A different "Which DCC System" question.

Model Railroader Electronics and DCC
21

Jim, first let me say I am sorry this question has turned into a bit of a fire fight, duck! In coming! [:D] It does sometimes happen here at this great board. You can learn a lot here, I have.

This statement is not correct! Reason I sort of wish I went with the Chief is not because it can read CV’s! Reason is the SEB DB 150 does not have a programing track hook up. If the PR 3 was working right, that would have never came up.

On the PR 3, yes many here have given me ideas what might be the problem. To be honest it has not been a big deal to me and have not messed with trying to fix it. David is right reading CV’s is not that important 98% of the time!

Again Jim, sorry for the fire fight.

Cuda Ken

22

Maybe you should hook up the laptop to the Zephyr instead of the DB150, then you could pull in the settings for new locos when they get added to the layout. How else do you handle someone bringing a loco from home that they’ve already programmed? You know the address, so you can plug that into JMRI and not overwrite it, but what about all the other settings?

I use JMRI all the time - however for the SIMPLE stuff liek just setting an address, I can do that faster on the Zephyr console or a DT400 than I can in JMRI. Since I have a Zephyr, I can later on go back and read the address and/or program extra stuff for functions - although here the benefit of stickign with one or two brands of decoders comes in handy, after you’ve done a half dozen you kind of remember what the values are for what CV to make Rule 17 dimming. Theonly time I’ve found I really NEED JMRI, or at least it makes things MUCH easier, is when soemoen wants a more complex function setting, or programming those crazy multi-part QSI CVs. In working up my control scheme, I’ve probably used PanelPro more than DecoderPro.

Part of my reluctance is my dislike for XML and the use thereof as a ‘database’. It’s just a bad idea in so many ways, but since this isn;t a computer programmign forum I’ll leave it there. Which is also why I have a back-burner project to read the DecoderPro XML and store the data alongside the rest of the loco info in Dave Husman’s car card and roster database. As well as move that database into something more robust than Access. A solid database plus an offsite backup copy, once I get a picture of each loco and piece of rollign stock I have, will be the disaster recovery bit for insurance purposes - which I hope I will never need.

&

23

Well, as you can see, it’s not a question with a simple answer.

I bought my Lenz System 100 a bit over 4 years ago. At the time, it had capacities and capabilities that other systems did not. It is a 5-amp system right out ouf the box, while many others were only 2.5 amp. It supported 13 functions, which was state-of-the art in 2005. And, with my big fingers and aging eyeballs, the large, friendly buttons on the throttle made me more comfortable than the little cell-phone buttons on all the others.

I have been completely happy with this system, and have no plans for upgrades. For my layout, 5 amps is plenty. I picked up an extra “engineer’s” throttle, because I thought I might like the large analog throttle control dial, but as it turns out I never use it. In fact, if I ever get around to multi-operator action on my layout, I’ll probably pick up another “dispatcher’s” throttle rather than saddle anyone else with the low-end one.

The higher functions now available don’t interest me, to tell the truth. I have sound engines, and I enjoy them, but I don’t need the “station announcements” or “mooing cows” or whatever else comes out of those speakers when you get to the point where they ran out of meaningful engine noises.

However, much has changed in 4 years. While Lenz was on the cutting edge back then, they really haven’t released anything new, other than some very high-end block signalling stuff I’m not interested in. Other manufacturers have added radio throttles and whole new systems. I expect this to continue.

My advice, then is to buy a basic system, but one that’s already expandable. If you plan to operate with radio throttles, it might be a good idea to get that now, although a control bus for tethered throttles isn’t that big a deal to add.

24

Just to be clear, Lenz does now support functions up to F28, and older system scan be upgraded to provide that support.

25

Just so I am clear, who cares? Who cares about functions over 12 or 8 even? MRC does, that’s who. MRC is the only sound decoder MFG who actually program 28 functions into their decoders that require your system to have 28 functions.

Ill stick with my 8. My standard 8 functions (I remap all my locos so the first 8 buttons do the same thing). I just dont see the need to hear the toilet lid slamming down…

F0=lights

F1=Bell

F2=Horn

F3=Short Horn

F4=Dynamics

F5=Extra light function #1

F6=Extra light function #2

F7=Light Dim

F8=Mute (or volume to %)

Beyond those, I am not interested, thanks.

David B

26

Well, I don’t, but some people do, and from reading MisterBeasley’s post, someone might come away with the impression that Lenz does not support them, and I like for people to have as accurate as possible information.

Why is it when people say they don’t care about the higher functions, they often have to mention a sound that is not available.

27

The question is, why do we actually need higher functions? I submit to you that the higher function “need” is an MRC feature that MRC wants you to have so that MRC can sell more systems and MRC can sell more sound decoders. In short, it is an MRC thing.

