 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Railroads / April 2005Question on several trains on one layout
I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my best bet? I don't really want to spend $200+ on a DCC system... is there a cheap "starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I can reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? Look at the basic MRC unit.................... > I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 switching > yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my best bet? > > I don't really want to spend $200+ on a DCC system... is there a cheap > "starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I can > reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? If you are into electronics, you can build your own. Schematics for pretty much everything DCC, are available on the web at various sites. You can build your own decoders, DCC-computer interfaces, and everything in between. Open source software is available too, for controlling the layout, monitoring what's going on, setting and resetting your decoders, and even designing the layout in the first place. Much of what I have seen is even loco-net compatible, so it will work directly with digitrax products. Carolyn > I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 > switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I > can reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? Can u give some good web adresses for those DCC-computer interfaces and that open source software? Looks like this is what i'm looking for thx > If you are into electronics, you can build your own. Schematics for > pretty much everything DCC, are available on the web at various sites. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Carolyn <<crossposting trimmed>> >I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 >switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >"starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I >can reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? Your best bet at the lower end is the Digitrax Zephyr system. It's fully capable and expandable with all the bells and whistles (yes, it will control sound units), handles 2 and 4 digit addressing and all programming modes, 14, 28, and 128 speed step modes, will write _and_ read CVs, will control as many as 10 trains at a time, has 2.5 amps power, and can use all Digitrax and third party Loconet accessories (such as throttles, IR and IR/Radio receivers, fast clocks, block occupancy detectors, and computer interfaces). It will also let you use 2 analog controllers as digital throttles (which can save you some money starting up) In the event you build a larger layout and need more power, all the accessories work with the other Digitrax systems and the Zephyr can be used as an additional booster, or as a dedicated programming station. In short, the Zephyr's only lower power, not limited capability. No financial interest, just a very satisfied user of many Digitrax products.  SignatureJoe Ellis I thought like you and bought the Atlas Commander system because I didnt' know if I'd like DCC or not. It works fine and I'm very happy with it except that when I visit other layouts or talk to other railroaders, or if I need help, I find that everybody uses Digitrax. It's a Digitrax World and I wish I'd popped the extra bucks for Digitrax. As George Goble used to say, "I feel like a pair of brown shoes in a room full of tuxedos." Carter > I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 > switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I > can reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? > I thought like you and bought the Atlas Commander system because > I didnt' know if I'd like DCC or not. It works fine and I'm [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Digitrax. As George Goble used to say, "I feel like a pair of > brown shoes in a room full of tuxedos." I risked the wrath of SWMBO and popped nearly $300 for the Digitrax Super Empire Builder. Although the layout is barely begun, I am totally satisfied. At the same time, I bought a Broadway Limited E7A. I have to say that never in my 58 years have two product so thoroughly exceeded my expectations. Kudos to both companies for absolutely outstanding products! Signature=========================================================== Norman Morgan <> http://www.norm-morgan.com =========================================================== Sometimes I wake up grumpy. Other times I let her sleep. =========================================================== > I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 > switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I > can reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? The Digitrax Zephyr (http://www.digitrax.com/prd_zep_basic_set.php) goes for about $160 (US). -- Bill McC. 1. You might consider DC and block control. Each oval could be a separate block easily enough, and the yard could be broken down to blocks as well. There are enough block control advocates here to provide better input. And it may well be less expensive than DCC, though if you really will run three trains on the ovals and one or more in the yards, you will be looking at multiple transformers. An entry level MRC is about $50 at Walthers (on sale). But I recommend the Digitrax Zephyr as have others. At LoysToys, a Zephyr plus the PS315 power supply is $160. You can even use old power packs as throttles (up to two) if you have them laying around. The Zephyr will not become obsolete in the future since it can be integrated into Empire Builder or Chief systems as your needs grow. I would block each major area of your layout regardless of the system you choose (DC or DCC) with a switch to isolate each one. You must do that with DC, but for DCC, that allows you to turn an area completely off if you have a short to see where the problem is; for future proofing, that allows easy integration of PM42's power managers with their individual block circuit breakers and/or auto-reversing capabilities. Ed. >> I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 >> switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > for about $160 (US). > -- Bill McC. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > I'm in the process of setting up a new layout which will have 2 > switching yards and 3 independent runnable ovals of track... what is my > best bet? > I don't really want to spend $200+ on a DCC system... is there a cheap > "starter" type kit.. like one power module, and 1 controller (since I > can reprogram for which engine to run)... for cheap? A dissenting opinion from an old dinosaur: A layout with "3 independent runnable ovals" doesn't seem to me to need DCC. It seems totally within the capability of a couple used power packs and some Atlas "Selectors" and maybe a "Controller". Use your limited model RR budget to complete your RR, get it sceniced, to add structures, and to expand you motive power and rolling stock rosters with better quality equipment. When you get that running, and when you are ready to tear it down and start an larger RR with passing sidings and scheduled operation and meets and double heading etc., then consider buying DCC. You can always use the old power packs to power turnouts or illuminate structures and street lamps. The state-of-the-art seems to still advancing so that by then there will be better smaller decoders and better controllers available, and probably for less money. In my experience operating on a half dozen different DCC equipped layouts, and visiting several dozen more at NMRA meets, I've only seen a couple where the operation is really improved over old fashioned toggle switch block control systems. I have yet to get through a DCC operating session where someone's unseen derailment doesn't short out half the RR, where all of a sudden locomotives start running away by themselves, where a half dozen totally different controllers show up and not