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.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
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.
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
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.
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
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.
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.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
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
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?
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...
" 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
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!"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
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.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
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!!!
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!
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
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!"
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.
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!!
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!!
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)
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.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
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.
Tracklayer wrote: The simpler something is the better off I am...Tracklayer
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.
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
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/