 |
 | 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 / September 2006DCC - why not?
For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? Is it because your layout is already operating fine with conventional power; the cost of converting; the effort to convert your existing locos; your club has decided not to use DCC; etc.? Do you think DCC is in you future? ... already planning to do a conversion in the future; maybe you will convert if the price is right; you might do it if the time is available; don't want to mess with a system that's already working; etc.? The recent thread on MTH's entry into HO scale with a non-DCC system has me wondering how saturated the DCC market has become. Has everyone who would have been likely convert to DCC already made the change? Are there many more modelers out there waiting for the right time to make the switch? I'd like to see opinions from the non DCC modelers/operators. __________ Mark Mathu The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com/ "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it." >For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? An interesting questions. Here are some of my random thoughts. * The four digit numbering system for locos isn't a good fit for the loco rosters on many foreign railways, and there isn't always a logical/simple translation (some European systems are working around this already) * A large slice of our layout operation is at exhibitions, and adding DCC makes this sort of operation more complex and more work each time a train is changed. (with DC its change the points, set speed direction and you're off. With DCC it's the above plus drop the current train, select the next train. Not something I can literally do with my hands behind my back) * Lack of a DCC retailer within 500km of here (except the Bachmann system . . .) * Lack of a suitable handset for some roles in certain systems * Lack of licensing to use the radio capability of certain systems * I'd be lying if I didn't say price was an issue. Not so much the base units but the outlay to equip the whole fleet over the first few months, and the desire to use not the base level decoders (or are these OK??) Having said that, all new layout work for the last 5 years has been done to allow easy conversion to DCC when the time comes. I've done a lot of thinking and planning, and came close to handing over the Visa card last month (except the shop only had 5 suitable decoders on the shelf when I wanted 20 straight up!). May consider it before March next year, but that will be more on the basis of doing it while I can afford it rather than because I see any major benefit in the immediate term. I suspect I'll be the first in the local group to go, and that the others will follow within the next 12-18 months with the same system, so I'm choosing for them too in many ways. I see this is the way to go, and for many layouts/groups will make life easier. On the other hand, its not the solution for everybody and they shouldn't be "punished" (in whatever way) for their modeling choices Regards, Stuart Dix Hobart, Tasmania, Australia > * The four digit numbering system for locos isn't a good fit for the > loco rosters on many foreign railways. Stu: Yup, I can see the trouble with reducing something like 141R.72001 to a four digit code. "Fhat? Ze Americain systeme electronique das naht fit ze Gallique systeme tres logique? By ze holy zacraments!" (Heh heh. SNCF froods will note intentional irony in the class no.) I don't have an operating layout now (sigh) as I have been hard at work fixing up an old house, but when I do I won't use DCC. I have a philosophical dislike of complexity and layers of separation between operator and equipment. Yes, I can already hear you saying 'But isn't the multitude of block switches a worse layer of separation? With DCC you just pick it up and go." Well, call me a techno-Luddite then. I have other reasons. First, I like smaller locos, and it's hard enough to fit the motor in a HO early 4-4-0. Second, in the interests of economy and more Luddism I model a small shortline, so I don't have many engines or many trains to run simultaneously. Finally, DCC introduces problems of electrical contact and short avoidance (through flawed and non-robust engineering, IMHO) that are less of a problem using straight track power. I just can't justify the expense for my purposes. Cordially yours: Gerard P. > First, I like smaller locos, and it's hard enough to fit the motor in a > HO early 4-4-0. A fellow club member is putting them in his TT equipment, and our HOn3 is going to be DCC. While I agree it's harder, it's not impossible. > Second, in the interests of economy and more Luddism > I model a small shortline, so I don't have many engines or many trains > to run simultaneously. I've always said that a one train/one operator layout won't see much benefit from DCC. But once you start adding trains and/or operators, then DCC should be a serious consideration. > Finally, DCC introduces problems of electrical > contact and short avoidance (through flawed and non-robust engineering, > IMHO) that are less of a problem using straight track power. Sorry, but that's poppycock. The only difference between straight DC and DCC is that you can't power through a short. And quite frankly, if you see sparks shooting from your wheels with DC, you really should fix that problem. > I just > can't justify the expense for my purposes. That is the only reason you gave that I agree with 100%. It's in each person's mind what's worth what. If it ain't worth it for you, well, then it's not worth it. What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Weather Or No Go New Haven > ************* No doubt that's the same feeling of merriment that I get when DCC proponents (especially those who've never built a DC layout) explain to me all the things that I can't do with DC - except, usually I can. ron  SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are > > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > (especially those who've never built a DC layout) explain to me all the > things that I can't do with DC - except, usually I can. Well, I built two multi-cab DC layouts for myself, and operated and maintained a 2500 sq. ft. layout at my club that was DC (built 1953, added on in 1980). So I'm quite familiar with most of the problems, issues, and tribulations that occur with a cab controlled DC layout. Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL My favourite is that old reliable comment, "I have 200+ locomotives - it would cost too much to buy and fit decoders to convert them to DCC!" And yet it didn't cost too much to buy 200+ locomotives in the first place? LOL! Mark. > > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are > > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > And yet it didn't cost too much to buy 200+ locomotives in the first > place? LOL! Oh, god, that brings me back. I made the same comment on the Atlas Forum many moons ago, and I thought I was going to be drawn and quartered after being hanged...especially by David Harrison. I said I had far more sympathy for the guy that has a couple locos that says he can't afford DCC then the guy that has 200 locos who can obviously afford a great deal more. You would have thought I poked him in the eye by the response I got. Jeez. Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* > Oh, god, that brings me back. I made the same comment on the Atlas > Forum many moons ago, and I thought I was going to be drawn and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > afford a great deal more. You would have thought I poked him in the > eye by the response I got. Jeez. I can imagine! Mind you, I'm buggered if I know why anyone would *want* 200+ locos - how often would most of them get a run? Cheers, Mark. >> > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are >> > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > then the guy that has 200 locos who can obviously afford a great deal more. > You would have thought I poked him in the eye by the response I got. Jeez. The problem with having been around long enough to collect 200+ loco's (all of which you might enjoy running from time to time) is that some if them could be very difficult to convert to DCC. Several club members, who have far fewer than 200 (combined) loco's will never convert entirely to DCC for just this reason. Looking here at the total cost of conversion (TCC :) not just the $$. Thus the club will, most likely, never convert totally to DCC. So we are stuck running alternately DC and DCC. Each has it's own basket of pluses and minuses. Being relatively new to collecting my 200+ loco's, I find the DCC basket of minuses to be rather small ... but, that's me not necessarily you (the generic you). Paul SignatureThe lotto must be rigged, I should have won by now. Modular furniture is cruel and unusual. > > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are > > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL >My favourite is that old reliable comment, "I have 200+ locomotives - it >would cost too much to buy and fit decoders to convert them to DCC!" >And yet it didn't cost too much to buy 200+ locomotives in the first >place? LOL! I think I'm the the only one in this thread that mentioned having 200+ locomotives. I did NOT say the cost of converting them was too high. I said they are N-scale, and are not designed for a decoder. That means, there is no room inside to put a decoder without a lot of reworking of the interiors. As for the cost of buying 200 locomotives, I've been buying them for about 24 years. When the cost is spread out over 24 years, it is very affordable. And why would I want 200+ locomotives? Because I like the way they look. (About 2/3 are part of passenger sets). And I will admit that they do not get heavy usage. SignatureKen Rice -=:=- kennrice (AT) erols (DOT) com http://users.erols.com/kennrice - Lego Compatible Flex Track, Civil War Round Table of DC & Concentration Camp made of Lego bricks http://members.tripod.com/~kennrice Maps of Ultima 7 Parts 1 & 2, Prophecy of the Shadow, Savage Empire, Crusaders of Dark Savant & Others. > I think I'm the the only one in this thread that mentioned having 200+ > locomotives. I did NOT say the cost of converting them was too high. I said > they are N-scale, and are not designed for a decoder. That means, there is no > room inside to put a decoder without a lot of reworking of the interiors. You're the only one *here* who has said "200 locos", but that number was also used on the Atlas Forum's flame fest a couple years back, so don't take it personally. > As for the cost of buying 200 locomotives, I've been buying them for about 24 > years. When the cost is spread out over 24 years, it is very affordable. And who would buy 200 decoders at once? This reminds me of the reasons that people give to not convert to Kadee's: "I have X number of cars...it'd cost me $Y to convert. No way!" Well, yeah, but who converted to Kadee's overnight? I sure didn't. I had a couple "conversion" cars with a horn hook on one end and a Kadee on the other until I could afford to change all the cars. A good way to do this, BTW, is to ask for Kadee's for X-mas and birthday gifts. Makes a great "stocking stuffer". > And why would I want 200+ locomotives? Because I like the way they look. (About > 2/3 are part of passenger sets). And I will admit that they do not get heavy > usage. I don't begrudge anyone for the number of locos they own. However, if you can afford hundreds of locos, you can afford DCC. You just choose not to. That's all I'm saying. Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* >clip > I don't begrudge anyone for the number of locos they own. However, if >you can afford hundreds of locos, you can afford DCC. You just choose not >to. That's all I'm saying. Right. If I wanted DCC, I'd have it. Right now I would rather put the money towards other aspects of the hobby. I've got my eyes on a few more engines. <G> SignatureKen Rice -=:=- kennrice (AT) erols (DOT) com http://users.erols.com/kennrice - Lego Compatible Flex Track, Civil War Round Table of DC & Concentration Camp made of Lego bricks http://members.tripod.com/~kennrice Maps of Ultima 7 Parts 1 & 2, Prophecy of the Shadow, Savage Empire, Crusaders of Dark Savant & Others. > What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are > just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL Pac Man: What I find amusing is the pseudo-religious devotion DCCers have to their own pet system. :-) Cordially yours: Gerard P. >> What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that >> are just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL > > Pac Man: What I find amusing is the pseudo-religious devotion DCCers > have to their own pet system. :-) LOL! We're no more or less evangelical than some of the more strident members of the DC camp! :-) Cheers, Mark. > > Pac Man wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > LOL! We're no more or less evangelical than some of the more strident > members of the DC camp! :-) And some of them are right up there with Franklin Graham and Muktada al Sadr in terms of bloody-minded fundamentalist bullsh-t! SignatureSteve >>>> What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that >>>> are just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > And some of them are right up there with Franklin Graham and Muktada al > Sadr in terms of bloody-minded fundamentalist bullsh-t! I'm not sure where the strident evangelicalism comes from for either camp; maybe misery loves company. I personally like DCC because it is simpler (for me) to set up and run. Others find the same benefit with DC. This is a HOBBY folks, and the goal is to enjoy yourself; if DC makes you happy: great; if DCC rings your bells, that's great, too. If you like using the palm and digital system to push your brio trains around, that is likewise cool. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com > >> What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that > >> are just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > LOL! We're no more or less evangelical than some of the more strident > members of the DC camp! :-) Yes but, we're right. *8^P > Cheers, > > Mark. SignatureThe lotto must be rigged, I should have won by now. Modular furniture is cruel and unusual. >> What I find amusing is all the reasons that non-DCCers give that are >> just not correct. That's always fun to listen to. LOL [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > their > own pet system. :-) Yep - it's definitely a religious issue, on both sides :-). But at least the argument is pretty much limited to the bishops and cardinals of the hobby - the lowly parishoner just keeps running his one train around his 4x8, blissfully ignorant of the whole debate :-). SignatureIt's turtles, all the way down > I've always said that a one train/one operator layout won't see much > benefit from DCC. And that type of layout is probably 80-90% of all layouts :-). And in fact, if the layout is designed for it, you can have at least three trains running with two or three operators and not have to flip switches. One train making laps on the main, another loco working the yard, and a third climbing the switchbacks on the branch line. But I think the only reason for a club, formal or informal, not to go DCC is a large investment already made and the expense of changing. SignatureIt's turtles, all the way down > And that type of layout is probably 80-90% of all layouts :-). And in fact, > if the layout is designed for it, you can have at least three trains running > with two or three operators and not have to flip switches. One train making > laps on the main, another loco working the yard, and a third climbing the > switchbacks on the branch line. Well, sure, you could also have a "Northlandz" layout and have 100+ looping trains that never intersect...each on it's own independant track. But that's not much of an realistic operation. ;-) > But I think the only reason for a club, formal or informal, not to go DCC is a > large investment already made and the expense of changing. Our reason before we moved was ignorance, price and the conversion labor. We had enough trouble keeping our 40 year old layout running as it was. And it was so "old school" that we took an odd sort of pride in getting the old layout to run well. Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > > Is it because your layout is already operating fine with conventional power; yes > the cost of converting; yes > the effort to convert your existing locos; yes > Do you think DCC is in you future? when decoders cost at most $3 per loco > don't want to mess with a system that's already > working; if it's not broken, don't fix it I don't use DCC but right now as I don't have room for a layout so I tend to build railroad models like scale modelers do. I build them and box them. Also I'm in the process of changing eras. So I'm getting rid of a bunch of modern diesels. It doesn't make sense to put decoders into them either time or moneywise. I think DCC is the way of the future. I think MTH system unless in so utterly superior to DCC will go the way of the myriad of command control systems of the 1980s that had no interchangeabilty. Does the DCS system use decoders? Have you seen aristocraft's ho radio control system? http://216.86.38.243/aristo/AMAZING/itemdesc.asp?CartId={40C45C85-FDEC-44D2EVERE ST-9B3F-0E32D65336B0}&ic=CRE55000&eq=&Tp= http://216.86.38.243/aristo/AMAZING/itemdesc.asp?CartId={40C45C85-FDEC-44D2EVERE ST-9B3F-0E32D65336B0}&ic=CRE55001&eq=&Tp= Eric >Has everyone who would have been likely convert to DCC already made the >change? Are there many more modelers out there waiting for the right time >to make the switch?< I doubt the market is even close to saturated (with the caveat that certain RTR sound imports might be). Most/all of the US DCC companies are behind in production which really means they can't product fast enough. Not quite enough to grow the companies (i.e. hire more people) but enough to keep them behind. Clubs that are not DC tend to have the problem of older members. These members present are sorts of reasons the most famous being "I have a million engine and it costs to much to convert". The reality is they probably one run a dozen of them, ever! As their voting power goes away then the club go to DCC. IMHO MTH is marketing with arrogance. Very few, if any, in the HO DCC group will switch to their command control (no new converts with only one engine to run) and I suspect the K4 will be a very poor seller. At best it will sell and then user will find it's not compatible _enough_ with DCC. If they can't get their money back it will show on the records as a sale. > >Has everyone who would have been likely convert to DCC already made the > >change? Are there many more modelers out there waiting for the right time [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > will sell and then user will find it's not compatible _enough_ with DCC. If > they can't get their money back it will show on the records as a sale. Sorry to wade in late on this topic, one of the few I've followed the thread through. I've just begun my third layout of my lifetime (literally laying subbed and drilling for switch throws as this thread has progressed), and am intending to fully implement DCC to the best of my abilities. My reasons for this decision are many. Mostly, I intend to operate switching on locals and yard jobs, while DCC with a computer act as dispatcher, clerk, express agent, or any other job I can hope to automate to a schedule. Routing and signaling are icing on the cake. Car tracking is also something I wish to include (anyone going to Denver? Can I get a progress report on the chip scanning tech?). I understand that both my layout concept and my wishlist are overly optimistic, but it is time to DO something aside from collection and reading. I'll likely operate the layout alone, so I will be trusting DCC to do what it can so that I will eventually enjoy the theatrics I'm building. Steve Woodall >Car tracking is also something I wish to include (anyone going to Denver? Can I get a progress report on the chip scanning tech?).< There is a really good discussion about RFID going on now on the JMRI list. Have you been following that. > There is a really good discussion about RFID going on now on the JMRI > list. Have you been following that. That is something I am not familiar with. If you have an addy or URL for it, I would appreciate the jesture and give it a look over. Steve >> There is a really good discussion about RFID going on now on the JMRI >> list. Have you been following that. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Steve http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jmriusers/ Stevert > >> There is a really good discussion about RFID going on now on the JMRI > >> list. Have you been following that. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Stevert I thank you all for the pointers and links I've followed throughout this thread. I'm wishing there were a r.m.r.dcc group on the regular usenet, but I haven't tripped into one yet. But I am curious about one dcc item that I'm kind of banking on...is running scheduled trains on varying routes (and possible scheduled meets) within dcc's capabilities? Oh, yeah...I began an order for my 8' x 35' trailer today to house the future layout; I will take this one with me if ever I move again. Steve > I thank you all for the pointers and links I've followed throughout this > thread. I'm wishing there were a r.m.r.dcc group on the regular usenet, but > I haven't tripped into one yet. But I am curious about one dcc item that > I'm kind of banking on...is running scheduled trains on varying routes (and > possible scheduled meets) within dcc's capabilities? Sure. But you have to attach the layout to a computer and run software like Railroad & Co.'s "Train Controller", IIRC. Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* It will probably be in my future but I tend to be somewhat of a late adaptor. I wanted to let things shake out before I started to go in that direction. Many people bought superior Beta-max video recorders to see them become useless ans teh marketplace decided the VHS standard. My lack of electronics knowledge is also somewhat of an issue. Don't know a thing about installing decoders but think that as more & more locomotives come out with either plugs or decoders in them, this will be less of a problem. dlm > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com/ > "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it." >For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? >Is it because your layout is already operating fine with conventional power; >the cost of converting; the effort to convert your existing locos; your club >has decided not to use DCC; etc.? >Do you think DCC is in you future? ... already planning to do a conversion >in the future; maybe you will convert if the price is right; you might do it >if the time is available; don't want to mess with a system that's already >working; etc.? >The recent thread on MTH's entry into HO scale with a non-DCC system has me >wondering how saturated the DCC market has become. Has everyone who would >have been likely convert to DCC already made the change? Are there many >more modelers out there waiting for the right time to make the switch? >I'd like to see opinions from the non DCC modelers/operators. I have over 200 n-scale engines, most of which are not designed for a decoder. And my layout works just fine the way it is. SignatureKen Rice -=:=- kennrice (AT) erols (DOT) com http://users.erols.com/kennrice - Lego Compatible Flex Track, Civil War Round Table of DC & Concentration Camp made of Lego bricks http://members.tripod.com/~kennrice Maps of Ultima 7 Parts 1 & 2, Prophecy of the Shadow, Savage Empire, Crusaders of Dark Savant & Others. > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > Do you think DCC is in you future? ... already planning to do a conversion > in the future; maybe you will convert if the price is right; you might do it > if the time is available; don't want to mess with a system that's already > working; etc.? > __________ > Mark Mathu > The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com/ > "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it." I am in the design stages of a small home HO around the walls layout. I am undecided about DCC. DCC allows any number of engineers to operate any number of trains all at once. For a lone operator, it offers less advantage. My current thinking is to build the layout, get it running on DC, and if and when I have operating sessions with lots of operators, then go out and buy DCC. For the time being, I am thinking about running two throttle buses, allowing dual cab control. If I could find a batch of electrical switches offering more than double throw operation, I would run more throttle buses and allow more cabs. David Starr >I am thinking about running two throttle buses, allowing dual cab control. If I could find a batch of electrical switches offering more than double throw operation, I would run more throttle buses and allow more cabs.