even the "DCC experts" seem to know how to use all the styles to un-MU locomotives or whatever, or where the owner hasn't gotten sick of the sound and turned it off once the new visitors are done ooing and aahing. I'd rather put my money and time into another T-1 or string of new passenger cars. An old Geezer. Geezer, you hit it right on the head! I have used DCC, and I don't like the idea that glitches can cause exactly what you described. If one of my locos got into a "corn field meet" as a result of electronic glitches, I think I would be ready to kick some butt. I think DCC is still "Trendy" . With block controls and DC, those kinds of things don't happen. I have yet to get through a DCC operating session where > someone's unseen derailment doesn't short out half the RR, where all of a > sudden locomotives start running away by themselves, where a half dozen [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > An old Geezer. Thanks.. that's is what I was thinking... my layout will have 3 independent runnable ovals (that can intersect) and also 2 yards... DCC is nice... but if I do it right as I thought, and you stated.. I should have able to have 3 nice cheap used powerpaks and just have kill switches for track segments (with a nice little map on the dashboard maybe)... Sounds good.. yeah first line of business is to build a 4'x8' table.. then put foamboard on it.. then cork and track.. once that's all running then get scenery =) > Geezer, you hit it right on the head! I have used DCC, and I > don't like the idea that glitches can cause exactly what you described. If [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> >>An old Geezer. > Thanks.. that's is what I was thinking... my layout will have 3 > independent runnable ovals (that can intersect) and also 2 yards... DCC > is nice... but if I do it right as I thought, and you stated.. I should > have able to have 3 nice cheap used powerpaks and just have kill > switches for track segments (with a nice little map on the dashboard > maybe)... You might be interested in my DC wiring circuits. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards > Sounds good.. yeah first line of business is to build a 4'x8' table.. > then put foamboard on it.. then cork and track.. once that's all running [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >> > >>An old Geezer. >... but if I do it right as I thought, and you stated.. I should >have able to have 3 nice cheap used powerpaks <sigh> People bought Yugos because they were cheap. People buy $50 bikes at KMart and wonder why their legs are trashed on a short ride. (My triathlon bike is worth more than my truck.) People buy cheap used power packs and wonder why their trains don't run well. (Ever wonder why there are lots of used cheap power packs around? Does that possibly mean something?) Get over cheap. It isn't a cheap hobby. You get what you pay for and it's far wiser to invest in good equipment from the beginning. >and just have kill >switches for track segments (with a nice little map on the dashboard >maybe)... And when you're tired of flipping toggles and watching your trains running around in circles doing nothing, you can second guess yourself about how much more fun you could be having with DCC. Sorry, but I did it your way using the same explanation/rationale. I finally switched to DCC and never looked back. Mike Tennent "IronPenguin" > Get over cheap. It isn't a cheap hobby. You get what you pay for and > it's far wiser to invest in good equipment from the beginning. You got that right. Much more fun to play with the trains, rather than work on them to keep them running. Same for the rest of the equipment. That is unless you like maintaining more than running. :) Carolyn >> Get over cheap. It isn't a cheap hobby. You get what you pay for and >> it's far wiser to invest in good equipment from the beginning. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Carolyn Some do, it would seem. The "cheapest" power pack that I'd use for other than running some lights in buildings is the MRC for about $50 at Walthers. For three of those (or maybe 4 if he wanted to run something in the yard, too) is $150 to $200 plus the Atlas (or other) selectors. For the same $200 + $20 for each loco, you would have a Zephyr. So at least at this entry level, cost is not the biggest factor. The choice is how you want to operate and there have been repeated and plentiful discussion of the pros and cons of DC vs. DCC on this news group. Beware as you read them that after about 10 messages or so, it all turns into a flame war. There is a good Atlas book about common rail wiring for beginners (using Atlas products, of course) as well as some other more advanced stuff. For a DCC primer, I recommend Digital Command Control by Stan Ames et al. But choose your electronics based on how you want to run the trains now and in the near future, not on the price of "cheap" power packs, or "expensive" power packs, or the initial cost of DCC. The wiring for all of them is about the same since you wind up blocking DCC anyway for circuit protection and fault detection. Oh, and I've never had a runaway train on DCC, and there is a kill switch on nearly every throttle (emergency stop). Ed >> ... but if I do it right as I thought, and you stated.. I should >> have able to have 3 nice cheap used powerpaks [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Mike Tennent > "IronPenguin" SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > The "cheapest" power pack that I'd use for other than running some lights in > buildings is the MRC for about $50 at Walthers. For three of those (or maybe > 4 if he wanted to run something in the yard, too) is $150 to $200 plus the > Atlas (or other) selectors. I never recommended "cheap". I recommended "used". You can get early metal-case MRC packs with a quality couple amp transformer and rheostat inside at train shows for well under $10. I got a bunch that weren't working from a hobby shop that dealt in used equipment for free. You can replace the old selenium diodes with Radio Shack silicon devices for under $2, and have a quality pack. If you run can motors, you can replace the rheostat with a potentiometer and power transistor or adjustable voltage regulator for around $5. The Atlas Selector only accepts two throttle inputs. So for your $200, you can do this and have enough left over for a pair of P2K diesels, or one loco and some nice Walthers or Branchline heavyweights. Gary Q >> The "cheapest" power pack that I'd use for other than running some lights >in [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >pair of P2K diesels, or one loco and some nice Walthers or Branchline >heavyweights. Gary Q Let me guess... do you think it's too much work to install decoders? <<grin>> SignatureJoe Ellis >Let me guess... do you think it's too much work to install decoders? ><<grin>> Programming decoders has it's learning curve, only the instructions are like program manuals, they're written in geek. As more and more features get added as "standard" the complexity of programming will increase, not proportionally, by a factor between two and ten. DCC is NOT without it's learning curve, and it is NOT a perfect solution, Perfect solutions don't exist, only fair compromises. TANSTAAFL! Greybeard. > Programming decoders has it's learning curve, only the > instructions are like program manuals, they're written in geek. Even though I'm a recent convert to the DCC cult. I'll give this point a big AMEN! I've been wrestling with computers and their manuals for 30 years and some DCC documentation still left me scratching my head and wishing for a decent example or two. > As more and more features get added as "standard" the complexity > of programming will increase, not proportionally, by a factor > between two and ten. DCC is NOT without it's learning curve, > and it is NOT a perfect solution, Perfect solutions don't exist, > only fair compromises. Another amen. I don't think perfect solutions exist