I can appreciate the case Antonio's making for DCC for a smaller layout, and it makes sense. Two train operation with DCC must be less operator-intense than two train operation with DC, since you're not constantly flipping switches and deconflicting blocks.
On the other hand, the great thing about DC is that it's the least common denominator of model railroading. It works with every locomotive (unless you converted your whole fleet to something like ASTRAC or CTC-16, in which case you're obviously an electrical and electronics pro who relishes that sort of work anyway). I see the time required to convert my fleet to DCC as the principal barrier to entry: right now, I want to spend that time building scenery and structures, not installing a chip every time I want to run a non-DCC engine.
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
My wife and I are getting back into Model Railroading after a long hiatus. I think that any thoughts of DCC went out the window after we watched a salesman in the local hobby store spend more than 30 minutes trying to get a train started <G>.
Model railroading has room for all sorts of people. Some people like to operate and some people like to build. Me - I like to fiddle with electronics. My first project (post hiatus) was a microcontroller based IR reflection car detector (why so complicated - had to be proof against stray ir - like the sun). Then a controller for a couple of 3 aspect signals on a pony wall (train goes back and forth forever. Then a daliance with a current type block occupied detector. Mustn't forget the microcontroller based noise generator (since I couldn't find the National Semiconductor part specifed in the old article on generating steam type noises) and so on. The next project will be a pulsing throttle again using a micrcontroller - the last one that I built (20 years ago or more) was built from op amps etc, much easier using a micro...
That's my kick. I could still do part of it if we went DCC - but then I wouldn't be able to justify playing around as much as I want to... The trains are a justification for my fiddling with the electronics.... It's good that my wife wants to build scenary - otherwise that would never get done
Villy
Simon:
Those of us that have hi-tech transistor throttles with variable momentum, RF hand held control, and two cabs, May not feel the need for DCC.
My current layout layout fits my room, was designed for all modern improvements (motor driven turnouts - buss/feeder wiring - reusable modules - and yes, even DCC), HOWEVER I find block wiring undaunting, already have engines that run together, and find one 'guest' cab sufficient for my needs.
I guess I haven't found the incentive to switch over. I already have enough engines that run together (a major DCC advantage). I also privately wonder how many DCC'ers buy more than one (or two)of those expensive cabs (another main advantage). Joe Fugate excepted.
Sound is a mixed bag - I have it in Analog which sends two sounds to two speakers via blocks, including a $100 sub woofer with bass down to 50 Hz.- something DCC'ers or QSI and LOK cannot do.
TWO channel or Multi channel Surround sound should cure that.
I have nothin against DCC'ers or 'Plug and play' types, except their avoidance of learning basics +/- of electricity. How can understanding two wires be that complicated?
Rather than spend $300 on DCC, I'd rather have a working Signalling system - the kind that shows red yellow and green in both directions and block occupancy. Now that's realism.
As I stated in the Spacemouse thread, I like to have multiple operators run on my layout. This doesn't mean that I couldn't do it but the cost involved with the type of rotary swithces I would need to add to my collection would have been astronomical! Plus after adding in the price of wire etc, I decided that I had to go DCC.
I, like Tom am getting tired of people coming on and stating that old brass was bad runners. I've never encountered one that was, at one time I owned almost 50, except for a 1950's era International Models 2-8-0. That was easily fixed with a new gearbox and motor, since both in the loco were bad to start with. Parts coming off??? I've lost more parts off of the few plastic diesels I own than any other ten brass engines I own.
Unlike plastic locos, which generally come over lubed, brass never arrived lubed. You have to do some general maintanence to each and every one. When I finish with tweaking, I take the mechanism, minus the motor and worm, and place it on a plate of glass. Using the drawbar as a push/pull bar, if the mech rolls on the glass with just the frame as weight, its ready to go on the track. If not, it needs a little more tweaking. None of my steamers get on the rails until it passes this test. This also goes for my kit builts as well.
Like Tom, most of my fleet is brass steamers and I do run them, a lot! They are all balanced and have more weight in them. The newest brass engine I have is from the 1970's and it still looks better than, and I guarantee that it will out pull any plastic loco of its same size and even several plastics that are bigger. It will also move to the tune of 1 tie every 30 seconds. Up until this past year it was pure DC. That was when I finally got around to putting a decoder in it.
Now I will return you to your regularly scheduled forum.
