Unfortunately, I find a lot of the arguments against DCC come from misconceptions about DCC. Some examples:
DCC means sound. No it doesn’t. Many companies make locomotives with factory installed non-sound decoders. Or you can install non-sound decoders yourself. Non-sound decoders are much cheaper than sound ones, and you don’t have to buy a speaker and enclosure.
DCC wiring is difficult. No, DCC wiring is easy. Multi-train DC wiring is hard. If your DC layout works well, you can just connect up a DCC system to it (two wires) and the layout will work fine.
DCC doesn’t allow blocks. Yes it does. Most DCC layouts still are separated into blocks to allow for detection for signals, to allow an area like a roundhouse or engine service area to be turned off, or just to help track down problems. However, you only need an on/off for each block; you don’t need to switch between several DC power outputs / powerpacks.
DCC requires a degree in computer programming. No. You get an engine with a factory installled decoder. You put it on the programming track and change the ID number from 03 to the number on the engine. Then you’re done, the engine will run on DCC the same as it did on DC. You can go back later and add momentum or change how the lights work, but you don’t have to.
Consisting is hard. No again. Each system is different, but basically you call up the ID of the lead engine. You press a button to add an engine and enter it’s ID. That’s it, both engines will respond to the lead engine’s ID. Add another if you want.
Installing decoders is hard. Not really. Most engines made after 2000 have a DCC plug. Remove the dummy plug and plug in the decoder. Older engines may need to be “hardwired” but it’s not difficult. If you’ve been in the hobby a while and are use to soldering wires, it’
Something I rarely see mentioned in these discussions is what I consider the biggest advantage of DCC…
If I come to your layout as a guest operator, I know how to run your trains already.
Back when I used to do this, DCC layouts were just so simple.I picked up a controller, input my locomotive number, and I was off to the races.
No instructions on how the locate block seperations, how power isolation worked for parking locomotives, how to work reverse loops, making sure the next block was assigned to my cab, or anything else.
None of those are my misconceptions. But I do have personal opinions about those issues.
DCC means sound - no, but sound is best accomplished with DCC.
DCC wiring is difficult - no, but large new construction layouts are often over wired with power districts, buss wires, 300 feeder drops, circuit breakers, etc, etc. Not necessarily wiring that that takes lots of knowledge or engineering skill, but lots of wire none less. Yes a small DCC layout will work with two wires…
DCC does not allow blocks - not sure where you got this one from, but nobody has ever said that before. Fact is however, if you take a poll, DCC or DC, you will not find many modelers on here with signal blocks and signal systems on their layouts.
DCC requires a degree in computer programming - never said that either, but there is learning curve to the whole CV adjustments, etc.
Consisting is hard - no, it is just an annoying task I don’t need.
Installing decoders is hard - no, but it is time consuming and fussy in those cases where you do need to hardwire. Sure plugging in a decoder is easy, but does not always make for the best install.
That is why my DC system is complex under the layout to make the user interface much like DCC.
Because left is always west, and east is always right, the direction buttons on my Aristo throttles are intuitive. With a dispatcher on duty I can hand you a throttle and say “obey the signals”. All you then need to do is control the speed of the train.
Even without that I could set the whole layout to one throttle and let you go, or show you how to push just few buttons as you walk around with your train. Select your route at turnouts, push one other button to proceed along.
I don’t have any confusing reverse loops, or places where the train is now going in the opposite direction to confuse you.
A similar level of simplicity is possible in DC as well.
When I first started operating layouts I was in Nashville as a college student in the middle 1980s.
Some of these layouts… good lord… nothing was intuitive.
The worst were the layouts with four or five cabs selected by a rotary switch. As you moved past cabs B and C, your train would jump in random speeds and directions as they temporarily took control.
Sure, there were ways around it, but few layout builders bothered. There was just so much more to be done back then. Adjusting twin-coil switch machines was a horrible time consuming task I am sure no one misses at all.
I really don’t think I ever ran a truly well designed DC layout. I know I failed twice. Once on the Dream House layout, and once on the N scale layout for Scale Rails of Southwest Florida.
DCC makes multiple operators on a large layout much easier.
My large layout days are over. I plan to spend my remaining train time on craftsman kits and just playing with trains in no special manner all by myself.
The best DC layouts start with the track plan. There are track schemes that can be avoided with no loss of function that will make a good control system easier to implement.