either. We all have to pick the compromise we can live with the easiest. I do hope that as DCC matures, the manufacturers realize that railroaders are not necessarily computer geeks and start writing docs the average guy can understand. That alone might do more for the acceptance of the technology than all the gee whize features they can add. > TANSTAAFL! Took the words right out of my mouth! (Another RAH fan?) Signature=========================================================== Norman Morgan <> http://www.norm-morgan.com =========================================================== Sometimes I wake up grumpy. Other times I let her sleep. =========================================================== I >do hope that as DCC matures, the manufacturers realize that >railroaders are not necessarily computer geeks and start writing >docs the average guy can understand. That alone might do more for >the acceptance of the technology than all the gee whize features >they can add. If you have a Digitrax system my heart goes out to you. Digitrax pubs are some of the worst examples of technical writing for the layman that I have ever seen. I am a Digitrax user and I adore the product. But the pubs are a mystery to me even after more than 40 years of working with electronics and electronic equipment. The users manual for a Cincinnati-Milacron CNC machining center was easier to read and understand than the manual for the DT-400. Now that I have had my DT-400 for some time, I can say that it is a great deal simpler than the controller on the Cincinnati machine. However, from trying to read the manual when I first got it, I would not have thought so. IMO, the problem is not lack of information, it is a complete lack of logical organization of the information. That makes all the difference. CH > I >do hope that as DCC matures, the manufacturers realize that >railroaders are not necessarily computer geeks and start writing >docs the average guy can understand. That alone might do more for >the acceptance of the technology than all the gee whize features >they can add. Seems to be the thing with hitech things, more features, how to use them is a trade secret. Best manuals I've seen are from Serif, and even those could use a few more pages of examples. >> TANSTAAFL! > >Took the words right out of my mouth! (Another RAH fan?) ROTFLMAO! (Lennie) I'll be off line permanently on the ninth of this month, SBC decided that $30 a month wasn't enough, $50 is more than I'm going to pay and I haven't found a decent local ISP, but more because of the phone lines. Thirty miles from Milwaukee, and 1000 miles from civilization. Phone lines are ancient, the phone company doesn't want to spend any money keeping things up. Tried Road Runner twice now, they screwed it up both times, no sense in giving them installation fees for nothing a third time. (Everything is done through their website, which does no good when the user name they gave me also belongs to someone in Milwaukee.) 12 hours between installation and me taking the modem back to them. SBC is highly variable, on a good dry day, I get reasonable D/L speeds, if the humidity is up, I might as well be on dialup. Greybeard (I'm not really against DCC, but don't like anyone posting that it's the way to go because you can maintain a higher level of ignorance. It has it's place, but won't be on my layout.) People keep saying that programming decoders is somehow difficult. For novices, only a couple of things need programming: the locomotive address and CV29 if the default won't do. Since new decoders seem to all come with 2 digit addressing and 128 speed steps all set up out of the box, only the address must be set. Once you get the hang of it, then setting start / mid / max voltage (where available) is next, followed by acceleration and deceleration. Then the user is pretty familiar with things and the "difficult" part starts since there are no apparent standards if you have decoders from different companies: speed tables, lighting effects, sound settings, etc. But when I got my first decoder (Digitrax DH121 back in '98 or so), I had it installed in a blue box Athearn GP38 in about 1/2 hour, running on address 3 (the default) a few minutes later, and a new address, start voltage, etc. about 1/2 hour after that. Once you get into more advanced programming, the "difficult" part is documenting what you have done for each locomotive. I used the PR1 program for a while till I finally shot my old Windows PC and went all Mac. I just created a form in Word (for Macintosh :) with the major CVs and keep them in a notebook. That way, if a decoder breaks (only one NCE fried itself so far and they just replaced it and sent me a couple of prototype stationary decoders for my trouble; excellent service from those folks), it is easy to program the replacement. Ed >> Let me guess... do you think it's too much work to install decoders? >> <<grin>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Greybeard. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > Once you get the hang of it, then setting start / mid / max voltage (where > available) is next, followed by acceleration and deceleration. I think that period between starting and "getting the hang of it" is what they are complaining about. Thirty years of deciphering Unix man pages made the decoder programming instructions seem rather tame. I can see where the first one can be a bit overwhelming to those not used to interpreting terse/barebone instructions. Paul > I think that period between starting and "getting the hang of > it" is what they are complaining about. Thirty years of > deciphering Unix man pages made the decoder programming > instructions seem rather tame. I can see where the first one > can be a bit overwhelming to those not used to interpreting > terse/barebone instructions. I always thought it was you pointy-head Unix types who WROTE those twisted docs for the rest of us! <grin> Hablo solo un poco Unix Signature=========================================================== Norman Morgan <> http://www.norm-morgan.com =========================================================== Sometimes I wake up grumpy. Other times I let her sleep. =========================================================== >> I think that period between starting and "getting the hang of >> it" is what they are complaining about. Thirty years of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I always thought it was you pointy-head Unix types who WROTE those > twisted docs for the rest of us! <grin> Only the man pages, most of the books are pretty good. *8-> Yeah, maybe it helps that I built my first computer in 1960 and was in R&D at Singer (Friden), Ampex, Memorex, and Oracle. When designing new hardware at the first three, the "instruction" book was talking to an engineer who said things like, this flip-flop controls the nand gate in the adder. So to me, even the Digitrax books are decipherable. But that said, the basic functions are simply loading 8 bits into a register, and of the basic ones, only CV29 it a bit function; the others, address, max/min/mid, acceleration / deceleration are simple values between 0 and 255 (0 and xFF). Once you figure out how to get into programming mode and avoid programming all your locos at once, and you figure out how to set the address, the others are pretty easy. At first, the newcomer to DCC needs to avoid reading about all the lighting, function matrices, sound tables, and sound functions. Just learn how to get into programming mode with only a single loco on the track, and how to pick a register, and set a value into it. Ed >> Once you get the hang of it, then setting start / mid / max voltage (where >> available) is next, followed by acceleration and deceleration. