DCC a hobby inside a hobby?

Model Railroader Electronics and DCC
1

Hi.

Is DCC turning a hobby into another hobby? It seems when someone asks a question about a decoder they get responses with JMRI decoder pro, sound file, function control, consisting, advanced consisting, PR3, RTC, BEMF, P&P, FFN, RFN, 28SS 128SS, and other acronyms thinkable in the answers. What happened to the KISS (Keep It Simple & Stupid) methods?

Even though I have been into DCC for over a decade I sometimes feel I am still in the stone age sometimes. With 72 decoder equipped locos and over 100 decoder instals I have never found a reason to change a sound file or hook my laptop to my modules. I have decoder pro but never hooked it to a track. I rarely use more than 4 functions and really don’t need my locomotive to talk to the scale cattle on the miniature farm in their native tongue. I also don’t need to have my decoder tell me what address it is. I can read that right on the side of the loco. I feel that I should not need an engineering degree to set up ditch lights. Why does it take 4 pages in a manual that is 120 pages long to do so?

Do we make it harder than it has to be? Do we spend more time fooling with decoders instead of running them? Do have a $160 programer for your $100 decoder? Is it a hobby in a hobby?

Pete

2

I hear ya buddy! [8-|]

I’m sure that DCC doesn’t have to be complicated. DCC is what “pulled” me into MRR a decade ago. I wanted a layout but just couldn’t “get into” cab control. Then DCC came along. [:O]

But, that being said, DCC does give lots of folks an outlet for their “techie” side. Almost unlimited, I guess.

But I like it simple. Or, at least, simple for me. And that’s pretty simple!

So I like simple answers if possible.

Have fun,

3

It all depends on what you’re doing and what you’re trying to do. I have the whole works, a PR3, I built a porgrma track (which also has coupler height gauges and car weights marked off - so even without DCC I’d still have this track on a board). But I RARELY program with JMRI - my era and railroad has only a basic headlight on each locomotive, no fancy beacons, no flashign lights. ANd I use all TCS decoders, so when it comes to BEMF settings and soo forth, I’ve pretty much memorized the settings I use on all my locos. So it takes me less time to just key in the few changes (address, turn off DC mode) than it does to fire up the computer and use JMRI.

Now, change that to a mix of various brand decoders. With a railroad like the SP with rooftop beacons and what seems like a dozen different flashing lights on the front of the locos. That’s a lot of settings to memorize.

Sound is a whole new ballgame. If you just used the canned sounds and are happy with them, great. But even more than actually trying to edit down your own sound files (NOT an easy task, I assure you), just being able to swap predefined sound sets makes it easier to manage your supplies and fleet. I have a drawer full of TCS T1 decoders, because they fit nearly anything. Non sound, no big deal, a decoder is a decoder. But what if I was goign to put sound in them, instead of motor only decoders? I’m not sure what locos they will go in (I have a pretty good idea because I know what I own and which have deocders, but stick with the thought). With a sound set replacement liek QSI uses (not editable, you can only swp factory sound sets) you don’t have to buy decoder aprt number 1234 for the EMD first gen, part #2314 for the Alco 251, part #4321 for the EMD 2nd gen Turbo, etc. All the deocders are identical - it;s just a different sound set. So you coudl have 4 of part #5678 on hand and as you install them load the approriate sound files for the loco type. This sort of thing is easy, not at all liek editing your own sound files. It

4

For some folks it is, just like structure builing, super detailing locos, collecting brass etc etc all of which could be considered hobbies inside the hobby.

5

Pete,

I don’t even use DCC, but for me the electronics is a hobby within the hobby - BECAUSE I want detection, signaling - with correct interlocking signals, CTC operation, simple user interface, and more.

For me, these things are important. I have been in this hobby for over 40 years, and long ago mastered all the basics and want a more “advanced” version of the hobby - electricly and other wise. But DCC was not really in line with my goal list.

Simple is fine if that’s all you want - but some of us want more.

Sheldon

6

A Bruce Chubb fan. [8-|]

“The World’s Greatest hobby.” It’s got a lot going for it.

Something for everybody.

7

Pete, I couldn’t agree with you more. Like you, I keep it simple. I program my decoders with the basics. I don’t use computers or sophisticated signal systems on my layout.