I don’t see Digitrax, QSI, Loksound, Soundtraxx, or any other MFG of sound decoder claiming that they actually support above function 12. MRC is the only company that uses the 28 functions as a selling point for their sound decoder. So why bother?..unless you really like MRC sound decoders…

David B

28

David,
Um, I hate to break it to you, but BLI’s new Paragon2 line of sound decoders have 28 functions, and so does MTH (I know, I know…they are barely DCC but they do have 28 DCC functions). The 28 functions is an NMRA item, not an MRC item. MTH was first, then MRC, and now BLI. MRC was the first DCC system that had 28 functions, but MTH made the first loco that had 28 functions.

Other than that, yeah, most of the higher functions are all but useless. But if they are totally customizable, then I can pick the first 12 I like so I can play with them with my DT400R without too much problem. For example, I like the speed call out of F10, I like having a grade crossing sequence built into a function for the horns (but I still want both long and short toots for other things), I like various other doodads like more realistic braking performance, various 1-button sound volumes, and things like that. I’m not into “train wreck sounds” or other nonsense.

Paul A. Cutler III

Weather Or No Go New Haven

29

Well Paul looks like you beat me to the keyboard.

Yes Paragon2 decoders support F0 to F28 and I particularly appreciate the F13=Grade Crossing Horn. Fortunately the documentation for these decoders is so well written that mapping function above F12 to something in the F0-F12 range is a piece of cake.

30

LOL

I always love a thread where the different makes are argued as who’s the best.

I’m personally an NCE user but from what I’ve seen if comes down to a couple of things.

  1. After trying a couple of samples, which one works for you functionally.

  2. If you’re planning on joining a club, it’s a good idea to use what they use, since you’ll probably be using your controller.

  3. What is the expansion path of each system. Each major brand has one.

  4. Consider radio. Once you try it you’ll never go back so I suggest you start there, especially if you have a large layout.

If you haven’t started the layout yet, I’d suggest that you wait until benchwork and some track is laid. Shortly after I’d look into a couple of Loco’s and a system. Don’t wait too long though. All work and no play often results in a dust collecting layout.

31

David, with all due respect you’ve have ignored the part of my question about skipping the argument about whether they are needed or not or if you want to access them, the question STILL is, with the setup described, Can you? Put aside your bias against MRC decoders, its not about MRC, it has to do with accessing (or conforming to being able to access) the 28 functions that are part of the NMRA standard.

After reviewing the NMRA DCC standards, here’s an example of a possible use for something above F12 and for readback of CVs without using a computer. Just imagine having CVs that you could program for the amount of fuel, water or coal on board the loco. As you run your train fuel is consumed, if you fail to stop and re-fuel. when the CV hits 0, your loco stops where it is, or if you run out of water all of a sudden you hear an exploding boiler. The CVs control how much you have on board, the

32

It’s still a pointless argument as all systems currently on the market (maybe not CVP - did they have an upgrade for 28 functions yet?) do all current NMRA functions. They’re there regardless of which system you go for, if you really need them.

As for reading back values on the fly, Digitrax has had that ability for YEARS. If you’re careful with your layout design and wiring, it works pretty well, but it’s touchy. The NMRA has once again adopted a Lenz idea as the psuedo-standard, and there are several systems supporting it now, but it is every bit as finicky as Digitrax’s transponding PLUS there are still issues with non-decoder loads on the track (lighted cars, etc). If I had to guess, we’ll have onboard battery power with radio control before we get all this feedback stuff working reliably across the board regardless of decoder or system brand.

–Randy

33

Silver Pilot,
“jalajoie” already answered your question back on August 9th.

At this very second, no, one cannot access F28 with a DT400 purchased 5 years ago. However, starting next month, one will be able to access F28 when one sends in a DT400 into Digitrax and they turn it into a DT402 for $25.

All this talk about upgrading throttles and all that… Ask any Digitrax user whether they wish Digitrax had simply upgraded the software of the DT100/DT300 over the years or put out the DT400. The answer, IMHO, will be heavily weighted towards the “glad they made the DT400” camp.

Sure, NCE and MRC stole a march on Digitrax with supporting F28, but it’s not like Digitrax hasn’t lead the way in the past:

First to offer plug-n-play decoders
First to offer a decoder under $20.
First to offer infrared DCC throttles
First to offer radio DCC throttles
First to offer bi-directional communication with decoders (“Transponding”)
First to offer an integrated DCC signal system
First to offer support of F9-F12

And so on…

Paul A. Cutler III

Weather Or No Go New Haven

34

what Paul said

i do prefer the size of the 100/300 though, but smaller means more button combo’s required, not to bad for just movement and lights, but when sound etc comes into it, the more buttons the better…

and on the subject of sound, i would like to see ( wish ) that digitrax would allow you to set all the function buttons ( their outputs really as the button is just push with no latch ) to either latching or non latching as a user selectable choice. i get frustrated with having to hit function buttons twice on my sound loco as it doesn’t the see the ‘off’ command on the function as an activation of the sound. so you have to clear each function except the factory non latching F2 button/function. even the bachmann dynamis allows the user to set the latching aspect of functions, and it sets those latching options for each address. so if say F3 is coupler noise on loco A and it isn’t latching, if you select loco B, and F3 is a cab light, it can be latching so it stays on when you let go of the button. to me this is the only option digitrax don’t offer that i would want to make use of.