Digitrax is the best at controlling two trains with one throttle because their DT400 has two seperate throttle knobs. If you want to control more than two trains, then Digitrax loses it’s edge. NCE’s recall stack seems easier to use, and, if your going wireless, you would have to be constantly plugging in to control more than two with Digitrax.
Since you said you want one or two fully-featured throttles and two or three more basic ones, you’ll need to know that with the PowerCab you can only have one additional throttle or, if you get the SmartBooster, three additional throttles. Otherwise, this approach is feasible, and I believe what a lot of people do. My understanding is that you can control momentum from NCE’s intermediate cabs.
If you have a 5 Amp system and get a 3 Amp booster, the booster would be wired to a seperate section of the layout, so you would not have 8 amps going through the whole layout. If you upgrade from the PowerCab to the PowerHouse Pro, then you can not use the 2 amps of the PowerCab to power a seperate section of the layout. I coould be wrong, but I don’t think that you can use the Smartbooster with the PowerHouse Pro either(if you can, it does not say how to in the online manual).
As promised, here’s a summary of the results of my first op session with NCE wireless.
I bought a Lenz system in late 1993 to use on my new Siskiyou Line layout which
was shown at the 1994 National in Portland, OR. In 1997 we started official
monthly op sessions on the layout using the Lenz system. By 2000, the now
7-year old Lenz system was in need of some major upgrades – but I wanted
wireless and EasyDCC had the best wireless offering at the time, so I went with
EasyDCC and have been using it with great success since 2000.
However, the system is now obsolete and some of the throttles were misbehaving
so I priced a complete overhaul and upgrade. I found I could move to wireless
NCE (which had some great features I wanted) for several hundred less, so I sold my
EasyDCC system and moved to NCE. This last Saturday, September 8th, was the
first op session with NCE.
In my layout room, I found I could get good wireless reception (15 foot radius
max) with one RB02 and one RPT1. My existing operators have been used to the
EasyDCC wireless, which has rock solid reception and performance – you could
run trains and not think twice about the fact you were running wireless.
We found out that is not the case with NCE’s wireless. It is what I would call
quite “finicky”. You cannot just “punch the buttons” like we did with the
EasyDCC wireless throttles. You have to slow down and be extremely deliberate
with each and every key press.
SUMMARY
In short, the first op session experience with NCE wireless was so-so. It’s clear you need to train your operators to be slow and deliberate because of NCE’s finicky nature, which means you are more aware of “model railroading” thoughts with NCE wireless as compared to EasyDCC’s wireless system.
From the information I got in the previous discussion pages I am very interested in the NCE Power Cab system but the NCE site says nothing about reversing sections. How is that handled ?
Also, is it possible to wire in more than one additional throttles ?
Reversing sections are handled by reversing modules that are wired in between the DCC system outputs and the track. I don’t think NCE makes a reversing module, but they are system indepedent, so you should be able to use anybody’s reversing module with the PowerCab.
You can only use one additional cab with the PowerCab. If you get the SmartBooster, then you can use three additional cabs.
Only if you purchase the NCE Smart Booster. The Smart Booster (SB3) increases the total number of additional throttles you can use with the Power Cab from one to three, as well as increase the maximum output from 1.7VA to 3VA.
Thank you Joe for a very interesting thread. I have spent the last days reading it.
When I decided to start building a model railroad a year ago (October 2006) I found out that the only reasonable way to go was DCC if you want to run several trains and have a relatively easy wiring of the layout. I talked to a couple of other modelrailroaders that mentioned Lenz and Digitrax as the two systems mostly used here (Sweden). I also found out that Atlas seems to market the Lenz system with their own brand.
I decided to buy Digitrax Super Chief from the beginning because I didn’t want to spend money on upgrades when I eventually will build a bigger layout. If I then had known about this forum I will probably have had a much harder decision to do. I have now used my Digitrax for seven months.
To tell the truth I didn’t even thought of connecting and trying out anything without reading the manual. IMHO reading the manual is part of the fun with a new ‘toy’ and the manual instructed me to do everything correct the first time.
When it comes to consisting I think Digitrax solution is quite logical. Start with selecting the lead engine on the right throttle, run it to where you want to build your consist. Select another engine on your left throttle and run it to the first so they are coupled together and press the ‘MU’ and the ‘+’ buttons. I think this is quite clear and easy. You must run the locos to the same spot and have them coupled regardless if you consist them this or the other way. This object - action sequence is also consistent with all (i think) other actions you do, you select a loco and then the speed, select a turn-out and then throw it.
What drawbacks have I found? Well I don’t know if I should blame Digitrax, the throttle or myself for the following two problems
Running more than two trains. I mostly am to slow changing the throttle to control another train when I need to stop or slow down.
You’re welcome! However, this thread is what it is because many others with great insights have posted to it.
I heartily agree with your comments about JMRI and DecoderPro. Once I started using DecoderPro to program decoders, I won’t do it any other way. The “decoder discover” feature on the programming track is very helpful, and being able to program decoders by pointing and clicking with a mouse is far easier. It’s especially helpful with today’s complex sound decoders that have over 100 CVs to set! With DecoderPro I just set the features I want and I never have to remember what CV does what.
Because of my day job managing web developers, I’m constantly thinking in terms of making a user interface (UI) that doesn’t need a manual. My head’s in this space most of the time, so Digitrax’s UI grates on me, as does Lenz’s UI – but I understand these are usable systems by most people – especially once you get used to them. And neither system is short on features, especially Digitrax
Hi Steve!
I do have to agree,but have you ever read an Ercoupe flight manual???
You’d have a difficult time steering mine with the rudder pedals, hmmm, what rudder pedals??? LOL!!!