Carey
Keep it between the Rails
Alabama Central Homepage
Nara member #128
NMRA &SER Life member
Started a new n-scale layout about 6-7 months ago, thought about DCC but for me it was cost prohibitive. I've got everything I want out of my DC layout and love it. I won't lie and say I never forget to flip the switch through one of my reverse loops though /snicker.
In some of my n-scale engines I don't see how it would be possible to mount a DCC chip inside it even if I wanted to. My near 30 year old chessie engine, that rattles like a snake, nearly jumps off the rails at times, brings back so many memories of days gone by. I have no desire to modify that dinosaur. It may not see much run time, but I really enjoy seeing it run through my layout now and again.
I love technology and "new" things, I'm an IT guy by trade, nearly 20 years in IT. Even though I didn't seriously look at DCC until 1/3 of my track work was done, after I looked at it, I knew for me (and I'm not dogging DCC), that DCC had a ways to go OR there would be something better. I figured if I'm going to invest money in someting, I'll wait for "something better" or not move off DC at all.
EDIT
Some of my post got eaten :\
Too many Locomotives.
Not enough time to do all I want to do.
Equals not enough time and not enough money for DCC.
DC works fine for me. I can not justify a change to DCC now.
GARRY
HEARTLAND DIVISION, CB&Q RR
EVERYWHERE LOST; WE HUSTLE OUR CABOOSE FOR YOU
I have bought all of my old brass second or third hand (if not more!), and I suspect that the reason it can sometimes be a mixed bag is previous owner maintenance - I have picked up stuff that runs like a watch on the test track, as well as stuff that jerks and pops along. People who buy Akanes today are buying items that are now thirty years old, and have probably been through a string of owners.
I'm staying with DC and will probably never go with DCC-no reason to. I'm into very small layouts, my main one is only 4X5.5 plus I have a 1X6 timesaver and a 1X5 inglenook, no need for DCC. I'm also running a Tech2 1400 powerpack from 25 yrs ago and it still works fine. Small and simple works for me
Bruce
MidlandPacific wrote: When I decide that I'm ready to expand my layout and make the leap to a bigger system, I think I'll convert to DCC. The advantages for large layouts seem pretty clear: more trains, more operators, and relatively less wiring. I put twenty-three blocks in my small starter layout, which is basically a pair of urban junctions, operated with dual-cab control. It was easy to wire it, but it was very time-consuming, and the circuit logic for a bigger layout with multiple cabs would get pretty unwieldy, I think. And I'm willing to wait awhile to see other great stuff what the electronics revolution can provide. Incidentally, per the comments on brass engines shedding parts, I have noticed that some of them do - some of the NJ Custom brass stuff seems to have detail parts that were held on with some kind of adhesive, rather than soldered, and I've noticed they will shed a bit, things like injectors and piping - as a Grande fan, Tom, you might have noticed this with their L-76 class 2-6-6-2s.
When I decide that I'm ready to expand my layout and make the leap to a bigger system, I think I'll convert to DCC. The advantages for large layouts seem pretty clear: more trains, more operators, and relatively less wiring. I put twenty-three blocks in my small starter layout, which is basically a pair of urban junctions, operated with dual-cab control. It was easy to wire it, but it was very time-consuming, and the circuit logic for a bigger layout with multiple cabs would get pretty unwieldy, I think. And I'm willing to wait awhile to see other great stuff what the electronics revolution can provide.
Incidentally, per the comments on brass engines shedding parts, I have noticed that some of them do - some of the NJ Custom brass stuff seems to have detail parts that were held on with some kind of adhesive, rather than soldered, and I've noticed they will shed a bit, things like injectors and piping - as a Grande fan, Tom, you might have noticed this with their L-76 class 2-6-6-2s.
Midland--
Not to get off topic again (he said with an evil chuckle) but about the NJ Custom shedding parts--don't have their L-76, but I have three M-78 4-8-2's that came with drivers sprung with--of all things--GUITAR wire! Had to re-spring the little devils, because they were incredibly mushy, and the only thing that would work was a stronger Ernie Ball .013 guitar wire. You should have seen the look on the guy's face at the music store when I told him that the wire was for a model locomotive, not a Fender Stratocaster! But the stronger wire's held up for quite a few years, now. Nice to know if I need to re-spring, I can just head down to my local guitar shop, LOL! But I do have a tendency to refer to those three locos as my Rock n' Roll Mountains.
Tom
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!