< By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! > By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! Maybe, ... maybe not. Let's see. DC: When I've finished my track laying I will have about 60 blocks. At about AU$6 for a switch and knob, that'll cost me AU$360, but let's say AU$400 including wire. DCC: In a normal operating session I run about 40 locomotives, but about 30 of them are on through trains which are run one-at-a-time. That's handy, as it means I can run my through trains on address "00" and I don't need to buy decoders for most of the locos. My cost to convert then comes to whatever it will cost me for the following: - Digitrax Empire Builder set (maybe AU$350 by the time I get it here and convert it to Aussie current) - 4 throttles (luckily my friends have more) (say another AU$90 each or A$360 for the lot) - a single DCC booster (about ~ AU$200) - I'd prefer 2 at least - a dozen decoders (well, where do I begin - at least AU$25 each if I'm REALLY lucky ... say AU$300) Total cost to convert my existing layout to DCC is over AU$1200 ..... I think that the answer is .... NOT!!!!!!! Ron Australia SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > > By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > AU$6 for a switch and knob, that'll cost me AU$360, but let's say AU$400 > including wire. Um, have you priced copper wire lately? I seriously doubt you could wire a 60 block layout for AU$40. You also forgot throttles, power supplies, block lights, ammeters, plus the cost of the cab panels, paint, lettering, etc. that you don't have with DCC (not to mention your time). BTW, is that 60 blocks...does that mean that each cab needs 60 toggles? Or have you spread that out a bit? > DCC: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > - Digitrax Empire Builder set (maybe AU$350 by the time I get it here and > convert it to Aussie current) Why can't you use their Zephyr? It's only US$155. Are you running more than 10 engines at one time? > - 4 throttles (luckily my friends have more) (say another AU$90 each or > A$360 for the lot) Just curious, but what throttles are these? UT4's? > - a single DCC booster (about ~ AU$200) - I'd prefer 2 at least I run 3 to 6 locos on my 25' x 50' layout with a single 2.5amp Zephyr with three operators. I, too, was concerned about power, but over the last year and change, I've found that I don't need boosters for what I'm doing as most of my locos are "modern" (within the last 20 years) with low amp motors. > - a dozen decoders (well, where do I begin - at least AU$25 each if I'm > REALLY lucky ... say AU$300) That's the main cost right there. However, when one can aquire 40 locos, gathering the resources for decoders shouldn't be an issue. > Total cost to convert my existing layout to DCC is over AU$1200 ..... > > I think that the answer is .... NOT!!!!!!! Well, go back and add up how much money you're really spending on DC, then get back to us. Paul A. Cutler III ************* Weather Or No Go New Haven ************* > > > By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! > > [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > Weather Or No Go New Haven > ************* AU$40 for wire? Yeah - I was just rounding and it would have been more, but not a great deal more. On the other hand, I priced the switches I've used today and they'd actually work out at under $5 each including knobs, and the average cost will be closer to $4 per switch, as less than half require a knob. In the yards I have rotary switches (for left and right mainline throttles and the yard throttle), in the intermediate towns I use DPDTCO switches (left and right throttles only). So the extra cost of the wire will largely be offset by the saving on the switches. You're right - I did forget about the throttles, etc. Most of my power supplies are all freebies that I've picked up along the way (~40 years), and I build my own transistor throttles. My 6 tethered (walk-around) throttles cost me about $15 each, and my two panel mounts less than $10 each. It is about 60 blocks spread across 2 yard panels (~12 each) and 4 town panels. The layout is walk-around, and the town panels mean that the length of wire between the panel and the track is in most cases only a few feet. OTOH, I was conservative with DCC throttles, as I will be relying on friends to bring theirs over. Block lights? Ammeters? ......Why? Control panels - print the track plan artwork onto paper and laminate it., then back it with a sheet of mdf board. It works a treat. Cost = a few cents. In fact, my DCC operating friend does the same thing to show the town layouts, so the cost is the same eaither way. Zephyr? Thanks - I will check it out. One of my friends recommended the EB and I haven't looked into it myself. I expect to run up to 6 DCC 'trains' at a time, some of which will be double headed, plus a (7th) double or triple deaded DC train on address "00". Is the limitation on the number of loco addresses, locos, or trains? Yes, I think the throttles were the UT4s. I just want whatever's cheapest, ... with a big knob. I'm not particularly interested in the ...err, bells and whistles. If I save money on the main unit then I can afford to buy more throttles. As for a booster - well as I mentioned, I will be running up to 10 locos at a time, so power will be a consideration. But my reason for wanting more than two (eventually) is to minimise the effect of short circuits. BTW - almost all my switches were used on an earlier layout which predated DCC, so their cost to me is actually nothing. Most of my locos are older units which will require milling to fit a decoder into. When I convert I will simply put all my DC locos into the through train motive power pool, and buy new decoder equipped locos to run on DCC. So don't get me wrong - I'm not opposed to DCC. I plan to convert when I can afford to, just so that I can run more trains simultaneously. But that won't be until I have nothing better to spend the money (well over AU$1200 including the new locos) on. In the meantime, my layout handles 4 trains simultaneously just fine. Regards, Ron SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > > By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > AU$6 for a switch and knob, that'll cost me AU$360, but let's say AU$400 > including wire. My, you ARE an optimist. Only AU$40 for wire, with 60 blocks? This tells me two things right away: 1) It's a physically small layout 2) You're not using big enough wire! However, let's look at this operationally. To get the same OPERATIONAL capability that DCC gives you, you'll need FAR more blocks. As an example, I had a 7x9 foot N scale layout, with a 4 track yard, engine house, and a single track mainline with 4 passing tracks and 6 sidings. At any one time there would be at least 2 through trains running (two locomotives each), a yard switcher, and an industrial switcher (not to mention closing out the last run and preparing the next...). To get anywhere near the same capability with analog I got with digital control, I estimated I would need AT LEAST 51 blocks, each with a MINIMUM of 4 cabs!! With DCC, I wired it as a single block, with only one feeder and a single reverser. I'd add a couple more feeders if I were doing it again... and am in the process of building my next layout now. > DCC: > > In a normal operating session I run about 40 locomotives, but about 30 of > them are on through trains which are run one-at-a-time. That's handy, as it > means I can run my through trains on address "00" and I don't need to buy > decoders for most of the locos. Only if you buy a Digitrax or Lenz system. > My cost to convert then comes to whatever > it will cost me for the following: > - Digitrax Empire Builder set (maybe AU$350 by the time I get it here and > convert it to Aussie current) Much better to buy a Super Chief system (street price US$350, includes 1 DT-400 throttle) and a couple of PM-42 power managers (street price US$62.95) The Empire Builder system does NOT read decoder settings. The Chief does. > - 4 throttles (luckily my friends have more) (say another AU$90 each or > A$360 for the lot) UT4 throttles are US$64.95 > - a single DCC booster (about ~ AU$200) - I'd prefer 2 at least Unless you have a HUGE private layout, it's not needed. Use the PM-42s to divide power up instead. Are you REALLY going to have more than 5 amps draw on the layout at any one time? > - a dozen decoders (well, where do I begin - at least AU$25 each if I'm > REALLY lucky ... say AU$300) Digitrax's least expensive decoder (DZ123, 1 amp capacity) is street priced at US$15.95. ($20.98 AUD) > Total cost to convert my existing layout to DCC is over AU$1200 ..... Totals using the above prices: Chief system....