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Paul SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) Ed, You are wasting your time preaching to the choir. I agree, it ain't that difficult ... for you, me and lots of others. There are people at the club who have little computer experience and have done little that would have prepared them for programming a decoder. They my not be rocket scientists but, they ain't the dimmest bulb in the pack either. They seem very intimidated at first. After they have been walked through it once, some times twice, they are explaining it to others as if they built it from scratch. It's that first, "get your feet wet", experience that they have a little trouble with. I don't identify with it very well but, I have learned to recognize it. One of the die hard, "DCC makes no sense", guys at the club, who is a guppy for switching operations, got converted when he realized he didn't have to clean the track very 20 minutes. DCC puts full power to the track all the time. Now he is at the club most Friday nights with a soldering iron and a new engine to decoderize. But, he was a hard sell for a long time. Now you frequently find him with two handhelds, each controlling two switchers, a rabid convert. There are others who just say, "costs too much to convert not doin' it". The club will never be all DCC, just not gonna happen. On analog nights I just find other things to do *8-> Paul > Yeah, maybe it helps that I built my first computer in 1960 and was in R&D > at Singer (Friden), Ampex, Memorex, and Oracle. When designing new hardware [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >> >> Paul SignatureExcuse me, I'll be right back. I have to log onto a server in Romania and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information before they suspend my accounts. Working the Rockie Road of the G&PX It strikes me as strange that the same guys who will take a saw to a perfectly good (well sort of) $100 model, are somehow intimidated to just press a button or two on a handheld attached to a $20 decoder. But I've seen it a lot with all novice computer users: they are afraid to touch anything. Maybe they think if they touch the wrong thing they'll vote for Buchanan instead of Gore. The walking a novice through for the first time suggestion is a good one for those involved in clubs. I wish more local hobby shops had someone who knew something about DCC. Around here, The Train Shop in Santa Clara, CA, finally started carrying Digitrax and LGB stuff and learned enough about it to show people how it worked. But some other places around (won't mention 'em), carry some DCC, like Atlas and MRC, and apparently haven't taken the time to learn anything about it. Sigh... Anyway, I like preaching to the choir...there's that cutie in the second row... > Ed, > [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] >>> >>> Paul SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) >It strikes me as strange that the same guys who will take a saw to a >perfectly good (well sort of) $100 model, are somehow intimidated to just >press a button or two on a handheld attached to a $20 decoder. That won't make up for the sorry excuses for documentation that they stick in and "sorry, sucker, you're on your own." Example: Yesterday I bought a new digital camera, a Fuji, and find the documentation deals with the camera, which is good, but says nothing about the sorry excuse for software they send. Like "How do I get the damn thing to down load the pictures, or, where in hell in the 150000 files in my computer did it hide them?" It's not unusual, one of the most popular 3D programs for manipulating humanoids, Poser, has probably the worst manual, even though it's several hundred pages, that I've ever seen. It's less than worthless, the writer had no familiarity with either computer or 3D terminology. My guess is he works cheap. Why would the doc for a DCC be any better? Geeks wrote them both. (When they get a USER to write the instructions, they might be easier to work with, Tech writers care more about the nitty gritty of the circuitry than they do about being able to use it.) ((Excuse me while I send Fuji an email asking how to get the damn thing to download, before I get frustrated and see how far I can throw it.)) Greybeard >When they get a USER to write the instructions, they might be easier >to work with Yep. That's why there's a Digitrax users group on Yahoo...with thousands of subscribers, there's someone there to help everybody. CL P.S. I bet there's a group for NCE, Wangrow, Lenz, Atlas, etc., ad infinitum. >>When they get a USER to write the instructions, they might be easier >>to work with [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >P.S. I bet there's a group for NCE, Wangrow, Lenz, Atlas, etc., ad >infinitum. Being as I'm trashing my connection in six more days, I don't think any of those would help me. I can't justify $50 per month for a 156K connection, and I've already tried the locals, with varying degrees of unreliability. A couple of them would be overpriced at $2 per month. Greybeard. >>P.S. I bet there's a group for NCE, Wangrow, Lenz, Atlas, etc., ad >>infinitum. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >connection, and I've already tried the locals, with varying degrees of >unreliability. There's alwasy satellite... <g> > Yesterday I bought a new digital camera, a Fuji, and find the > documentation deals with the camera, which is good, but says nothing [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Why would the doc for a DCC be any better? Geeks wrote them both. Oh, look! Another apples/celery comparison. Your camera has crap documentation, therefore so must DCC? Whatever happened to lowering the "level of allowable ignorance" - whatever that means - and figuring things out for yourself???? > > Yesterday I bought a new digital camera, a Fuji, and find the > > documentation deals with the camera, which is good, but says nothing [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Oh, look! Another apples/celery comparison. Your camera has crap >documentation, therefore so must DCC? Doc is doc, if it's any kind of digital, it was written for geeks by geeks. >Whatever happened to lowering the "level of allowable ignorance" - >whatever that means - and figuring things out for yourself???? Frustration leads me to destroy things. There is NO mention in the socalled on line help files as to how to access the data in the camera. Just absolutely beautiful, typical of digital equipment. If it doesn't work as advertised, you're screwed, charlie. It doesn't. I worked with and on digital equipment for a good many years, I'm sick of manuals that don't tell what I need to know, and "help desks" that don't even know how to operate their own equipment. No way am I going to complicate my hobby. And by the way, I don't mind if someone wants to go DCC, it's not my railroad. I don't like it when they press being able to stay ignorant as it's strongest point. "You don't have to learn *****". Greybeard >Frustration leads me to destroy things. Well, you should seek help for that. It can be cured, you know. > There is NO mention in the >socalled on line help files as to how to access the data in the >camera. Just absolutely beautiful, typical of digital equipment. If >it doesn't work as advertised, you're screwed, charlie. It doesn't. Then it is defective, or fails the test of merchanability, and should be returned for a full refund. If you didn't get your money back for a faulty product, you have no one to blame but yourself. CL I solved the digital camera problem by buying one with a removable memory card (5.1 MP Sony F717 in my case), bought a Mac and a memory card reader, and use iPhoto or Photoshop Elements (available for PC as well), and it just works. I can even post 'em on the web in easy steps directly out of iPhoto. See my website... Ed >>> Yesterday I bought a new digital camera, a Fuji, and find the >>> documentation deals with the camera, which is good, but says nothing [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Greybeard SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > I solved the digital camera problem by buying one with a removable memory > card (5.1 MP Sony F717 in my case), bought a