about getting one loco equipped with this though, just for the kids. But it's pretty low on the list of priorities right now.
One of the guys at the club installed sound in a Bachmann Thomas the Train, not sure if your kids are to old for Thomas but he sounded pretty cool with it.
SunsetLimited wrote: el-capitan wrote: SunsetLimited wrote:Are alot of you guys that are still using DC, using the Quantium Engineer from Altas and Broadway for your sound locos (assuming you have some) or are you just using the powerpack for the horn and bell? That can be a good alternative for clubs that don't want to switch from DC so the people with sound can still control the sound functions. I had one for awhile before i switched and i loved it. Its not walk around but still cool. Sorry a tad off topic, just curious.I've never liked sound. I hear enough huffing and puffing at work all day long. Working on the railroad is my quiet time. I was thinking about getting one loco equipped with this though, just for the kids. But it's pretty low on the list of priorities right now.One of the guys at the club installed sound in a Bachmann Thomas the Train, not sure if your kids are to old for Thomas but he sounded pretty cool with it.
No, my son is 6 and is too old for Thomas at this point. He actually may be too old for his Lionel layout I built for him 2 years ago . He wants to get into proto operation and is bored by trains going in circles. He actually wants to sell all of his die-cast thomas on ebay (I can't believe how much this stuff sells for)to buy an Atlas-O SD-35 or Weaver U boat to run on my layout. So that would be what I put sound in, if he ends up getting it.
My daughter is only 4 and shows little interest in Thomas but does like the trains. I try to limit her time in the basement due to her "throwing phase".
Also, I would have to buy a Lionel Thomas and convert it to 2-rail. Not something I'm to keen on.
CSX Robert wrote:Since when is 6 to old for Thomas? I'm a 35 year old N-scaler and I have Thomas, James, Percy, and Henry. Actually, they do belong to my 7 and 11 year old sons, but I like to run them to, and if they ever "outgrow" them, I 'll keep them for myself.
I cringe just having my son's Chessy System caboose on my layout because it doesn't fit. I can't imagine what my thoughts would be watching a train with a face going around my pike.
...and going...and going...and going...
Driline wrote: el-capitan wrote: I must have missed the humorous part. Seems like a flame to me.And I didn't think my post was offensive but if it was I appologize.I am the idiot you're talking about. Your layout offends me too. It looks nicer than mine. I like the way the track flows. Do you have any recent pics of the layout? I'd like to see it. Mine is just an around the wall shelf unit and has gotten boring rather quickly. I am in the process of adding some staging tracks though.Old layout pic....
Driline,
I like your layout! I'm downloading the photo and will use it as one of my references.
Your situation is similar to mine. We're "squeezed for space" so we have to take advantage of a track plan that works. I have even less space then you do, judging by the photo's appearance. With detailed scenery and several industrial customers, I certainly would not be bored with your layout design at all. It's good that you're adding to it.
Since I like both, switching operations and watching trains roll, I would have a double-track mainline on an around-the-wall layout like this. To me, with DCC/Sound, I would enjoy all the benefits in a small space.
Don't get bored.....smile and "enjoy-whatcha-got" You have a lot more than what many modelers already have.
tstage wrote: ...and going...and going...and going...
seriously, this thread is getting really old.
OzarkBelt wrote: tstage wrote: ...and going...and going...and going... will it ever end? All i want is world peaceseriously, this thread is getting really old.
We are having a discussion about sound for DC and Thomas the Tank for kids (and adults). What is your issue with this?
my bad. i thought we were still having that debate on dc vs dcc. oops, sorry. i'll be at the eye docter if you need me.
I thought the same thing. Sorry about that.
el-capitan wrote: We are having a discussion about sound for DC and Thomas the Tank for kids (and adults). What is your issue with this?
dc plus sound trash that idea. Thomas the tank engine for adults. why not if you enjoyed them whane you were younger. Heck I'm 13 and starting a collection of all the thomas the tank engine stuff and then mutiples of each because they don't have road numbers. So then just by switching rolling stock and motive power my layout can be thomas or normal event though the scenery will be dessert not the greenery of the island of sodor.
I like your track plan. Great use of the space without congesting things. Do you have any plans for operation? I'm curious because I am tweaking my operation plan and am always looking for fresh ideas.
Yes, my layout depicts the real Davenport Rock Island & Northwestern shortline as it appeared circa 1995. I will also be adding another industry when I add my staging tracks. I haven't entirely come up with the final operation plan, but it will include industry & yard switching along with some through freights and even a nostalgic passenger train. I've got all the info needed frm the real DRI LINE to make it work.
AntonioFP45 wrote: Driline wrote: el-capitan wrote: I must have missed the humorous part. Seems like a flame to me.And I didn't think my post was offensive but if it was I appologize.I am the idiot you're talking about. Your layout offends me too. It looks nicer than mine. I like the way the track flows. Do you have any recent pics of the layout? I'd like to see it. Mine is just an around the wall shelf unit and has gotten boring rather quickly. I am in the process of adding some staging tracks though.Old layout pic.... Driline,I like your layout! I'm downloading the photo and will use it as one of my references.Your situation is similar to mine. We're "squeezed for space" so we have to take advantage of a track plan that works. I have even less space then you do, judging by the photo's appearance. With detailed scenery and several industrial customers, I certainly would not be bored with your layout design at all. It's good that you're adding to it.Since I like both, switching operations and watching trains roll, I would have a double-track mainline on an around-the-wall layout like this. To me, with DCC/Sound, I would enjoy all the benefits in a small space. Don't get bored.....smile and "enjoy-whatcha-got" You have a lot more than what many modelers already have.
Thanks for the kind words. Here are a few updated pictures I just took today.
Wide Shot
Ralston Purina Industry
Where the staging tracks will go on this wall. I'll also add another industry not shown in the plan.
My passenger excursion train.(Proto 2000 E8 with sound and Rapido passenger cars) I painted the Driline switcheres myself with more to come with sound.
I went to New Mexico to research the area of the ATSF that I am modeling. Unfortunately I am not able to operate like they did. Their locals originated and terminated in Rincon, while I am using Deming for this. So at this point, since I am drifting somewhat from the prototype, I am looking to make the operation as interesting as possible.
AntonioFP45 wrote:[to Driline] I like your layout! I'm downloading the photo and will use it as one of my references.
Thanks for those other photos ( I downloaded them too). I like the bridge and how creatively you were able to add the Purina industry. I plan on having a small Purina Feed Mill on a spur that will be serviced by boxcars. I think Walthers still has that kit available.
For scenery: How soon will you be scenicking?
This is only my opinion, but there's great potential with your layout. The blue backdrop blends in nicely, but if you want to take it another step, then http://www.sceniking.com has some very cool backdrops that appear to fit in well with your rail theme.
It looks like you can even add an additional 4" width (with 1" x 4"s) to the inside edge of the layout if you'd like to build more roads or add buildings parallel to the mainline to partially hide trains and convey a busy town with traffic. A small passenger station could be worked in too.