DCC. What is in the future for those of us who still use DC only?

Model Railroader Electronics and DCC
41

And why would I waste money to trade in my perfectly functional '93 Taurus on a new Chevy equivalent? The whole point of paying the cost of trading in would be to get benefits I can’t realize from the Taurus.

The point is that unless DCC is perceived as a serious and worthwhile upgrade to DC, then there is no reason to spend any money on switching from DC to DCC.

There are really several different scenarios being confused with each other.

The newbie starting out in model railroading, perhaps with the proverbial simple 4x8 layout. In this case, straight cost comparisons might be useful in the single engine/single operator case. On the DCC side, the Zephyr takes the place of the DC power pack. Not much benefit for the extra cost ($100+) of DCC in this scenario, unless the single locomotive is sound-equipped ($100 extra).

Next scenario - the 4x8 train set is expanded to 2 train/2 operator with several locomotives available. Now the DCC operational benefits of not having block toggles start to mean something. But the true cost of DCC includes: Starter system plus second throttle plus jack(s) for second throttle plus extra cost of decoders in locomotives (either bought with decoders or installed afterwards). Total DCC cost is in the neighborhood of $250+. Cost of DC is around $100 (2 power packs plu

42

While the word religious can be divisive, I would say in the myriad of the DCC and DC threads, one thing is clear, some people’s choices about this are less than logical.

That’s okay. It’s a hobby. Why I have 50 locomotives when I only need three makes no sense to me either. What is fun often makes no sense.

43

These discussions about DCC vs. DC make me chuckle. Even more, when the arguments include cost. C´mon on folks, this is a hobby, so if you want DCC, get it it.

No one actually needs DCC, just like no one actually needs a hobby. We are in it for fun, entertainment and relaxation, so forget about economics. This ain´t business!

44

I can understand why they make you chuckle, but as usual, there are few people who insist on trying to invalidate the choices of others.

And, yes that can make people defend their position with “religous” fervor.

First I would ask cuyama if he read the WHOLE thread or just jumped in based on Fred’s post?

As this question was posed by the OP, even many of the strongest DCC promoters on this forum seemed to be in agreement with the DC users.

But there are always a few who feel they need to re-explain to us DC users that:

It does not really cost that much more.

We will like so much more.

It is so much “better”.

So once again we reexplain why we don’t need to be “saved” by their religous fervor.

Sheldon

45

Calling some people’s choices “less than logical” is not a proven way to reach hearts and change minds. [:)]

Will I convert to DCC? Yes, probably in the next 6 months. Why? Because that’s what Free-mo and Hon3 Free-mo (and most modular standards) use. If I want to run my locomotives at a setup, I need to install decoders and have a throttle (assumes someone else provides the command station and boosters). And I need minimum equipment at home to test my module wiring and operation before a setup.

Once I put decoders in my locomotives, it makes little sense to not complete the conversion at home except for a test loop. But the cost of conversion is daunting - just as the costs of modeling an earlier era than most, and modeling both narrow and standard gauge are also daunting. It is not just a matter of buying an NCE PowerCab - which I almost did at a show yesterday. I need the S3 booster to be able to fully test throttle jacks on the module, and module track and throttle bus wiring. And the locomotives need decoders.

While I understand the $15 fleet decoder works well in standard HO diesel models - does it really work so well in tiny steam models? Or do I want the superior BEMF implementation and motor control and tiny size of ESU decoders (and if possible with a keep-alive option, given the tiny size of the models)? In those engines where a decent speaker might fit - do I want the known Tsunami steam sound? Or the reportedly less finicky motor control of ESU? Even

46

Another interesting observation.

Fred W and I have been at the heart of many of these discussions over the years, and we share a very similar understanding of the issues involved, from a technical, modeling and personal stand point.

Yet Fred is about to go DCC while I remain committed to my advanced DC cab control with wireless radio throttles - why?

Fred has explained very clearly that one of his main interests in DCC is to participate in a group that is using DCC and he sees the addition of sound as an added benifit.

Both clearly good reasons to invest in DCC in Fred’s case. And I know a number of other modelers who have not only chosen DCC, but even chosen a specific brand based on their desire to participate in a group setting with fellow modelers.

I on the other hand am not as involved in “social” modeling. I belong to a round robin, I enjoy a number of social activities in the hobby, I enjoy operating on others layouts, I enjoy having others to my layout, but I have NO interest in transporting my locos or rolling stock to other layouts, group, public or private, for operation.

The complex combination of my specifc layout goals led me to my current control system choice - after DCC was available and DCC was carefully examined in the process of deciding on a control system.