And there are basic features, like the left is west, right is east feature that not only make the control system work better, it makes it more user friendly. I would still do that if I used DCC.
Rotary switches are a bad idea, as you experienced.
X sections that automatically connect two blocks correctly thru complex junctions and interlockings are a must. They actually cut the number of “blocks” in half.
There is a long list of semi automatic assignment schemes that streamline DC operation with no loss of function when compared to the most basic and typical DC block schemes.
First it is factually true that today’s dual mode decoders in Athearn Genesis Tsunami 2 units and ScaleTrains rivet counter ESU Loksound 5.0 units produce the same sounds in both plain dc and dcc operation with the exception that in plain dc one cannot easily blow the diesel horn. All the lights come on by default in plain dc for most Genesis 2.0 AND Scaletrains units, unless clearly stated otherwise by Athearn. Even red Canadian National DPU Marker Lights (correct Canadian terminology) default to ON in plain dc and are directional.
So dcc is NOT required to enjoy most default features of these engines. Even ScaleTrains ground lights default to ON in plain dc operation.
We have tried to switch almost entirely to dcc operation for my son’s desires to operate horn etc.
It has NOT been a good experience.
Some back emf equipped locos will not run well with other engines in dcc. My dealer’s technician says they can even cause damage to other engines’ boards and decoders and that this is a little known but recent problem. Speed matching of locos in dcc is also more difficult than some would have you to believe. In oder for engines to run well, it would be preferable to use the back emf if/when you have it. That means one may end up speed matching units of only one brand of decoder with each other but maybe not with other brands.
I have been informed by NCE that Kato track is junk for dcc operation and that I must remove and replace all of it. They want virtually every rail joiner soldered regardless of power drop location or bus wire size. They say soldered joiners are absolutely required for good dcc operation.
My layout was built 18 years ago and not designed for dcc operation. Except for not being able to blow the horn, ALL my dcc equipped units: Genesis 2.0 and Scaletrains rivet counter, operate better and run better on my layout with plain dc (we have a toggle switch to turn power on or off to both dc and dcc).
Personally, I would have never chosen Kato track, but that is another discussion.
For 56 years, all my DC layouts have had all rail joints soldered with in each electrical block with only one feeder. Some blocks being 40-50 feet long. No issues in DC.
No matter how well these new dual mode decoders work, they still do not work with PWM DC throttles like the Aristo Craft TE that I use.
At some point in future when sons are gone and housing market stabilizes the solution is to move and build a new layout. Until then try to get by.
Also a number of new locos are experiencing motor failures even on a brand new 2023 production diesel just off the boat, in less than one week of being here. I am returning them for warranty repair, but one warranty replaced motor lasted less than one month before failing again. Issues are not limited to me or my layout but other people are having same issues dating back to 2022 production diesels.
Others also have units with failed motors after repair. Not willing to call manufacturer out as they have or will have 2 units of mine for repair so why burn bridges…but son most disappointed as they are his units. We do not own any Bowser units currently so not them.
expect this to be lost in all the other posts about the pro/cons of DCC
Sheldon
i was surprised to read that you agree with PM. I guess it’s not clear what “adaptable” and “integrated” mean
when PM said “list goes on and on for what a PC could do” it sounded like all the model RR devices should be PC based because
presumably the point is that the PC can be reprogrammed – updated, fixed, improved and combined with other MR features such as waybills.
Sheldon, the hardware you describe built into the layout is not as easily changed (i.e. adaptable) as just modifying the code on a PC
i’ll agree with the concept of making MR devices upgradable. i recently did firmware upgrades of digitrax components. the technology is changing and to PM’s point, PCs aren’t the only devices that can be reprogrammed.
and i’ll agree that capturing the logic to control the layout: turnouts, signals, monitoring block detectors, turnout feedback is easier to implement and update on a central PC
but of course, no one wants to be encumbered by using a PC to control a loco and that is why devices other then PCs are necessary
i believe MR control is becoming more distributed among many intelligent components that control and can be controlled from different parts of the layout.
John, that has to be so frustrating. I glad I am not buying many locos these days. I have some RS units on pre-order from Bowser, that’s about it. I may pickup a few Bachmann USRA Pacific’s from their new release. Their B&O P5 is being offered without DCC and would be any easy kitbash to P6, considering I already have Delta trailing trucks that will fit. And the other roadnames offered have the right details for my ATLANTIC CENTRAL.
There are only a few other locos I would even want at this point.