I don't want to jump on to DCC for a big reason: I want this to remain a hobby, not an investment. Hobbies do come with some sort of "investment," but I am not ready for the shock of first time DCC conversion. I don't want to have to share stocks of my RR to keep it operational (LOL) I don't think the cost of DCC is too bad, but its too high for my budget of a hobby, and this could be in part because I have two or three seperate hobbies, which all require money, so I have to treat them equally. I don't even think DCC would be that hard to accomplish, its just I dont want to take the dive just yet. Just more of my
-beegle55
I still use DC and have no desire to change for several reasons:
Nick
Take a Ride on the Reading with the: Reading Company Technical & Historical Society http://www.readingrailroad.org/
DCC:
Play more - pay more
twhite wrote: MidlandPacific wrote: When I decide that I'm ready to expand my layout and make the leap to a bigger system, I think I'll convert to DCC. The advantages for large layouts seem pretty clear: more trains, more operators, and relatively less wiring. I put twenty-three blocks in my small starter layout, which is basically a pair of urban junctions, operated with dual-cab control. It was easy to wire it, but it was very time-consuming, and the circuit logic for a bigger layout with multiple cabs would get pretty unwieldy, I think. And I'm willing to wait awhile to see other great stuff what the electronics revolution can provide. Incidentally, per the comments on brass engines shedding parts, I have noticed that some of them do - some of the NJ Custom brass stuff seems to have detail parts that were held on with some kind of adhesive, rather than soldered, and I've noticed they will shed a bit, things like injectors and piping - as a Grande fan, Tom, you might have noticed this with their L-76 class 2-6-6-2s. Midland--Not to get off topic again (he said with an evil chuckle) but about the NJ Custom shedding parts--don't have their L-76, but I have three M-78 4-8-2's that came with drivers sprung with--of all things--GUITAR wire! Had to re-spring the little devils, because they were incredibly mushy, and the only thing that would work was a stronger Ernie Ball .013 guitar wire. You should have seen the look on the guy's face at the music store when I told him that the wire was for a model locomotive, not a Fender Stratocaster! But the stronger wire's held up for quite a few years, now. Nice to know if I need to re-spring, I can just head down to my local guitar shop, LOL! But I do have a tendency to refer to those three locos as my Rock n' Roll Mountains. Tom
That's priceless! I got the same thing from a guy at a hardware store when I was buying fishing line to make truss rods.
MidlandPacific wrote: twhite wrote: MidlandPacific wrote: When I decide that I'm ready to expand my layout and make the leap to a bigger system, I think I'll convert to DCC. The advantages for large layouts seem pretty clear: more trains, more operators, and relatively less wiring. I put twenty-three blocks in my small starter layout, which is basically a pair of urban junctions, operated with dual-cab control. It was easy to wire it, but it was very time-consuming, and the circuit logic for a bigger layout with multiple cabs would get pretty unwieldy, I think. And I'm willing to wait awhile to see other great stuff what the electronics revolution can provide. Incidentally, per the comments on brass engines shedding parts, I have noticed that some of them do - some of the NJ Custom brass stuff seems to have detail parts that were held on with some kind of adhesive, rather than soldered, and I've noticed they will shed a bit, things like injectors and piping - as a Grande fan, Tom, you might have noticed this with their L-76 class 2-6-6-2s. Midland--Not to get off topic again (he said with an evil chuckle) but about the NJ Custom shedding parts--don't have their L-76, but I have three M-78 4-8-2's that came with drivers sprung with--of all things--GUITAR wire! Had to re-spring the little devils, because they were incredibly mushy, and the only thing that would work was a stronger Ernie Ball .013 guitar wire. You should have seen the look on the guy's face at the music store when I told him that the wire was for a model locomotive, not a Fender Stratocaster! But the stronger wire's held up for quite a few years, now. Nice to know if I need to re-spring, I can just head down to my local guitar shop, LOL! But I do have a tendency to refer to those three locos as my Rock n' Roll Mountains. Tom That's priceless! I got the same thing from a guy at a hardware store when I was buying fishing line to make truss rods.
The larger guitar strings that have the "wrapping" around them also make great "insulated piping" for detailing engines as well.
The play more-pay more phrase is used for people who can afford to pay more. I still can play more, but I am not going to pay more.
It's how you choose to pay. I used to put off buying DCC because I thought the money could be better spent on more trains. Now that I went DCC, I find the trains I have (at least those that I've converted over) are more enjoyable.
DCC is not just a "rich guy's" toy. It's how you chose to spend your hobby dollar. Plus, DCC is much more affordable now than it used to be. Still more expensive than DC, but not as cost prohibitive as it once was.