Mac and a memory card reader, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Ed I also bought a card redaer, no problems after that. If youi're going on vacation, buy an extra card otr two -- they are getting quite cheap now. Most important: If you have a Windows system, do _not_ rely on "My Computer", "My Pictures" and all Micos**t crap. Set up your own folders and subfolders, with suitable names. I have a folder with the camera name, and every time I download another batch of pictures from the memory card, I create a new subfolder labelled by date. Eventually, I burn the whole folder with its subfolders onto a CD and start over. HTH&GL [...] On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:58:55 +1100, mark_newton <mark_newton@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Yesterday I bought a new digital camera, a Fuji, and find the > documentation deals with the camera, which is good, but says nothing > about the sorry excuse for software they send. Like "How do I get the > damn thing to down load the pictures, or, where in hell in the 150000 > files in my computer did it hide them?" I have a Fuji and the solution is simple. Plug in the USB cable, put the camera in standby and use the pc from there. the camera becomes a "removable media storage" device and is treated like any other hard drive. Mane a directory on one of your regular drives and Move the images from the camera to there. That's it, That's all. Simplicity itself. Now use PhotoShop to crop and manipulate the images. Beats the heck out of going to the drugstore. A useful tip. I have found Fuji is just a bit low resolution in general so set the camera to a fairly high resolution (quality) mode and use PhotoShop to shrink the images. That will make them sharper and better looking. You may not get as many images on a card but, with a spare card, that is no problem and the results are worth it. cat > On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:58:55 +1100, mark_newton ><mark_newton@optusnet.com.au> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > cat I think Greybeard wrote the original post, not Mark. Graybeard's problem, of course, is that first he has to make a USB cable from the wiring inside a 1950's Tyco transformer. <g> Mike Tennent "IronPenguin" >> I have a Fuji and the solution is simple. Plug in the USB >>cable, put the camera in standby and use the pc from there. the camera [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>but, with a spare card, that is no problem and the results are worth >>it. The problem with their software, it reads the camera as a flash memory, and I already have the default in the computer set as "take no action", so it never launches the stinking software. The other problem is that I expect it to at least equal my five year old Olympus D600L, and from what I see, the lens is nowhere near as good. (I bought a card reader, more convenient, I don't have to bother plugging and unplugging the camera, it also accepts the Oly cards, a bonus.) My 35mm cameras are Fujicas, I've used their 635 and loved it, and I've had Fujinon lenses for my large format cameras, with good results. If anyone is looking for a digital, I would say that looking at other than Fuji would be a good idea. I don't use Adobe for anything, too expensive. I have Photo Plus and find that anything I want to do can be done with it. One hint, I convert from .jpg to .png with Irfanview, then resize with Photo Plus, setting the resolution to either 800 or 1200 dpi, this forces my printer into the high quality mode. 11 X 17 prints that are almost photo quality, but $2 per sheet for the paper and it's hell on the ink. Another hint, using Carrara to generate curtains, then printing in much reduced size on transparency film gives the curtains that look pretty good. Carrara isn't the only one, there are a lot of good 3D programs that will do it, depending on your wallet. UV mapping an image onto another object can give some weird effects, might also be effective for generating backgrounds, if someone has a printer big enough. >I think Greybeard wrote the original post, not Mark. > >Graybeard's problem, of course, is that first he has to make a USB >cable from the wiring inside a 1950's Tyco transformer. <g> Other than this on line box, Mike, I haven't bought a computer that was assembled in more than ten years now. I'll buy the components, then set it up for the purpose it's going to be used. The one I use for MIDI has the cheapest graphics card, the CAD machine doesn't have a sound card. No problems with drivers messing with each other that way. Standard "office suite" stuff is done on an old Mac, beats the hell out of any windoZe box for reliability. When my connection expires, the on line box is being traded for a couple of 0-4-0 Plantations, in brass. Sounds like a good deal to me. Greybeard. >>> I have a Fuji and the solution is simple. Plug in the USB > I don't use Adobe for anything, too expensive. I have Photo Plus and > find that anything I want to do can be done with it. One hint, I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > photo quality, but $2 per sheet for the paper and it's hell on the > ink. Adobe Photoshop Elements lists at $99 and has much of the functionality of Photoshop which is very expensive. Unless you are a professional digital photo producer, elements is probably sufficient and very good. Much more capable than PhotoPlus and Element's resizing sampling algorithms are better. The proper answer (imho) to all of this complication is to buy a Mac. > Greybeard. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > Adobe Photoshop Elements lists at $99 and has much of the > functionality of Photoshop which is very expensive. Unless you > are a professional digital photo producer, elements is probably > sufficient and very good. Much more capable than PhotoPlus and > Element's resizing sampling algorithms are better. I've always been partial to Paint Shop Pro from JASC. Costs about 20% of what Photoshop does and has about 90% of the functionality. I started using it back at v.4 and it's up to v.9 now. I've used a number of digital cameras, but my current favorite is a Kodak DX6490 I use at work. 4 megapixels and a 10X optical zoom. Plus it just "feels right" in your hand if you are used to SLRs. Signature=========================================================== Norman Morgan <> http://www.norm-morgan.com =========================================================== Sometimes I wake up grumpy. Other times I let her sleep. =========================================================== >The problem with their software, it reads the camera as a flash >memory, and I already have the default in the computer set as "take no >action", so it never launches the stinking software. I never use their program as it is more confusion and trouble than it is worth. I use the camera as a "removable media drive" and transfer the files direst to the hard drive and work from there. Their program is just an unnecessary intermediate step and you are better off without it cat >Graybeard's problem, of course, is that first he has to make a USB >cable from the wiring inside a 1950's Tyco transformer. <g> Been there. Done that. Ended up with firewire. =^-^= cat > On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:58:55 +1100, mark_newton ><mark_newton@optusnet.com.au> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >but, with a spare card, that is no problem and the results are worth >it. I have a quick solution - purchase an inexpensive card reader like my USB Cameramate. Get one that accepts whatever media you use. You plug the thing into a USB port, push the card into the reader, and it can be read like a hard drive. I don't know about Macs, but you must have some icon that shows what files you have like Window's Explorer. You then should be able to move your pics wherever you want or copy them by dragging and dropping. Cordially, Ken (NY) email: http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm "What should we do with this projected surplus? I have a simple four-word answer: Save Social Security first." -Bill Clinton, State of the Union speech, 1998 > I have a quick solution - purchase an inexpensive card reader >like my USB Cameramate. Get one that accepts whatever media you use. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > You then should be able to move your pics wherever you want or >copy them by dragging and dropping. Did that last night, that part's ok, but Fuji isn't the quality they were years ago when I bought my 35mm. My old Olympus D600L is going to be hard to beat, the Fuji isn't going to do it. The Fuji will do more functions, the Oly won't do video, but the Fuji doesn't do many things well, a collection of compromises. The thumbnail option in Irfanview makes file sorting easy, I've gone through several hundred images, sorting them into different directories in less than fifteen minutes. Not that you won't find some of them in the wrong directories, but the same options can fix it before I burn to CD. My Macs are so old that even thinking about connecting anything modern to them is foolish. I think the newest is maxed out at OS7. Good for word processing, spreadsheets, database, but I don't try to go beyond that. But it would be nice to have something that will render a 500 frame animation without getting the BSD, and of the 4 versions of windoze I've tried, they all fail. (Then I get out the old Linux machine, start it going and come back in a week. 166mhz P-2's aren't the fastest thing, but it's never choked up on it either.) Greybeard I repeat my recommendation if you want video rendering, DV editing, audio production, and photos and rock solid stability: Mac OS X. It comes with iPhoto to organize and do minor photo tweaks; PS Elements is for Mac, too. Video stuff: iLife '05 (iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, and iDVD) is included with new machines for pretty easy functions; Final Cut Express HD and DVD SP are pro-sumer level programs which while not cheap, are inexpensive compared to say, the Avid suite. Trying to do decent photo processing on antiquated equipment (Mac System 7? Yikes!) or Windows is possible, but definitely a hobbiest obsession. Even Windows XP, while stable enough, is more problem laden than OS X, and much more prone to infection from the internet. Camera: dump the fuji, get either a Canon or a Sony with at least 5MP. My F717 takes great photos at 2560x1920; a friend has the 6MP Canan D10 (or 20, I forget) and it takes 3072x2048 pictures using the interchangeable Canon lens system. Ed >> I have a quick solution - purchase an inexpensive card reader >> like my USB Cameramate. Get one that accepts whatever media you use. [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Greybeard SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) >Trying to do decent photo processing on antiquated equipment (Mac System 7? >Yikes!) or Windows is possible, but definitely a hobbiest obsession. Which is why I don't do it on my old Macs. My first real computer was an Apple IIC, and I kinda got used to something that was stable, call it a nostalgia thing. >Even >Windows XP, while stable enough, is more problem laden than OS X, and much >more prone to infection from the internet. Hmmm. Tried POV-Ray on any version of windoze? I'll guarantee a crash before frame 250 on a long animation. I've heard that a Mac will complete it, but Linux in a good machine is much faster. >Camera: dump the fuji, get either a Canon or a Sony with at least 5MP. My >F717 takes great photos at 2560x1920; a friend has the 6MP Canan D10 (or 20, >I forget) and it takes 3072x2048 pictures using the interchangeable Canon >lens system. Don't care for Canon, never did like the way they feel, and won't buy Sony under any condition. Got a couple of cheapie Aipteks, been thinking about putting one in a gon and sending it around the track, it'll store about a minute of low res video. (Serif screwed up, sent me the wrong camera, twice. Freebies to me.) Software, most of what I do is color correction, get the red out, and even Irfanview does that pretty well. Photo Plus if I have to do any more than that or want to set transparencie in a .png. Actually, all I want is a digital with the resolution and features of a Crown Graphic, at $100 or less. ;^)) Greybeard. (text deleted) > Camera: dump the fuji, get either a Canon or a Sony with at least 5MP. My > F717 takes great photos at 2560x1920; a friend has the 6MP Canan D10 (or 20, > I forget) and it takes 3072x2048 pictures using the interchangeable Canon > lens system. > > Ed FWIW, I've got a Sony "cybershot" that I like pretty well. Takes decent photos, and the software automatically loads and the pics are already .jpg format. If I need to do any editing, Adobe's "photo delux" came free with my first HP scanner and does everything I need to do. Don -- don.dellmann@prodigy.net http://www.geocities.com/don_dellmann moderator: WisModelersAid@yahoogroups.com moderator: MRPics@yahoogroups.com moderator: vintageHO@yahoogroups.com co-moderator: SCENERY@Yahoogroups.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MRPics http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vintageHO >> I have a quick solution - purchase an inexpensive card reader >>like my USB Cameramate. Get one that accepts whatever media you use. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >more functions, the Oly won't do video, but the Fuji doesn't do many >things well, a collection of compromises. Oh, I know what you are saying. I have three Pro Nikon 35mm SLRs which I thought were pretty good. When I went digital, I bought an Olympus E-10, and have been getting the pics I want, with the ease of use of an SLR. For my wife's birthday, I got her a Nikon Coolpix 2100, and the thing is too small for my fingers and not very user friendly. By the way, the three Nikon F-3 HP 35mm could not be traded in since it seems that nobody is buying used film cameras anymore. I am giving them to friends this summer. >The thumbnail option in Irfanview makes file sorting easy, I've gone >through several hundred images, sorting them into different [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Greybeard Yep, an upgrade would be in order especially if you are using high res pics and Photoshop. Another helpful application is LView Pro, which uses less resources than the hungry Photoshop. I think there is a Mac version(?). . Cordially, Ken (NY) email: http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm "What should we do with this projected surplus? I have a simple four-word answer: Save Social Security first." -Bill Clinton, State of the Union speech, 1998 Uh, Mark, DCC does have CRAP documentation. It is opaque and contains too many detail without enough examples; no real "quick start" guides, etc. It's just that I've read enough crap documentation and managed tech writers and trying to get them to think like and end user that I can usually read through that stuff. Also, I'm not afraid to push the buttons and see what happens. "Oh, that's what it means!" Once a decoder is properly installed, it is difficult to destroy it by trying to program it. Ed >> Yesterday I bought a new digital camera, a Fuji, and find the >> documentation deals with the camera, which is good, but says nothing [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Whatever happened to lowering the "level of allowable ignorance" - > whatever that means - and figuring things out for yourself???? SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > Uh, Mark, DCC does have CRAP documentation. It is opaque and contains too > many detail without enough examples; no real "quick start" guides, etc. Maybe I misunderstood Marks remarks; I thought he was pointing out Greybeards "guilt by similarity" argument was bogus. I don't think Mark was saying that DCC has crap for documentation. Greybeard was complaining that his Digital camera was poorly documented as an example of why he doesn't like DCC. > It's just that I've read enough crap documentation and managed tech writers > and trying to get them to think like and end user that I can usually read [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> Whatever happened to lowering the "level of allowable ignorance" - >> whatever that means - and figuring things out for yourself???? SignatureExcuse me, I'll be right back. I have to log onto a server in Romania and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information before they suspend my accounts. Working the Rockie Road of the G&PX >> Uh, Mark, DCC does have CRAP documentation. It is opaque and contains too >> many detail without enough examples; no real "quick start" guides, etc. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > example of why he doesn't like DCC. > >>>> Why would the doc for a DCC be any better? Geeks wrote them both. My response was for the line above by "greybeard," and Mark's response, " Your camera has crap documentation, therefore so must DCC?" It is true that one does not imply the other, but DCC does have crap documentation. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > Maybe I misunderstood Marks remarks; I thought he was pointing out > Greybeards "guilt by similarity" argument was bogus. Correct. > I don't think Mark was saying that DCC has crap for documentation. I'm not in a position to comment, as I am only familiar with EasyDCC and NCE docs. Neither of these will ever win any literary awards, but I was able to comprehend them and get things running. Perhaps I just have low expectations of documentation? :-) > Greybeard was complaining that his Digital camera was poorly > documented as an example of why he doesn't like DCC. It's not just me - he <does> have wierd ideas. > > Maybe I misunderstood Marks remarks; I thought he was pointing out > > Greybeards "guilt by similarity" argument was bogus. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > It's not just me - he <does> have wierd ideas. DC must mean Digital Camera? DCC must be Digital Camera Confusion? Ed Oates is right, DCC documentation is pretty bad but, not because Digital Cameras Confuse Greybeard. Paul > Uh, Mark, DCC does have CRAP documentation. It is opaque and contains > too many detail without enough examples; no real "quick start" > guides, etc. As far as my own experience goes, I can't agree. I have replaced EasyDCC with an NCE system, and while their documentation is certainly rather tersely written, I had no trouble getting started. I'm in no way a techie, nor particularly computer literate. I just took everthing slowly, and followed the instructions. :-) > It's just that I've read enough crap documentation and managed tech > writers and trying to get them to think like and end user that I can > usually read through that stuff. Also, I'm not afraid to push the > buttons and see what happens. "Oh, that's what it means!" Yes, I'm happy to do that too. If all else fails, I just reset the CVs to the factory defaults, and start over. Like you, perhaps I have become accustomed to badly written manuals, and have learned to read between the lines. > Once a decoder is properly installed, it is difficult to destroy it > by trying to program it. Absolutely. And contrary to the assertions of the amateur EEs, installations in most locos aren't difficult or time-consuming. My first sound decoder install was in an Atlas RS3. Again, I followed the instructions, and had the job finished and running in about 45 minutes, including coffee and a smoke! All the best, Mark. >Absolutely. And contrary to the assertions of the amateur EEs, >installations in most locos aren't difficult or time-consuming. My first [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Mark. My very first decoder install took about an hour. Now I can do one in about seven minutes if I don't have to modify the mechanicals of the loco. If it's a true plug-N-play such as a Stewart F-3, it takes about two seconds, not including taking the body shell off and putting it back on. Doing that bit extends the time considerably, up to almost a full minute. 55 seconds of valuable hobby time wasted installing decoders. At that rate it's a wonder we ever get to run the trains..................... CH >55 seconds of valuable hobby time wasted installing decoders. At that rate it's a >wonder we ever get to run the trains..................... Are you saying that it wouldn't take any longer on a Cary Pittsburg conversion for the Tyco/Mantua General? That's as big as I'm going to run. And Cap, it isn't DCC that I object to, it's the continual statement that you can have independent control while remaining constantly ignorant. If that's your selling point, you don't have one. Touting ignorance as the strong point is why CNC machine operators get less than half the money that a toolmaker does. Greybeard <snip> > And Cap, it isn't DCC that I object to, it's the continual statement > that you can have independent control while remaining constantly > ignorant. If that's your selling point, you don't have one. Um, yes, we do. You can have independent control while being totally ignorant of blocks, common rail, toggles, rheostats, voltmeters, etc. You do have to know how to operate a DCC system, but that's spelled out in the admittingly poorly written instruction book. So you can't have total ignorance, but you don't have to know how to wire a cab to get independent control. > Touting > ignorance as the strong point is why CNC machine operators get less > than half the money that a toolmaker does. Is it me, or does that not make any sense? Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* >> Touting >> ignorance as the strong point is why CNC machine operators get less >> than half the money that a toolmaker does. > > Is it me, or does that not make any sense? CNC machine operators are viewed as "easily replaced", "grab a warm body off the street, show him how to load it, show him the cycle start. If it screws up, fire him and grab another body." You don't do that with a good toolmaker that doesn't need the computer to do the thinking for him. Yes, I know a lot of "toolmakers" run CNC machines, but the local toolshop has gone through four in the last year, trying to find one that can run a manual machine competently. It's the oldest tool shop in town, probably the smallest, but also the busiest. Greybeard >> Touting ignorance as the strong point is why CNC machine operators >> get less than half the money that a toolmaker does. > > Is it me, or does that not make any sense? Of course it doesn't make any sense - it's another of Greybeard's apple and celery comparisons, and a crap analogy to boot. Machinists and toolmakers are two separate, and different trades, of so course the pay rates differ. Presumably in Greybeard's mind the CNC machinist is no better than the DCC operator, revelling in their supposed "ignorance". Whereas the toolmaker is as the noble DC user, assiduously figuring things out, thereby increasing the sum total of human knowledge and achievement. Is it me, or does Greybeard have some wierd ideas? > >> Touting ignorance as the strong point is why CNC machine operators > >> get less than half the money that a toolmaker does. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Is it me, or does Greybeard have some wierd ideas? It's you Mark. If you are going to complain about Grey beards comparison, get your facts right. A toolmaker in NSW does the same trade as a machinist. The toolmaker does an extra year of studies. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards > And Cap, it isn't DCC that I object to, it's the continual statement > that you can have independent control while remaining constantly > ignorant. Well, if you object to it, stop making that statement, since you're the only one it's coming from. > Ed, > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Paul I have not observed the improvement in track cleaning you claim between DCC and DC. I do not need to clean track every 20 minutes on my DC layout, in its unlined room, with storage loops under the house, dirt floor. If you want slow speed DC control, use a pulse width modulated controller with back EMF, as good as the best DCC back EMF decoders. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards > I have not observed the improvement in track cleaning you claim between DCC > and DC. I do not need to clean track every 20 minutes on my DC layout, Glad to hear it. > in its unlined room, with storage loops under the house, dirt floor. If you > want slow speed DC control, use a pulse width modulated controller with back > EMF, as good as the best DCC back EMF decoders. The particular yard where he likes to operate seems to clean the wheels of every thing that comes through it better than any other cleaning method we use. Paul >I have not observed the improvement in track cleaning you claim between DCC and DC.< It's pretty much an accepted fact that DCC track can stay cleaner than DC. It's simply polarity, DCC is an AC signal and DC is well DC and it can attract dust, dirt, etc. Most track problems really depend on the environment the track is in. >>I have not observed the improvement in track cleaning you claim between DCC > and DC.< > It's pretty much an accepted fact that DCC track can stay cleaner than > DC. It's simply polarity, DCC is an AC signal and DC is well DC and it can > attract dust, dirt, etc. Most track problems really depend on the > environment the track is in. The track still gets plenty dirty. BUT, with the full power to the tracks DCC it doesn't suffer from the dirty track as quickly. i.e. - the track can get a log dirtier before you have to clean it. Paul That the AC on DCC keeps track cleaner is an urban legend. There is not enough voltage or amperage to do that and the frequency is too low. The new Miniatronics cleaning car does electronic cleaning, though, using a different technique. Ed >> I have not observed the improvement in track cleaning you claim between DCC > and DC.< > It's pretty much an accepted fact that DCC track can stay cleaner than > DC. It's simply polarity, DCC is an AC signal and DC is well DC and it can > attract dust, dirt, etc. Most track problems really depend on the > environment the track is in. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) >That the AC on DCC keeps track cleaner is an urban legend. There is not enough voltage or amperage to do that and the frequency is too low.< It's not that it cleans track ,it's the fact that you don't have a polarity (either + or -) that will attract charged particles of the opposite polarity. Not urban legend, science! I don't think the charge is strong enough, but I could be wrong. Has anyone done an actual study (doesn't have to peer reviewed ;-) in a reasonably controlled environment. Or just an experiment with some typical room dust and two track systems side by side? It would be interesting. But in the absence of a study which demonstrates that the DC charge really does attract enough dirt to make a difference, I'm skeptical. I suspect that the various track cleaning fluids used on either DC or DCC cause more dirt to stick to rails and wheels than the electrical charge. Ed >> That the AC on DCC keeps track cleaner is an urban legend. There is not > enough voltage or amperage to do that and the frequency is too low.< > > It's not that it cleans track ,it's the fact that you don't have a > polarity (either + or -) that will attract charged particles of the opposite > polarity. Not urban legend, science! SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > I don't think the charge is strong enough, but I could be wrong. Has anyone > done an actual study (doesn't have to peer reviewed ;-) in a reasonably [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>polarity (either + or -) that will attract charged particles of the opposite >>polarity. Not urban legend, science! I don't know the answer, but I suspect you're right about the voltage being too low to cause much of any effect. I suspect that much of the improvement just comes from the higher AVERAGE rail voltage, and it's better ability to 'burn' through minor dirt accumulations. Dan Mitchell ============ Unless your wheels are sparking (shorting out: 15volts*5amps = 75 watts is enough to get hot), that voltage doesn't burn through either. I think DCC apparently needs less cleaning because even with somewhat dirty track whose resistance is less than infinity, some voltage does get through. Since DCC is always running at about 13 to 15 volts (HO), the reduced voltage is enough. With DC, unless you are running your trains full out, you likely have significantly less voltage, and when it gets reduced due to dirt resistance, or just rail length, the effect on the loco is greater. But dirty track which causes voltage to drop below whatever threshold a decoder needs (I have no idea what that might be), causes the decoder to stop and reset to zero. Depending on the decoder and its internal capacitor to keep its own settings, that may mean the acceleration rate starts up again (loco effectively stops, then accelerates back up to the chosen speed), or if the small capacitance in the decoder can keep the values set, nothing noticeable except for the light flickering. Ed >> I don't think the charge is strong enough, but I could be wrong. Has anyone >> done an actual study (doesn't have to peer reviewed ;-) in a reasonably [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Dan Mitchell > ============ SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > Unless your wheels are sparking (shorting out: 15volts*5amps = 75 watts is > enough to get hot), that voltage doesn't burn through either. > <snip> >>>>>That the AC on DCC keeps track cleaner is an urban legend. There is not >>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>Dan Mitchell >>============ The dirt is somewhat conductive. Higher voltage means more current flow THROUGH the dirt. This causes heating, and may indeed 'burn through' (even if microscopically) the dirt, creating a yet better path for more current flow. Sparks are NOT necessary. I agree that the difference between 'DC' voltages (perhaps 8 volts average) and DCC (perhaps 15-18 volts, steady) is not great, but it does exist, and MUST cause some improved contact. That is, there is SOME layer of dirt resistance where 15 volts will cause sufficient current flow, and 8 volts will not. Dan Mitchell ============ Conceded. >> Unless your wheels are sparking (shorting out: 15volts*5amps = 75 watts is >> enough to get hot), that voltage doesn't burn through either. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Dan Mitchell > ============ SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com To help eliminate spam and scams, send it to FTC gov <uce@ftc.gov> (hee hee hee: Happy spam bot message) > > Unless your wheels are sparking (shorting out: 15volts*5amps = 75 watts is > > enough to get hot), that voltage doesn't burn through either. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >>Dan Mitchell > >>============ The main difference is people are comparing cheap reostat DC controllers with DCC. Comparing quality DC controllers with DC shows no measurable difference from what I can tell. > The dirt is somewhat conductive. Higher voltage means more current flow > THROUGH the dirt. This causes heating, and may indeed 'burn through' [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Dan Mitchell > ============ There is a device that has been used on DC for years, RELCO. Therefore if this is used the above DCC mythical advantage no longer exists. The problem is the digital signal on DCC can be affected by poor wiring to a greater extent compared to DC. With DC poor wiring results in voltage drop and slower speed. With DCC poor wiring results in unwanted capacitance, rounding the DCC signal, if bad enough the decoder does not respond to new commands. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/c |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message