I am right on the edge of having more locos than the layout needs, so it is time to stop.
expect this to be lost in all the other posts about the pro/cons of DCC
PM Railfan
Waybills, switching, forwarding, inventory, video monitoring, programming, automation, i mean the list goes on and on for what a PC could do.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL
ATLANTIC CENTRAL wrote the following post 6 hours ago: PM Railfan,
I understood, a single complete adaptable system.
Sheldon
i was surprised to read that you agree with PM. I guess it’s not clear what “adaptable” and “integrated” mean
when PM said “list goes on and on for what a PC could do” it sounded like all the model RR devices should be PC based because
PM Railfan
DCC systems are finite in that they can only do what they do from the factory. Thats it. A PC can be programmed to do that, and so much more. Its infinite compared to finite.
presumably the point is that the PC can be reprogrammed – updated, fixed, improved and combined with other MR features such as waybills.
Sheldon, the hardware you describe built into the layout is not as easily changed (i.e. adaptable) as just modifying the code on a PC
i’ll agree with the concept of making MR devices upgradable. i recently did firmware upgrades of digitrax components. the technology is changing a
i assume you’re not suggesting DC makes signalling easier? i believe DC/DCC has little impact on signalling
earlier i was thinking about a more complete MR control system and concluded that while you probably couldn’t replace DC with DCC and add decoders, you couldn’t do the opposite without a lot more work. in other words, DC and DCC are not quite equivalent.
but considering the use of block detectors, turnout control and signals on a relatively large layout required to run 6+ trains at a time, i believe DCC makes the layout wiring simpler and frees up time for detection, turnout and signal wiring
i think it would be difficult for club members to runs their trains around the mainlines (3 trains per b&o and western md) with DC and difficult to imagine the necessary wiring
[quote user=“ATLANTIC CENTRAL”]
I have circuit boards that the relays plug into for the most complex and repetitively used circuits, and mo
That is absolute nonsense! I have a layout with a 1 scale mile mainline and two decent sized yards, all using Kato Unitrack with absolutely no problems. I found testing things out on my previous layout that Kato Unitrack has better electrical continuity than regular track with soldered joints. No idea why someone at NCE would tell you not to use Kato?
I disagree, I have a fairly large layout (see post above) with no track bus wires etc. It’s just wired with Model Power wire. Since it’s spread over a large area, I do use a couple of power boosters - but a DC layout would have the same problem but not a solution like a booster. Again, the idea that DCC wiring has to be so different from DC wiring just isn’t true - except you don’t have to have all the wiring for extra blocks and throttles.
One of the earlier replies in this thread had someone saying they didn’t want to do DCC because they wanted to break the track into blocks for signalling and you can’t do that in DCC.
the club layout is blocked. each block powered thru a PSX circuit breaker, both to limit the impact of shorts (derailments) on the rest of the layout and now, because PSXs have block detectors, signals
i assume you’re not suggesting DC makes signalling easier? i believe DC/DCC has little impact on signalling
earlier i was thinking about a more complete MR control system and concluded that while you probably couldn’t replace DC with DCC and add decoders, you couldn’t do the opposite without a lot more work. in other words, DC and DCC are not quite equivalent.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL
DCC would just give me hundreds of hours of extra work mainly so I could squeeze a few extra locos in the engine terminal and I would still have to build the signaling system, with one technology or the other. And I would still need the blocks, and still need the turnout controls.
but considering the use of block detectors, turnout control and signals on a relatively large layout required to run 6+ trains at a time, i believe DCC makes the layout wiring simpler and frees
I am reporting what NCE told my dealer after we tested the store layout with the store’s NCE Power Cab system and could not run 4 diesels on the 15 lineal foot layout. They could not draw the needed current which was about 1 amp indicated. Another poster on another forum told me the NCE Power cab being only a 2 amp introductory system cannot get the full 2 amps to the rails.
My son wants to run long trains that require 0.8 to 1 amp.
NCE says the main thing is the unsoldered joiners and not bus wire or connectors from track to bus.
This is NCE’s official position. For us to run a long train it works very well in plain dc on an 18 volt-amp new MRC power supply. It does not work in dcc.
I’m not saying I agree with the idea that all that buss wire and multi drops are needed, but that is what the DCC “community” recommends and that is what most people do on larger layouts.
I’ve never had and noticeable voltage drop issues with DC, but again, all my rail joints are soldered.