Ulimately a series of improvements to the system used on my last layout, MZL control, was seen as more effecive for my goals than DCC. Do largely to my desire for signaling and CTC and my dislike for onboard sound in small scales like HO, DCC would add little “play value” over my current system for a very large additional investment of both TIME and money.

I will repeat again, one size does not fit all.

Sheldon

47

Fred. I always find your posts very logical.

The point of my entire post is that hobby decisions need not be logical. There is no goal here other than to have fun. There may not be much logic, say, in choosing a paint scheme for your layout, so why does there have to be one for choosing an operating system? If you like to fiddle with toggle switching or programming and addressing, so be it. The latter is not more logical than the former, and visa versa.

But rather than focusing on making our choices based upon what we find fun, these threads sometime take on the flavor of one trying to defend their decisions like there is a philosophy, principal, or virtue involved. About an operating system, really?

I appreciate your’s and others efforts to consistently take the time to explain things in a way that tries to remove that element from the conversation.

48

Ahhh, I sense a small crack in Sheldon’s windshield. So, it is, at least in part, TIME and money holding him back. Signaling and CTC can be accomplished in DCC, and I gotta believe that HO scale onboard sound is not as objectionable to Sheldon as he protests it to be.

Realistically, Sheldon, I know that you cannot admit it. But, secretly, deep down, there is a yearning in your soul for DCC, the freedom to operate multiple trains without blocks, the sheer thrill of sounding those horns, whistles and bells. Me thinks thou doth protest too much !

[(-D][(-D][(-D]

Rich

49

Rich,

Your perception is distorted by your own likes and dislikes, a weakness we all suffer from. We all want to think that others are “like us”.

I value my time and money too much to waste it on things I don’t want, and unlike many others, I have figured out what I really want, not what others say I should want.

As for bells or whistles, that is in my long range plan, just not IN the locomotives.

Rich - how old are you? I designed and built my first HiFi speaker system in 1972, I now listen to music/movies on a

50

Rich, a few more thoughts.

“signaling and CTC can be accomplished in DCC” - of course they can, but the a same or similar infrastructure is required to do that in DCC or DC.

DCC brings NOTHING to the “signaling and CTC” table. And it does not reduce the cost of signaling at all. Effective signaling systems have been being installed on model railroads LONG before DCC.

So “selling” me on DCC for my current set of layout goals would require it to proivde some other large benifit. For me those benifits do not justify the cost - in time or money.

And yes it is about time and money. I would rather be building structures, running trains, building rolling stock than installing decoders in 130 locos.

And, I choose to spend a specific amount on this hobby, well within my means. That’s why I’m not that guy who sells off stuff on ebay when the economy is bad, etc. I still have virtually every model train I ever bought.

I choose a 40 x 24 layout with 130 locos, 1000 freight cars, 800 feet of track, wireless DC, signaling and CTC, intergrated one button turnout routing, staging for 25 trains, running trains 50 cars long, etc, etc,

RATHER than scaling that back to invest in bad sound in fewer locos with comand control.

MY CHOICES.

If you are happy with your choices - great.

Sheldon

51

To get back to the OP’s question, and more meat n taters model railroading, the future of DC only.

DC-only will wane the more hobby producers actually manufacture more locomotives that are capable of using the advantages DCC offers.

Do producers put ditch light blinking decoders in locomotives that don’t have ditch lights? Why?

My layout is post 1996, when ditch lights basically became mandatory. Although handy with rewiring locomotives, the tedious process of installing tiny LED’s into the stands is something I’ve put off.

If the advantages of DCC include sound AND lighting, then why not make some versions of smaller locomotives have full modern light packages?

That might sound like a small market, but its 2012. Is there really that much more demand for a specific, say, 1950’s SP light package version of a GP9 than a modern solid black generic shortline version with ditch lights? I would think every layout of a modern bent could use one.

Between the Atlas Genset, GP40-2W, and if Athearn would produce LED ditch light versions of the GP15, GP9, or GP38-2, there may be enough variety out there for me to scrap DC-only.

52

Doughless,

Great points for those they apply to. But I model the early 50’s, some mars lights were showing up, that was about it. Easily done in DC.

Many railroads still ran dark in daylight, diesel or steam, the ditch light did not even exist?

My modeling needs/interests don’t need DCC lighting effects either. My full votlage pulse width throttles turn on typical DC constant lighting circuits before the loco moves - simpler - cheaper - easier.

Sheldon

53

Yes Sheldon. My Aristo BTE does the same thing with LEDs, and if I installed ditch lights, the ditch lights would work the same way. The issue for me is, do I want to take the next step towards accuracy and model ditch lights, and do they need to be able to strobe or alternate?