$350.00 Throttles 4 x $64.95......$259.80 PM-42............$62.95 12 decoders.....$191.40 ----------------------- Total: $864.15 USD or according to http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert.cgi , $1,136.37 AUD Using your figures, and assuming you underestimated the number of blocks necessary to get _equivalent_operational_capability_ with DCC by _only_ 50% (most folks do FAR worse - they dramatically underestimate the operational flexibility of DCC!), your costs are much higher than you think. For example, to run 10 trains at a time, you'll probably need TWO switches and knobs per block. 120 blocks, X 2 x A$6.00 (The Super Chief system quoted above can run 120 trains at a time...) Want to add just a couple more trains? You'll have to add 120 more switches and knobs, and take the time to wire and install them. With DCC, just install a decoder in the locomotive and run 'em. Switches & Knobs (240) A$1440.00 ... and you haven't even bought wire yet. > I think that the answer is .... NOT!!!!!!! If cost is your sole criteria, you'd better re-evaluate that answer. SignatureEvaluating all GUIs by the example of Windows is like evaluating all cars by the example of Yugos. You guys beat me to it. Nice job on the cost analysis.... Signature+GF+ "I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter." - Blaise Pascal among his Provincial Letters (1656-57) www.ete.org www.internationalrailfair.com > >> > By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] > > If cost is your sole criteria, you'd better re-evaluate that answer. > My, you ARE an optimist. Only AU$40 for wire, with 60 blocks? This tells > me two things right away: > > 1) It's a physically small layout > 2) You're not using big enough wire! Rubbish. If you go to buy such things new, you might pay a fortune; if you do a bit of searching (e.g. garage sales, disposal stores), the cost is minimal. Same applies to switches. > > My, you ARE an optimist. Only AU$40 for wire, with 60 blocks? This tells > > me two things right away: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > you do a bit of searching (e.g. garage sales, disposal stores), the cost > is minimal. Same applies to switches. Yep! I use mains rated wire for main buses and heavy duty figure-eight "speaker" wire for hooking up the track power. It is actually remarkably cheap. If you look around though, it's amazing how easy it is to come by FREE wire. Ron SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >> Rubbish. If you go to buy such things new, you might pay a fortune; if >> you do a bit of searching (e.g. garage sales, disposal stores), the cost [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > wire for hooking up the track power. It is actually remarkably cheap. If > you look around though, it's amazing how easy it is to come by FREE wire. And, as another poster pointed out, it's easy to build your own DC throttles for little or nothing using the sources mentioned. OTOH, I have a lot of TIP120 transistors I bought to build "Switch Witch" circuits for twin coil switch machines, and by the time I got around to it, I'd decided to operate the turnouts manually with cables :-). SignatureIt's turtles, all the way down > > My, you ARE an optimist. Only AU$40 for wire, with 60 blocks? This tells > > me two things right away: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > you do a bit of searching (e.g. garage sales, disposal stores), the cost > is minimal. Same applies to switches. I have to doubt you've tried to get "free" wire any time recently. Copper prices are up high enough that crooks are burning down warehouses in the process of trying to steal the wiring to sell. New homes under construction have had just-installed wiring ripped out of them during the night. Copper pipe for plumbing has doubled or trebled in price. Brass fittings, too. SignatureEvaluating all GUIs by the example of Windows is like evaluating all cars by the example of Yugos. > Joe Ellis wrote: > >> My, you ARE an optimist. Only AU$40 for wire, with 60 blocks? This >> tells me two things right away: >> >> 1) It's a physically small layout 2) You're not using big enough >> wire! > > Rubbish. If you go to buy such things new, you might pay a fortune; > if you do a bit of searching (e.g. garage sales, disposal stores), > the cost is minimal. Same applies to switches. No doubt the cost of obtaining wire and switches this way is minimal. But to me, what you would be then doing is embarking on a new hobby - scavenging! <Big smile!> Mark. > In article <44d1d8b2$0$5355$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>, > > However, let's look at this operationally. To get the same OPERATIONAL > capability that DCC gives you, you'll need FAR more blocks. I'm not trying to get the same capability that DCC offers. And what's more - I DON'T WANT IT! In a typical operating session, about one-third of my block switches (industrial sidings and yard tracks) don't get thrown at all. (They are there 'just in case') > As an > example, I had a 7x9 foot N scale layout, with a 4 track yard, engine > house, and a single track mainline with 4 passing tracks and 6 sidings. > At any one time there would be at least 2 through trains running (two > locomotives each), a yard switcher, and an industrial switcher (not to > mention closing out the last run and preparing the next...). I have a 20' x 18' room, with a point to point (staging yard to staging yard) N scale layout that runs around the walls, and down two peninsulas. There are classification yards at each end and five towns in between (each with a passing track and industrial sidings). I (simultaneously) run a switcher in each yard, plus a through freight and a local switcher. Operations are at a relaxed pace because that's how it was done on the prototype I'm modelling. > > Total cost to convert my existing layout to DCC is over AU$1200 ..... > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > or according to http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert.cgi , $1,136.37 AUD Plus S&H to Australia, and a power supply on Australian current ... over AU$1200. As I said. > Using your figures, and assuming you underestimated the number of blocks > necessary to get _equivalent_operational_capability_ with DCC by _only_ > 50% I'll have to read my post again. Maybe I DID say that I want to "get _equivalent_operational_capability_ with DCC" > (most folks do FAR worse - they dramatically underestimate the > operational flexibility of DCC!), your costs are much higher than you [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Switches & Knobs (240) A$1440.00 WTF? I don't WANT to run 10 trains at a time. Hello - did you read what I said??? Joe - what have you "proven" here? Your whole argument (and your costs) is based on your misguided notion that I have 120 blocks, and that I want to run somewhere between 10 and 120 trains at a time. Where did you get that from??? Ron SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Joe - what have you "proven" here? Your whole argument (and your costs) is > based on your misguided notion that I have 120 blocks, and that I want to > run somewhere between 10 and 120 trains at a time. Where did you get that > from??? I think that Joe has proven that he is one of the type of people who, after becoming addicted to a certain approach, must make everyone else's situation fit into their own framework. However I certainly don't fit into it. I only have two eyes and therefore could not even watch 10 trains simultaneously. > > Joe - what have you "proven" here? Your whole argument (and your costs) is > > based on your misguided notion that I have 120 blocks, and that I want to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > However I certainly don't fit into it. I only have two eyes and > therefore could not even watch 10 trains simultaneously. I think you missed the part of his original post where he said he has multiple operators... SignatureEvaluating all GUIs by the example of Windows is like evaluating all cars by the example of Yugos. > > In article <44d1d8b2$0$5355$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>, > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > my block switches (industrial sidings and yard tracks) don't get thrown at > all. (They are there 'just in case') Perhaps... but you wouldn't need them AT ALL with DCC, and you wouldn't be limited in what you can do by where the block divisions are. "You don't want" the operational ability of DCC... probably because you've never HAD it. The only _valid_ comparison in pricing between analog and digital REQUIRES you to compare _operational_capability_. Otherwise, it's an apples to coconuts comparison. You're not _REALLY_ comparing the same layout. You're just comparing _different_ layouts that happen to have the same track plan. > > As an > > example, I had a 7x9 foot N scale layout, with a 4 track yard, engine [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Operations are at a relaxed pace because that's how it was done on the > prototype I'm modelling. That's similar in size and concept to the N scale layout I'm building. I'll have just one peninsula, but it's a multi-level layout with over 6 double-tracked scale miles of track, point to point. My yards at each end will be working yards, with one in the middle of the run. Add a bunch of industrial sidings and a dedicated passenger hi=speed rail line. Guess what? The DCC costs are _exactly_ the same as the layout half the size. > > > Total cost to convert my existing layout to DCC is over AU$1200 ..... > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Plus S&H to Australia, and a power supply on Australian current ... over > AU$1200. As I said. Power supply can be the same one you use for the analog layout, which is why it wasn't included. The command station/booster takes 12-24 volt AC or DC input. AC Hz doesn't matter - it's rectified inside the unit. S&H to Oz is NOT over $100 AU. > > Using your figures, and assuming you underestimated the number of blocks > > necessary to get _equivalent_operational_capability_ with DCC by _only_ > > 50% > > I'll have to read my post again. Maybe I DID say that I want to "get > _equivalent_operational_capability_ with DCC" As I said above, it's the only VALID way to compare costs. > > (most folks do FAR worse - they dramatically underestimate the > > operational flexibility of DCC!), your costs are much higher than you [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > WTF? I don't WANT to run 10 trains at a time. Hello - did you read what I > said??? You didn't say HOW many trains you ran at a time in your original post, so it wasn't there to read, was it? You DID say you ran 30 to 40 in an operation session. You mentioned 4 throttles, but said "luckily my friends have more", indicating more than four trains were run. But think about it... if you only have 1-5 running at a time, you only need one set of switches (but you still have to change the setting every time you enter/leave a block... and don't even TRY to tell us you and your operators never forget to do that!). However, to add just ONE train (for a total of six), you have to add another _complete_ set of switches and wiring.. and flip one or two every time you enter /leave a block. You're good then until you get to 10 trains... then you need ANOTHER complete set to go to 11, and now you have to work one, two, or THREE every time you enter/leave a block. With the DCC system, you can go to 120 trains... and NEVER have to throw a cab selector. That alone is worth converting for many folks! As anyone who has made the change can tell you, you run more trains on a layout with DCC than you did on the same layout with analog... BECAUSE YOU CAN. When you have to completely rewire a layout to add a train (as in your case) it provides considerable operational inertia. > Joe - what have you "proven" here? Your whole argument (and your costs) is > based on your misguided notion that I have 120 blocks, and that I want to > run somewhere between 10 and 120 trains at a time. Where did you get that > from??? Your whole misguided notion is that you can compare a DCC layout evenly to your analog layout and make the comparison based on costs without considering operational flexibility. As I said above, you're comparing apples to coconuts. Really tiny apples. Really BIG coconuts. You say you have 60 blocks now. Got a track plan that shows them? Post a link to it and I'll take a look at it. I'm betting it would require AT LEAST 120 blocks to even APPROACH the capability of a DCC system powering the same track plan. It might well need _over_ 200 blocks to approach operational parity with DCC. SignatureEvaluating all GUIs by the example of Windows is like evaluating all cars by the example of Yugos. > > > By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! > > > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > were doing it again... and am in the process of building my next layout > now. I can't see why you would need 51 blocks with panel block switches for a DC layout that only runs 2 through trains. For DC layouts 3 blocks per train in motion is a good ratio. You only needed around 6 cab switched blocks for your example, not 56. Using route control wiring of your turnouts is how to wire a DC layout to minimise necessary panel switches. > > DCC: > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > take the time to wire and install them. With DCC, just install a decoder > in the locomotive and run 'em. With DC you can theoretically run as many trains as you like. The limit is the size of the layout, not the serial communications DCC bus. The DCC you describe only allows about 40 trains to be operated independently, the limit of hand controllers the system can use. I would expect some noticeable delay in response running this many hand controllers off one command station. Your DCC DC cost comparison is not realistic. There is more than one way to wire a DC layout. I can build a DC system for any layout, any size that is cheaper than the cheapest DCC system that will do the same basic job, if you include the DCC decoder costs. If you ignore the decoder cost DCC can become price competitive. > Switches & Knobs (240) A$1440.00 It is not necessary to use so many switches for a manual switched DC system. For your theoretical DCC example I can do the same Using my DC manual block control system on my web page, 3 blocks per train, 8 trains= 24 blocks. It cost's me about AU$30 per block, including block detection and a panel switch to operate a signal for each block. Total cost AU $720. No extra locomotive decoders needed. I can have 8 trains with more than 5 locomotives per train without extra decoder costs. If you want track detection for 24 DCC blocks, the price for DCC is higher again. > ... and you haven't even bought wire yet. Wiring costs will work out about the same if you want reliable running. > > I think that the answer is .... NOT!!!!!!! > > If cost is your sole criteria, you'd better re-evaluate that answer. I have, DC can be cheaper by far. Only when you decide to use all DC / DCC sound equipped locomotives does DCC become price competitive. So one reason to go DC is it can be cheaper. Another reason is DC is easier to build your own control system. Another reason is you get locomotive noise from a filtered DC controller. Another reason is with DC you do not need to find space in locomotives for decoders. Terry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track and wheel standards Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet Folks: All this verbiage and figurage flying through the air makes me want to use 1 throttle per block, and no switches, and maybe outside third rail. :) Cordially yours: Gerard P. >> By the time you do this you have paid for a DCC system! > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > AU$6 for a switch and knob, that'll cost me AU$360, but let's say AU$400 > including wire. Yes. If you want to use Tricky Dicky's rotaries. 