Thanks for that reply, KHolbrook77. Very fine analysis. Chalk up another happy Digitrax user, except for that old battle axe.
Rich
Kholbrook77, I donât question that your customer service experience was just as you say. My only comment is Iâve had to contact Digitrax a few times (years ago) for a few questions and situations and found their customer service very responsive. Maybe things have changed in the last few years?
Regards, Chris
1 Like
I will add a couple of things to the conversation. I have been really happy with my choice way back 20 years ago which was a leap of faith purchase. I agree with those that find the battery cover on the NCE Power-Pro-R hokey, it is.
Not sure what the range of the radio is on my controller, however, once just for fun I set my wifeâs phone up in the train room so I could see the layout with FB video and went to the extreme other end of the house, 90 ft away. The receiver is set up against one end wall and I stood back to the wall at the other end and could control the trains with no issues. I guess if I wanted to see where it maxes out I will have to go outside and start walking. 
2 Likes
Hi from the UK. When I first started in DCC back in the late 90s I had a Digitrax system. This was in N, a BN layout. Unfortunately, circumstances meant that I had to sell all my model railroad stuff about 2005ish. When I got back into it during 2020, I looked around for a system that I could afford and ended up building my own from MERG kits (https://www.merg.org.uk/). Although you have to join, the membership fee is well worth it.
Cheers Lee
1 Like
Thanks for that post, Lee.
How would you compare it to your Digitrax?
Rich
I like ESU sound decoders on my DR units.
1 Like
it might be an interesting thread to hear from those who have used different systems what features from each theyâd like to see in a single system.
some may like the way to control speed on one system but how to consist on another.
seems there are at least 4 major approaches for setting speed
- knob
- thumbwheel
- buttons
- graphics touch screen
it might be interesting to have a poll for which people prefer
then thereâs the encoder vs pot approach. for controlling multiple trains, a separate pots, and usually no more than 2, are needed for each train. But a single encoder can be used to control multiple trains because because the encoder inc/decreases speed, it does set the speed.
1 Like
Good suggestions, greg. I was hoping for more comparisons as well as a discussion of negatives where appropriate. Havenât heard anything so far about ESU and TCS systems. My NCE works just fine, but if I ever need to replace it, I would be interested on what alternatives are worth considering.
Rich
Might be added that more than one at the same time might be desirable. Just as there are times I use a touchscreen on a computer, and times I use a keyboard, and times I use a trackball or pointing stick rather than a mouse.
Haptics are likely to be important on any handheld control â you should have a âfeelâ for how to do important functions, rather than having to look at the device to figure out what to turn and press. I thought TCS was onto something good with the talking devices, but I think there are better ways to implement sound feedback.
Someone needs to follow through with a mechanical overlay to a touch smart-device screen, that lets you have mechanical knobs and buttons to actuate or manipulate virtual controls on that screen. With touch feedback as desired. If you have to have a knob to control locomotive speed, itâs important to me that it work like a rheistat or potentiometer, visibly pointing to a scale or clock position that tells âwhat itâs set forâ, and not just a clickwheel encoder (and especially not a âdebouncedâ clickwheel that canât be turned too fast without dropping counts).
Remember that the âHMIâ (the âhuman-machine interfaceâ) is not necessarily the same thing as the UI (âuser interfaceâ), or the user experience, or the IxD (interaction design). When people confuse or conflate these things, you get many of the current problems with usable devices fit for purpose.
1 Like
This is a bit off topic, but not too much, so hopefully you will allow. Earlier this year I purchased a TCS UWT100 throttle, which I have mentioned in a few other threads. But I have a question for you all- if Iâm correct the TCS throttle makes and holds consists in the throttle. But if it is done on a Digitrax system is the consist held only in the throttle, or in the Digitrax command station, or both. Thanks all.
Regards, Chris
1 Like
whatâs the difference between all these things?
the business terminals department at bell labs had a group of industrial psychologists the review the human interface to the terminals as well as sound quality. Never heard such terms from them
2 Likes
Yep, I recalled that when I posted that recent reply, but you do use a Digitrax command station. I remain anxious to hear from users of the TCS command station.
Rich
HMI is the hardware â the physical interface means.
UI is how humans use the HMI
UE is how humans perform tasks using the equipment
IxD has come to be how humans interact with the equipment (and the equipment interacts or learns to interact with humans) while âusingâ the system â often involved with optimizing the UE.
One example of the difference between UE and IxD was the way IBM implemented macros on terminals. They appear to have presumed that users already knew the best way to perform tasks, so merely recording keystroke sequences was enough to be useful. They had no âmacro editorâ at all, so if you missed or changed any keystrokes or timings you had to go back and record the whole thing over again. To this day (to my knowledge) there are no âsmart undo buffersâ in office software â you can only delete back to something you want to change, and then remember all the steps to get back where you were.
1 Like
in the command station. The command station at the club is in a separate room and it doesnât get powered off with the layout. A member can grab any throttle and run a consist knowing the lead engine address.
1 Like
All of this discussion about using different throttles is interesting to me, I have never given any thought until now about successfully using other manufacturers throttles with a different DCC command station.
Rich
Greg, thanks for that answer. Iâve been using my Digitrax ut402 throttle to build and break down consists because I wanted that data to be held in the command station. Reading up on the TCS throttle (which I love) I came away thinking it would hold the data only in the throttle. I must have missed that. Thanks again.
Regards, Chris
Rich, my take on the TCS throttle is itâs more like a NCE throttle than a Digitrax, but as I have stated in other threads, it combines the best features of both. Of course cost considerations come into play, but aside from that, I highly recommend the TCS over either a NCE or a Digitrax.
Regards, Chris
Thanks, Chris. So noted.
Rich
I started out in DCC about 20 years ago, buying a Digitrax Zephyr after receiving an early-run BLI NYC Hudson as a gift. I had a DC layout with separate blocks which could be set to either of two power packs; I just replaced one power pack with the Zephyr.
The Zephyr worked fine until I tried switching to radio control, and found it didnât really work that well - or sometimes at all. So I switched to CVP, and have been very happy with it. CVP was started by Keith Gutierrez, who pioneered DCC going back to the 1970s.
I donât know if there really is a best DCC system, it depends on what you want to do. If I hadnât wanted to do walkaround radio control, Iâd probably still be using Digitrax. I know for example that some folks donât like that with CVP you can only set up a consist thru the main controller, not from a walkaround. That doesnât really bother me, so itâs not a problem, but I guess it could be for some.
1 Like
Excellent review. Thanks, Stix.
Rich