Again, I think you should stick with DC if that's what best meets your needs. But I get the sense that there's a "sour grapes" mentality among some that because they can't (or won't) invest in DCC, it must not be all that it's made out to be.
My suggestion is to find a local club or buddy who's running DCC and try it out. If it doesn't thrill you, fine. You don't need it. But at least you will have a good idea what it is you're chosing not to use instead of this big, expensive, complicated boogie man some folks have made DCC out to be.
In the end, it's your dollar to spend.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
I posted before on this:
1. It's not the money in my case, yeah I can afford to go out and buy the best unit out there if I wanted to.
2. Like I said in my earlier post 80 loco's I'd spend all my time converting and not running.
3. One man layout only, I just run a mainline train and then switch the yards or whatever.
4. I just don't need it, my finished ( yeah right ) layout is wired with lots of blocks and no one to wreck it for me. (except me )
I just don't want the aggravation of changing the whole layout, just to run more than two engines at a time. Call me a dinosaur I still use atlas switches because thats what I started with 35 years ago.
Jerry SP FOREVER http://photobucket.com/albums/f317/GAPPLEG/
cjcrescent wrote: MidlandPacific wrote: twhite wrote: MidlandPacific wrote: When I decide that I'm ready to expand my layout and make the leap to a bigger system, I think I'll convert to DCC. The advantages for large layouts seem pretty clear: more trains, more operators, and relatively less wiring. I put twenty-three blocks in my small starter layout, which is basically a pair of urban junctions, operated with dual-cab control. It was easy to wire it, but it was very time-consuming, and the circuit logic for a bigger layout with multiple cabs would get pretty unwieldy, I think. And I'm willing to wait awhile to see other great stuff what the electronics revolution can provide. Incidentally, per the comments on brass engines shedding parts, I have noticed that some of them do - some of the NJ Custom brass stuff seems to have detail parts that were held on with some kind of adhesive, rather than soldered, and I've noticed they will shed a bit, things like injectors and piping - as a Grande fan, Tom, you might have noticed this with their L-76 class 2-6-6-2s. Midland--Not to get off topic again (he said with an evil chuckle) but about the NJ Custom shedding parts--don't have their L-76, but I have three M-78 4-8-2's that came with drivers sprung with--of all things--GUITAR wire! Had to re-spring the little devils, because they were incredibly mushy, and the only thing that would work was a stronger Ernie Ball .013 guitar wire. You should have seen the look on the guy's face at the music store when I told him that the wire was for a model locomotive, not a Fender Stratocaster! But the stronger wire's held up for quite a few years, now. Nice to know if I need to re-spring, I can just head down to my local guitar shop, LOL! But I do have a tendency to refer to those three locos as my Rock n' Roll Mountains. Tom That's priceless! I got the same thing from a guy at a hardware store when I was buying fishing line to make truss rods. The larger guitar strings that have the "wrapping" around them also make great "insulated piping" for detailing engines as well.
Carey--
Yah, Ernie Ball brass-wrapped .023 to .026 is really good for piping, especially if you're installing an Elesco FWH. Did it with my two Akane M-4 2-8-8-4's, and an Akane USRA Pacific, a couple of years back. Looks really cool. Thank God for guitarists, LOL!
I'm going to try to tread carefully here, this has stayed so civil it's almost boring, and I'd like to keep it that way!
I feel like I've heard more 'sensitivity' from DCers defending their choice. I'm sure it is similar to me having to sometimes explain why I drive a 14 year old car, for me it is right (at least for now), and I might get defensive.
The thing that I think some DCC supporters (probably to include me) have done is point out some of the fallacies in the arguments to not convert. (In my case I'm not really that hard over on that, being somewhat from the if it works, don't fix it camp. I do think that in most cases someone starting out is going to be better served by starting with DCC rather than starting DC and planning to maybe switch later. End of commercial interruption.) I think that the cost and complexity of a DCC system are often overstated. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, DCC does not require autoreverse modules, a switch will do. Also, earlier today someone said that they didn't want the trouble of 'changing his whole layout' to convert to DCC, which is most likely extremely overstating the task.
My point is that I think in many, many, cases there are absolutely valid reasons for a DC system to stay DC. I also think that in these cases, but even more in the case of a newer model railroader, the decision should be made based on real facts and thoughts, and not on knee jerk, absolute, emotional, statements. And either solution might be the right answer.
I'm going back under my rock now. Please don't start a flame war over this!
Jeff But it's a dry heat!
Virginian,
I'll try and tread carefully here, as Vail states above........