4 pole, 3 position rotaries were about $5 last time I looked. Putting it bluntly, they are awful. A decent rotary, break before make, with say 6 positions and 4 poles (swap the numbers around to suit yourself) is nearer $30Au from a reputable (not Dick) electrical retailer. Now, 60 blocks @ $30? You do the math. Then add rolls of colour coded wire - 12, to be the positive and negative of each cab, assuming you are not using common return - you're not using common return, are you?? Wire, large enough gauge to avoid v drop, $45 per 100 metres from Bambachs. Now, that's each roll. Chhhing. Add $540. Less, of course if you are using 4 cabs, I have based it on 6. Now throttles - decent ones. about $100 each purchased, $50 if you build them yourself - to the quality of, say, a TAT5. Ummmm - that's a lot.... > DCC: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > means I can run my through trains on address "00" and I don't need to buy > decoders for most of the locos. Um. I wouldnt run them on 00. It runis it for everything else, and it is a protocol that is being phased out - not supported by NCE, for instance. My cost to convert then comes to whatever > it will cost me for the following: > - Digitrax Empire Builder set (maybe AU$350 by the time I get it here and > convert it to Aussie current) Er - there is no difference, on the railway side of the transformer, between American and Australian current. Or English, Swedish, German, Swahili or whatever you use. Feel free, however, to purchase one of Dick's transformers. (plus cord, plug, box, switch, output terminals, fuse holder etc etc, but you'll need that irrespective of DC or DCC.) You dont need Toroidal Core hi qual stuff, just something with the necessary herbs to run the layout. > - 4 throttles (luckily my friends have more) (say another AU$90 each or > A$360 for the lot) Maybe - dunno about D throttles. NCE is under $200au each for a Cab04. > - a single DCC booster (about ~ AU$200) - I'd prefer 2 at least > - a dozen decoders (well, where do I begin - at least AU$25 each if I'm > REALLY lucky ... say AU$300) Try MRC - a bulk pack works out at under $20 each last time I looked. > Total cost to convert my existing layout to DCC is over AU$1200 ..... > > I think that the answer is .... NOT!!!!!!! I think the answer is reconsider. Connect your PC to a railroad for easy fine tuning in DC? Priceless - as in you can't do it, irrespective of cost. Run sound on DC? Haw. Fine if you JUST use BLI. Don't mix or match with anything else. Hope you haven't ordered one of Werris' AD60's. Radio throttles? With Lenz you can use a cordless phone. I went through the exercise in 1994, when I was building my prev layout and DCC just appeared. After musch research, I went DCC. Nobody forced me, or coerced me, it was a decision based on what I wanted to do. And there is one interesting thing. I have met lots of people who converted to DCC from DC since. I have met nobody who converted back from DCC to DC. Wonder why .... Steve Newcastle NSW Aust > Wire, large enough gauge to avoid v drop, $45 per 100 metres from > Bambachs. Now, that's each roll. Or about a tenth that price for ten times the length if you go searching or if you accumulate such things when you see them available. But isn't the real point much more fundamental? If someone is starting from scratch, obviously they would consider DCC. But if you already have a system that works (for which all these costs, real or imaginary, were incurred long ago) then the relevant cost to CONVERT to DCC is the cost of installing decoders and control systems (and maybe some other reconfiguration), which can be very considerable even if you can physically do it. Which brings us back to the basic point - if it isn't broken, don't fix it, but especially don't spend money to "improve" it if there are no benefits sufficient to justify the cost. It's like people wanting to spend thousands of dollars to get plasma or LCD TVs - if your existing TV works perfectly well and gives you complete satisfaction, why would you spend such money for at best marginal benefit? Some people will spend the money because they want new technology for the sake of it, or for snob value, or similar; but others will look purely at the practical benefit and conclude that it in no way justifies the cost. > if your existing TV works perfectly well > and gives you complete satisfaction . . . . . . you need to get a life, not a plasma TV! SignatureSteve > don't spend money to "improve" it if there are no > benefits sufficient to justify the cost. Using that logic, you're saying that we *should* spend money to "improve" it if there *are* benefits sufficient to justify the cost. I have a smallish layout - 11x14 feet. I wanted to do some things with it, such as some basic signaling, remote dispatching, multiple operators, etc. To do all that with DC is certainly possible, but by using the "intelligence" of DCC I was able to do it at a much lower cost in terms of dollars, time and wiring complexity. Adding decoders to my loco fleet was like detailing a freight car, or converting a car to KaDee's and metal wheelsets - a minor expense/inconvenience compared to the benefits received, and one that could be spread over time. I consider it to be a non-issue because it's like any other rolling-stock upgrade. So for me, converting to DCC was a no-brainer. Stevert >> don't spend money to "improve" it if there are no benefits sufficient >> to justify the cost. > Using that logic, you're saying that we *should* spend money to > "improve" it if there *are* benefits sufficient to justify the cost. Exactly. Isn't it like most other things: if a cost/benefit analysis shows that the benefits justify the costs IN THE PARTICULAR CONTEXT, then do it? Recall that this aspect of the thread has emerged from DCC supporters saying (in effect) that DCC was the only sensible action for everyone? What I and some others are trying to get across is that it is only a sensible action for SOME people. | assuming you are not using common return - you're not using common return, | are you?? | Steve | Newcastle NSW Aust Honest question - what's wrong with using common return? I haven't started my layout yet (and it'll be a while yet) but I'd prefer to do it "right first time" as much as possible. I would have thought that common return would save some effort and money? Ivor >| assuming you are not using common return - you're not using common return, >| are you?? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Ivor Indeed common return does save effort and money, and there is nothing wrong with it, I used it for all my layouts and club layouts for 30 years without any problem. With DCC boosters there are can be problems depending on how the rest of the circuitry is arranged so if you want it to be easily convertible make it so you can easily seperate the common return between what would become seperate power districts. Blocks within each district can be wired common return, then when you convert they become common feed as well. Keith > | assuming you are not using common return - you're not using common return, > | are you?? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ivor For Analog DC, common rail is usable, WITH the understanding that it has it's own set of 'Quirks' for handling "Reverse Loops", 'Turntables", and any other 'polarity reversal' problems associated with 'Two Rail' wiring. Converting from a 'Common Rail' wired layout to 'DCC' shouldn't be any harder than the "normal', two independent wires to every block that is the common situation. If you have handled the 'common rail' quirks successfully, they shouldn't 'bite you' too often during the change, because you are already aware that there are differences. If you are starting from scratch. I.E. New layout headed for DCC in the near term, don't even wave at 'common rail'. JMHO Chuck Davis | > Honest question - what's wrong with using common return? I haven't | > started my layout yet (and it'll be a while yet) but I'd prefer to do it "right [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] | | Chuck Davis Thanks Keith and Chuck - I will be starting straight off with DCC, so no common return then. Ivor >> For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > David Starr Certainly, one of the benefits of DCC is multiple operators. But even for single operators, if you have multiple trains, like on an around the walls layout with double tracking either everywhere or in sections, DCC is perfect. With my Digitrax system, the DT400 throttle lets me run two trains with one on the left and one on the right knobs. If you wire well for DC, conversion to DCC should be a snap; you'll wind up just putting all of control sections together with switches or jumpers as if you were controlling everything from a single DC cab; take care with your turnouts (see the DCC link below) to that when (if) you convert to DCC you don't have short circuits there. When I converted my first adult layout (1997) from DC to DCC, it took 