As I get more particular about accuracy, the idea of my post 1996 freelanced fleet not having ditch lights at all is beginning to bother me.

And here’s an issue related to Fred’s cost analysis, if I don’t learn to install them myself, I may just punt and convert to DCC to get the LED ditch lights in the first place, provided the producers make more models than the Genset or GP40-2W.

However, if I learn to install them myself, and since the BTE works very well as static lighting, the only reason to convert to DCC would be to get the strobe/alternation. In which case, I’d be going DCC just to get the incremental step up to those effects, making the cost of it very expensive.

I can see a scenario where if the manufacturers delay in offering working ditch lights in smaller locomotives, I’ll eventually learn to do it myself and have less incentive to convert.

Or, I might just move back to about 1995, which is the easiest fix.

And, if lone wolf modelers tend to have layouts too small for the six axle wide cabs, and as time moves on, I think this issue applies to more and more mod

54

[quote user=“ATLANTIC CENTRAL”]

richhotrain:

ATLANTIC CENTRAL:

Ulimately a series of improvements to the system used on my last layout, MZL control, was seen as more effecive for my goals than DCC. Due largely to my desire for signaling and CTC and my dislike for onboard sound in small scales like HO, DCC would add little “play value” over my current system for a very large additional investment of both TIME and money.

Ahhh, I sense a small crack in Sheldon’s windshield. So, it is, at least in part, TIME and money holding him back. Signaling and CTC can be accomplished in DCC, and I gotta believe that HO scale onboard sound is not as objectionable to Sheldon as he protests it to be.

Realistically, Sheldon, I know that you cannot admit it. But, secretly, deep down, there is a yearning in your soul for DCC, the freedom to operate multiple trains without blocks, the sheer thrill of sounding those horns, whistles and bells. Me thinks thou doth protest too much !

Rich

Rich,

Your perception is distorted by your own likes and dislikes, a weakness we all suffer from. We all want to think that others are “like us”.

I value my time and money too much to waste it on things I don’t want, and unlike many others, I have figured out what I really want, not what others say I should want.

As for bells or whistles, that is in my long range plan, just no

55

Having sound in an HO scale locomotive is not all about being an audiophile to appreciate it. If the sounds accurately reproduce the sounds of the prototype, that’s all that should matter. That alone should be enough to enjoy sound, and DCC seems to be required to do that.

As far as true fidelity goes, even the finest surround sound systems cannot truly equal the presence of a live band or orchestra experience, so why bother with that either?

Rich

56

Just to answer your specific question: the whole thread. And the myriad identical threads before it.

57

Rich,

I have said many times that if i was building a layout with a different theme, or different set of goals, or in a different scale I might very well choose DCC - I did almost choose it for this one.

Search my posts, you find that statement over and over.

But for THIS layout, in this scale, with this set of operational goals - DCC is NOT cost or time effective.

As for sound quality, there is “close enough” and not close enough.

For me, onboard sound in HO is not even in the running.

Now in larger scales - O scale, large scale, etc, I really like it.

Again, do a search of my views on sound in model trains, I’m not anti sound, I’m anti bad sound from 1" speakers that grates on my nerves because of its poor frequency response and limited dynamic range.

I will remind you again, I use DCC almost every week at our round robin operating sessions - except for the week that we run on a friends layout that has the same system as me.

At some point when the new version of the layout is comming along, my house will likely be added back into the round robin rotation.

There is nothing about the hard to read display, or the 32 buttons I can’t get my fingers on, or the tiny endless wheel throttle of a DT400R that I like - but I use them - at other peoples houses.

IF I went DCC (for some other layout scheme) it would be almost anything other than Digitrax.

If you only knew how easy well planned DC advanced cab control is to operate…

But admittedly it’s not easy to build - but it does not require all the expensive black boxes of DCC - and it has signaling and CTC built in - not as another high cost extra option.

Come on, tell me what feature of DCC would make me want to switch?

I don’t need consisting, I have explained that on here a dozen or more times.

I don’t want sound or need fancy lighting?

I don’t need or want to operate a bunch of trains at once on a 4x8, the layout is

58

Yet another post-count-padder-for-Sheldon thread. Also, where is my shovel?!?

David B

59

Well, after reading all of this I have the answer. At least to my satisfaction.

Those who wish to keep using DC due to preference or cost of upgrading will keep doing so until they get out of the hobby or die.

Those using DCC will do the same.

Every one is correct for what works for them. But I’m sure every one already knew this.[:^)]

Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion.[:)]

60