Sour grapes mentality from DCCers? Honestly, I've read a lot of the posts on this forum over the past 3 years regarding DCC. In most cases, the DCCers seemed to have a very enthusiastic attititude. A few were condescending and were quickly "put in their place".
The "sour grapes" attitude that you mention I've seen overwhelmingly come from many DCers. Specifcally, as Vail mentions, statements about the technology that are either exaggerated or flat out untrue.
In reading Vail's post above, imho, he hit the nail on the head.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
Virginian wrote:Dave, it must be us. I keep thinking I am getting the sour grapes mentality from DCC folks who cannot get DCers to agree it is the be all end all. Maybe I'm too sensitive... nah. Maybe I'm not sensitive enough.
So let me get this straight. Never discuss (in public) politics, religion, and DCC!
While I was still DC, I had to convince myself that DCC was a luxury I could do without. I talked myself into believing that it was too much for my small layout and limited operating goals, and was therefore overkill. But, the more I ran other layouts with DCC and saw it in action, the harder it was to convince myself that those grapes were sour. It just made everything so easy, convenient, and smooth.
So, last year when it came time to rebuild my layout, I took the plunge and went Digitrax. Wow.
Again, DC is great, and the right answer for lots of people. Nobody should look down on another for their choice of control systems. But you (third person sense) do yourself a disservice by trying to convince yourself you've made the right choice based on incorrect assumptions, fear, or sticker shock. If you've looked at DCC, maybe tried it out, or at least talked to knowledgeable people about it and still decide it's not for you, then you've got a rock-solid argument. That, and the budget. I know DCC is an investment. Otherwise, you may be missing out.
I know I was missing out for the many years I wasted my money on non-DCC-ready locomotives, running them one at a time with my glorified rheostat...
Dave Vollmer wrote: Virginian wrote:Dave, it must be us. I keep thinking I am getting the sour grapes mentality from DCC folks who cannot get DCers to agree it is the be all end all. Maybe I'm too sensitive... nah. Maybe I'm not sensitive enough.So let me get this straight. Never discuss (in public) politics, religion, and DCC!While I was still DC, I had to convince myself that DCC was a luxury I could do without. I talked myself into believing that it was too much for my small layout and limited operating goals, and was therefore overkill. But, the more I ran other layouts with DCC and saw it in action, the harder it was to convince myself that those grapes were sour. It just made everything so easy, convenient, and smooth.So, last year when it came time to rebuild my layout, I took the plunge and went Digitrax. Wow.Again, DC is great, and the right answer for lots of people. Nobody should look down on another for their choice of control systems. But you (third person sense) do yourself a disservice by trying to convince yourself you've made the right choice based on incorrect assumptions, fear, or sticker shock. If you've looked at DCC, maybe tried it out, or at least talked to knowledgeable people about it and still decide it's not for you, then you've got a rock-solid argument. That, and the budget. I know DCC is an investment. Otherwise, you may be missing out. I know I was missing out for the many years I wasted my money on non-DCC-ready locomotives, running them one at a time with my glorified rheostat...
With me it's not a sour grapes attitude. I have operated a few DCC layouts and understand the positive points of it. However, when I do state reasons why I have not converted (either on a forum or in real life) it seems like I have every DCC faithful come out and tell me I am full of BS. Here are the reasons:
1. Cost is a factor. Some of my Oscale engines pull over 2 amps and require a decoder which costs nearly $100. I just can't put a standard HO $20 decoder in my locos. You cannot argue that $1500 initial investment for my 15 locos is a major investment. And that is just for the decoders.
2. Head on collisions. I have a large layout that is in multiple rooms. Miscommunication between operators in separate rooms is common. While a head-on collision is nearly impossible on DC, it is way more likely with DCC. I have a ATSF Texas that weighs 12 lbs and 2 F45's that weigh 8 lbs each. A 30 car freight train can weigh over 40 lbs, not including the loco. I want to do everything possible to minimize the likelyhood of a head on collision between 2 50l lb trains. I'm sorry but there is no way that you can make me think differently.
3. When I have a problem with the operation of my layout I have always been able to troubleshoot it because it is simple. I would like to keep it that way. Throwing decoders and electronics into the mix always makes troubleshooting more difficult. Again, I'm not being sour grapes, I just know where my strengths are.
If you want to argue any of these points as being false or exagerated, go right ahead. You will not get any response from me though because they are not points to be debated in a committee.