I wouldn’t say that DCC is a hobby within a hobby though. If you break down DCC to its simplest terms, DCC is simply the ability to use your power supply to control locomotives as opposed to DC which uses your power supply to control the track. The principal advantage of DCC is to simplify the running of multiple trains on a layout.

The hobby witihin a hobby, if you ask me, is the use of computerization on a layout. That adds a whole new dimension of complexity, specialized knowledge, and a level of dedication not required with basic DCC applications.

Rich

8

Pete,

Yes, it is and can be a hobby within a hobby. The beauty of it? You can keep it as simple or explore its complexities as much as you want.

I’ve heard it likened to owning a car: Some folks just want to get in and drive while others enjoy “getting under the hood” and seeing what it can do. I think the same argument can be said about computers, cell phones, and cameras.

Tom

9

The ‘hobby’ is what you make of it.

There are so many facets to MRR that some folks end up really liking one particular one and start to become more engrossed with those particular aspects.

It’s their choice because that’s what they enjoy. I wouldn’t worry about it. Just enjoy what you do and try to have as much fun as you can.

that’s all…

-G-

10

Yes. Remember the DC electronic throttles back in the 1970’s and 1980’s

Signaling?

Oh boy, scenery for the layout is much more than DCC for another hobby.

I could go on, but you know what I mean.

Just another subject for discussion.

Rich

11

i just turned 70 last week and have been in and out of MRR for 60 of those years. I started into DCC less than a year ago and I like the KISS method whenever possible. WELL, I now have Decoder Pro, a PR3 and keep my laptop in the train room. I never, never in all my years thought I would use a computer to do ANYTHING with my trains, let alone own a laptop. (I now have 5 computers?). Decoder Pro fits the KISS system to a T. How easy is it to look at the screen on the PC and select how to operate the lights, sounds, motor speeds or ??? and then just click the ‘Write changes to decoder’ button; DONE. The hobby is what you make it and there are a lot of aspects of it that can get complex if you let it. I too built a ‘programming, coupler height gage, car weight measuring’ track and it works great for all of the purposes. I also love to build and detail/weather structures but hate to install and ‘adjust’ trackwork turnouts. Somebody out there loves the stuff I don’t and they may make it a Hobby within the Hobby, but that is what makes each of us unique and keeps us in the Hobby. Just do what makes you happy whether it is complex or KISS.

Just my thoughts,

-Bob

12

Do I spend more time building scenery for my trains to run through than I do running them? Yes

Do I have a hundred-dollar decoder in a forty-dollar engine? Yes

Is it a hobby within a hobby? Of course! Scenery-building is a hobby within a hobby. And hydrocal casting is a hobby within a hobby within a hobby. It’s this breadth and depth of skills and experiences that makes model railroading so engaging.

13

That’s why I intend running d.c. on my small, narrow shelf switching layout to start, with only 3 locos, (maybe a fourth later) I can spot all un-needed ones on spur, shut off power by simply resetting my Peco t/o to the main and run my single switcher with a big grin. IF I finally go DCC, t’will be all Lenz; (already have set 90, XPA throttle) only need max of 4 Standard Plus decoders which will only set me back 80 bucks plus postage. My 2 cents…papasmurf

14

Well, computers have been a hobby for some people forever. I actually built my own back in the 70s. But after over twenty years programming, designing systems and managing those who do, I like my model railroading simple. DCC - 75% “straight from the box”.

But if you think about it, MRR-ing is a high-tech hobby, at least compared to whittling or knitting and other simpler (and cheaper!) hobbies. So it’s not a huge surprise to see those who choose it also overly interested in computerization. I’ve found similarities with my fellow gearheads and our cars.

15

The playing with all of the CVs is for those modelers that just run around in circles :wink:

If they were Operating their layouts and had a group of 30 plus operators into their layout to have a full blown OPs Session all the layout owner would be worried about is -

Are the engines running!

As for setting all of the sounds - Horns and the like - with 20 some sound engines ALL RUNNING at once - you can’t tell the difference between one engine and another -

IF !

You are concentrating on your switching JOB!