10 minutes since I used Atlas turnouts which are DCC friendly out of box. SignatureEd Oates http://homepage.mac.com/edoates DCC wiring information is at http://www.wiringfordcc.com Use 6P6T rotary switches. You can wire the second and third for the DC cabs and when you go DCC, just wire it to the fourth. Leave the first position unwired for an off position. SignatureFrank Rosenbaum Please support the following train meets if you can Gratiot Valley ( www.gvrr.org ) in Macomb Michigan in March and November and the Kalamazoo Model Railroad Historical Society ( www.kmrhs.org ) at the Kalamazoo Fairgrounds in Kalamazoo MI in October. Also check out the Westchester Model Railroad Club's train meet in Greenwich CT in November and March. Visit this web site to see my bridge and the KMRHS http://tinyurl.com/7uqdr Frank Rosenbaum >> For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > David Starr My reason is $$$, pure and simple. I had a system but it went belly up. I'm going to buy a different one but just don't have the free $$. I don't want an entry system because I've used some advanced features and I want a specific brand. So I have to wait until I have the bucks to spend. Or at least until the sweet wifey says ok to putting it on the credit card :-). Yeah, DCC is definately in my future. If not I'll switch to building non railroad model kits. Life goes on within you and without you. Jb > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com/ > "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it." > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? Layout not built yet. When it does get built it will definitely be DCC powered. SignatureRick Jones Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me The Lake Erie & Oregon Railroad http://www.geocities.com/seventysixinchesoffun/ "I sometimes think that God in creating man somewhat overestimated his ability." -Oscar Wilde Mark, I just got an NCE Power Cab a few weeks ago. I have been looking into all the various systems for several years now and just kept waiting to see what might develop. Price was certainly a consideration however value was of greater concern. I wanted compatibility with some of the features of the more advanced systems but only needed to accommodate two operators. The Power Cab fit that need well at a modest price. As far as decoders go I only need seven total. Two for the diesel locomotives that are run on my timesaver and five for the steam locomotives on my layout so the total cost for me is low. One of the reasons I wanted DCC was to have control over sound and able to run two locomotives without having to switch power blocks between cabs. I wired the layout with DCC in mind but I still have blocks that can be turned on or off as way to help isolate problems. I think in DCC speak blocks are called power districts so that's what I have. I discovered after using DCC that I really like the ability to program the CVs to adjust locomotive performance and the actual control of them. I feel much more like I am operating a machine rather than just giving it more or less power. One thing I thought I would not be interested in using DCC for was to control turnouts but seeing how easy and intuitive my system is I may add this feature to the layout. Even though I wanted a DCC system I thought DCC might be over rated but now I feel otherwise. I can see that there are very valid reasons for people not to go with DCC but if a person does not need to decoder equip a large number of locomotives the cost is not high and benefits even for single locomotive operation are outstanding. Bruce > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com/ > "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it." > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The Green Bay Route: http://www.greenbayroute.com/ > "I started out with nothing and I still have most of it." Mark, My N scale layout was designed to allow 4 operators to work with minimal switch throwing: one operating each of the two yards, a 3rd running a local freight and a 4th running through trains. Athough the layout runs just fine like this, I usually get about a dozen guys show up to operate, so I've been looking into what I can do to keep more of them occupied. I reckon that if I run two switchers in each yard, I'll be able to run two locals concurrently, and more frequent through trains. Sadly, these extra trains (especially in the yard) will increase the amount of switch throwing to the point where it will become painful. When I first considered DCC I thought I'd have to convert all my locos at once. However, I've since realised that as I run my through trains one-at-a-time I can run them all on address "00" (ie leave the locos as DC locos), which means I will only have to convert about a dozen locos for yard and local switching. So, yes, DCC is in my long range plans. But the cost is prohibitive at present (see my comments elsewhere on that). Regards, Ron McF Australia SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com >When I first considered DCC I thought I'd have to convert all my locos at >once. However, I've since realised that as I run my through trains >one-at-a-time I can run them all on address "00" (ie leave the locos as DC >locos), which means I will only have to convert about a dozen locos for yard >and local switching. Address 0 is not in my opinion suitable for extended use, especially with small motors, you had better include the other 30 decoders in your costing! Keith > >When I first considered DCC I thought I'd have to convert all my locos at > >once. However, I've since realised that as I run my through trains [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Keith Keith, This is one thing that worried me, so I've done a fair bit of testing on a friend's DCC layout. The noise is annoying when the locos are stationary, but when they're moving all seems okay. My through trains will usually only make one trip per session. They come online from staging, exchange cars at one yard, then run to the second yard (at the other end of the layout) and exchange more cars, before going back to staging. Total running time is only about 10 minutes. I don't expect that to be a problem, but if anyone would care to comment, I'm listening. Ron SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? Simple. Our control system is 15 years old and is running with 76 current regulators. We could ditch those, buy boosters and decoders and make it run DCC, but why should we ? If we had to start all over today, it would definitly be running DCC. Klaus SignatureModelbane Europas hjemmeside: http://www.modelbaneeuropa.hadsten.dk Modeltog, internet, gratis spambekæmpelse, elektronik og andet: http://home6.inet.tele.dk/moppe > For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? > > Is it because your layout is already operating fine with conventional > power; the cost of converting; the effort to convert your existing locos; > your club has decided not to use DCC; etc.? The cost and the effort. I'd love to be able to have different brands of engines be able to run at the same speed. Plus, not having to have blocks. Chris Curren >> For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Chris Curren The whole concept of controlling your trains and not having to control your track is completely lost on Flynn and a few others. They just don't get it. Flynn seems to be proud of his ability to jump through burning hoops with regard to mimicking many of DCCs features with DC. Bully for him. I can't be bothered with trying to prove to the world that I'm as smart as Keith Gutierrez, or A. J. Ireland, or Bernd Lenz, or Jim Scorse, so I run my trains with a command station and two wires to the track. Bugger all that DC and block control crap. I'll take plug and play, all the way. Oh yes, one other thing. Don't give me any knicker stains about having to install decoders. After you do the first one, it becomes a no-brainer. -- arf arf Diesel Dog >>> For those of you not using a DCC system on your layout... why not? >>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Oh yes, one other thing. Don't give me any knicker stains about having to install >decoders. After you do the first one, it becomes a no-brainer. Unless you're in N scale. Then, things can get interesting! fl@liner This tagline has been certified to contain no political rants. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message