I havn't really gotten the "sour grapes" feeling from the DC or DCC posts here. I have gotten into many arguments on other forums with DCC guys berating me. One guy was arguing that a block in DC operates the same as a power district in DCC. He started out the disscussion by telling me that everything that I had written was BS. Another told me that head-on collisions and accidents in general are inevitable and that I am just going to have to live with it. It seems that the DC guys can always see the good things with DCC, while there are a few DCC guys that don't see any redeeming value in DC and will jump all over you for it. I think it has to do with experience with the two systems. While there are a few DC guys out there that just don't understand DCC, there are just as many DCC guys that never had DC or if they did they really don't have a good working knowledge of a GOOD block system layout. Yet on the internet, everyone's voice is just as loud, no matter what teir experience.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
Dave and Antonio--
Good points, as usual. Actually, the only 'Flame' I've seen here on this particular thread is the guy that called my choice of control and locomotives "Dinosaurs." Everyone else has been quite civil in explaining their particular stance--DC or DCC. Which makes me think that the large majority of us model what is right for us at the present time and are not only willing to present our particular views in a reasonable manner, but also listen to reasonable opposing views in the same spirit.
Frankly, for a thread that COULD have gone to nothing but Sniping and Trolling, this particular thread has remained both lively, interesting and for the most part, quite civil. Which shows that people CAN talk without having to out-shout or out-insult each other.
Cheers to us, I say!
el-capitan,1). I agree that price is a big factor...but what about the Digitrax DG383AR decoder? http://www.digitrax.com/prd_mobdec_dg383ar.php It's a 3 amp decoder (5 amp peak) that's roughly 1.5" x 2.25" in size, & has 8 FX functions. At http://www.tonystrains.com/ it's only $50 ea., not $100 ea.
2). Head-on collisions can be factored out with DCC, but it requires a lot of work to do so. For example, using block detection, signalling, and a form of ATS to stop trains from going past a red signal are all possible with DCC today. It is, however, much more expensive to do so. Or, you can use your kind of block control with DCC...using the Dispatcher to turn off the blocks that the trains aren't using. A manual kind of ATS, sort of.
3). I agree that troubleshooting can be difficult, but that's true with any system. Trust me. I spent years operating my club's old 1953-era DC layout, and floating blocks, relays, and dead toggles are also a pain in the rear. One time, a member who was the Narrow Gauge chairman snipped out the wires to a long abandoned narrow gauge track that was being removed. It killed the whole Division (25' x 50') because what he cut was also the common return for all the cabs! With DCC, you normally track it down to the faulty component device and replace the device. With DC, you track it down to the faulty resistor/relay/power supply/transistor/etc., and replace the part (for the most part). Not to say one is better or not, just different.
twhite,You do realize that the "dinosaur" crack was in humor, right? After all, you're the one that mentioned the "Jurassic Era" first. modelmaker51 made a funny (note the smilie), and then you rather insultingly told him to think before writing. Now you are still calling his joke (note the smilie) a "Flame".
Tom, if you don't want people to jokingly relate your trains to dinosaurs, don't say things like, "Hey, I LIKE the Jurassic Era! It's still fun!" when you talk about them.
beegle55,Shouting at someone to "shut up" for making a joke (note the smilie) is over the line. Especially since twhite is the one that compared his trains to dinosaurs in the first place!!!
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
I thought this was to be a place to discuss DC topics? We cannot get away from the constant blah blah blah of the DCC fanatics even here. Why is that?
WE DON'T CARE ABOUT DCC WE DON'T WANT DCC
Go preach somewhere else.
Clang,
"Go preach somewhere else" ......................
"Go preach somewhere else"
Is it really necessary for you to post such a nasty "in-the-sewer" reply?
Why are you saying "We"? Can you not speak for yourself?
Which modelers here have acted like fanatics? The person that made a "heated statement" apologized. That's the mark of an intelligent man. So there are no fanatics here.
BTW: Only my opinon, but chances are that 99% of DCC modelers that are over the age of 15 started in DC. So you can see that we're all binded together.
Overall this thread is full of intelligent, cool minded discussions here. Why you chose to dump trash on it is a baffling.
We have a good group of modelrailroaders here, bottom line.
Sorry if I ruffled some feathers. I've been very happy with my switch to DCC so I can't help but sing its praises.
That said, I still use DC to power my signals. That's right!
I use my Tech II from my DC days to run my signals and signal animators. I use the DC current to adjust the signal brightness. It's mounted under the layout with industrial-strength Velcro.
So, on a lighter note, does this get me into the DC Club?