If not

then you are just running trains around in a circle! :wink:

BOB H - Clarion, PA

16

This sounds like a lot of the reasons I don’t need DCC.

17

Well, gentlemen, you are certainly entitled to your opinions, erroneous though they may be. I participate in “full blown” operating sessions on someone’s home layout on a monthly basis. These sessions regularly attract 25 to 30 people, all using walk-around DCC cabs. Yes, there is sound. And when I operate my particular yard position I can assure you that I’m pretty much hearing my engine and not paying attention to the other locos that pass by.

Yes, I suppose you could say that the trains are “running in a circle”, in as much that the trains loop around the 30 by 80 foot barn with an addition half again as big as they make their point to point way from one end of the railroad to the other.

I don’t think it would be possible to do this without DCC. In fact, I’d like you to direct me to the club or home layout with DC where it is possible for a “group of 30 plus operators” to walk around an area that big and actually do anything.

So far as sound g

18

maxman said “I don’t think it would be possible to do this without DCC. In fact, I’d like you to direct me to the club or home layout with DC where it is possible for a “group of 30 plus operators” to walk around an area that big and actually do anything.”

Why not? My much smaller (24 x 40 - two decks) DC layout supports 8-10 engineers, a dispatcher and a couple of yard masters. I use wireless radio DC throttles. I have seen several layouts using similar systems much larger than mine, with 20-30 operators and trains moving - no problem.

I’m not trying to take you back to anything, but I’m just as tired of being told how “great” all this stuff is. I use DCC on six different layouts on a regular basis, including one I going to tonight - I know more than enough about it - I don’t need or want it.

Sheldon

19

Sheldon,

This question is out of genuine curiosity because you are the only person I know of that has a DC system with the capability that you have described many times.

Before asking the question I want to confirm my understanding.

10 plus wireless DC throttles work simultaneously running multiple loco trains. Block control is fully automatic with trains moving from block to block without the need for the operators to switch toggles or turn knobs to go from block to block. In effect all the trains are running fully independent in their own blocks at all times. All signalling and interlocks are integrated with the block system and work somewhat automatically. Is this somewhat correct?

Now for the questions. Since my only experience with DC block control has been operating on a friends manually switched block system, and since I was staggered at the wiring complexity of his layout, I really struggle to imagine how complex the wiring must be, behind the scenes, to create a system that works as seamlessly as yours appears to? I am guessing that the integrated interlocking and signal system goes a long way to ensuring that trains don’t end up in the same block at the same time?

I have no doubt that your layout is at the upper end of the bell-shaped-curve when compared to most DC layouts, but I wonder if it is something that is within reach for most modellers? If someone is genuinely overwhelmed by DCC would they find your solution any more accessible?

Final question, is there anywhere on the web that you can go to learn how to implement such a solution as yours?

20

Simon,

First, my system is not fully automatic, but such systems do exist and are not really as complex as you might think. You need to understand that systems like this are just like your car, or any other complex machine/system - lots of smaller, usually simple, systems connected together to preform a more complex task or group of tasks. And, building and using them does require learning how they work and taking it step by step - not trying to “look at the whole picture” at once.

What I have works like this:

First a few terms - rather than “block”, which is a signaling term, lets call the isolated sections of track “sections”, each throttle is a “cab”.

The cabs are assigned to some sections manually, but not with toggles or rotary switches, but with a series of lighted pushbuttons that can be duplicated at as many different locations as is needed around the layout. Basic example, one set at the begining of the section on a small local panel, one set at the end of section, and one set on the dispatchers CTC panel of the whole layout.

Other sections are assigned to a particular cab based on turnout position or route selection. This part happens automaticly as routes and turnouts are selected, based on the manually selected sections.

Rather than try to explain the circuitry, it is easier to explain how it operates:

Walk around with no dispatcher - you have throttle A in your hand, your train is in section 1, on one of the two local panels for that section you push the button for cab A. Any other cab previously connected is automaticly disconnected and you are connected. You start your train. As you proceed you come to a complex interlocking (crossovers, juction, or both). Rather than having to select both the turnout route and a cab asignment, you need only select the route, which is done with one button, and select the next section after that, and your power is automaticly routed through the interlocking. This is known as an X section. Hope that was