Some later versions did have them, but the original Ercoupes didn’t.Great airplane to fly!
Flying is my other hobby, but I also love MRR’ing!!!
And Joe Fugate has really made MRR’ing much easier for me with his many forums, and at length detailed explanations, being so kind as to share his wealth of experience with us as have so many others on these forums.
It’s been 2 years since you started this thread, and as you have said DCC is being improved all the time. How likely is it that we will see an updated version of your original comparisons?
Things get obsolete quickly in the field of electronics, and my DCC video I did in 2004 will shortly be 4 years old … oh, boy. These days I’m hearing an entire generation in the computer industry is 18 months. Fortunately, the DCC world doesn’t move that fast, but 3-4 years is enough to make some information obsolete.
I am working on a DCC clinic for the Anaheim NMRA Convention, and out of that material will no doubt come more “latest and greatest” comparisons.
One of the things I’ve been thinking about is developing a list of “Features you WANT in your DCC system” and then comparing the existing systems to this list. For example, one feature you want is the ability to read back CV settings, and the MRC Prodigy Express doesn’t provide this.
So while I may not get to this update right away, by the time I’ve developed my new DCC Clinic, I will have collected the information – and can make it available. I’m less inclined to post it on this forum, however, because the chronological organization on here kinda sucks for reference material … so we’ll see.
One thing I keep hearing about is back EMF capability, and I would like to see that and controling things other than loco’s covered a bit.
From everything else, it sounds like NEC might be the way to go especialy if they solve the wireless issue - I wonder [%-)] if a half wave antenna helps, what a full wave antenna or perhaps even heterodyne circut would do ( besides increasing cost ) to help cope with RF trash to the system?
< shrug >
It’s not like I need wireless now, but, it is something that I probably need to consider for future expansion.
Back EMF is a decoder function, and not related to the control side at all, other than set-up of CVs.
A little writeup on how stationary decoders are accessed by the various systems might be a good thing. Which throttles can do it, how obvious the keystrokes are, etc. Lots of people don’t use these, but as the price of stationary decoders seems to be dropping, and their cleverness increasing, more and more may, over time.
As far as NCE’s radio system goes, I visited Joe’s layout for this month’s operating session. The only issue I ever had with the RF system was in initial acquisition of the loco. Once I had control, I noticed no lag, no dropouts. I never felt like I was not connected to the train. It makes me think that the problem may be in the software side of things rather than the hardware. In which case, a real fix might not be too hard, and might not take too long.
There are a couple of popular techniques for enhancing loco performance with a DCC decoder. They are:
Dithering/Torque compensation
Back EMF
DITHERING/TORQUE COMPENSATION
Dithering or Torque Compensation (D/TC) is something like DC pulse power in effect, although that’s not technically what’s happening. TCS decoders call it Dithering, NCE decoders call it Torque Compensation. In both cases, the effect is strongest when the loco is first starting, and it tapers off as the loco comes up to speed. You set the amount of extra kick voltage and the frequency of the kick.
D/TC is a fixed amount you set, and it’s only altered by loco speed. When starting up the loco, D/TC is at its strongest, and it fades away as the loco speed increases.
BACK EMF
Back EMF (BEMF) uses the natural electricity generated by a spinning motor to determine when the loco is lugging down and needs a voltage boost. Decoders with BEMF allow setting the amount of BEMF compensation to apply, and also allow turning BEMF off in consists, since locos can fight each other on a consist if BEMF is set high.
BEMF depends on constant feedback as to how hard the motor is working, and a BEMF decoder will compensate dynamically. This creates a loco that can “float” through complex trackwork like silk at slow speeds, for example. But BEMF has its downsides as well. If you crank up the BEMF settings, you can get a loco that will act like it’s on “cruise control” – it will pull a train around curves, up a grade, and down a grade at a constant speed – you never have to touch the throttle.
Getting a loco to behave in “cruise control” fashion is a neat stunt, but it’s not at all realistic – and it takes all the fun out of running a train.
Perhaps the worst “side effect” of BEMF is consisting locos with BEMF decoders. If the BEMF has been set hi
[quote user=“Brunton”] This is off the topic of DCC, but is in reply to an earlier post, so skip this unless you’re curious
Without trying to raise any hackles, your argument is incorrect, Joe. I’ve been designing aircraft for nearly two decades, and a pilot about as long, so let me explain.
The reason the airplane and the automobile user interfaces behave differently is because the vehicles are fundamentally different. An automobile navigates in two dimensions, while the airplane navigates in three. Rudder pedals steer the airplane on the ground because rudder pedals control the yaw, or left-right pointing of the aircraft, in the air. So they also control that on the ground. The steering wheel (“yoke” on an airplane) controls roll, or tilt, of the aircraft wings via the ailerons. There is no corresponding control on an automobile. A combination of rudder pedal and yoke input controls turns in an aircraft in the air (the ailerons are the primary turning agent, with the rudder assisting - different even than a submarine, another three-dimension navigator).
I could go on a lot more, but probably most folks don’t care anyway, so I’ll stop. Suffice it to say, though two different systems may get you to the same ultimate goal, the methods employed to do so may dictate very different interfaces. It depends on what is required in of the control system.
By the way - the auto and airplane controls developed over ten years apart, not at roughly the same time. Autpmobile controls developed basically in
Hey, I come onto the new DCC forum and what do I see but my DCC clinics … nice job Bergie!
It’s hard to believe these forum clinics are now 3-4 years old already … as a bit of news I will be doing a DCC clinic this summer at the NMRA National and plan to include new updated info in the clinic. Maybe we can even put the clinic on video – we’ll see.
Things have changed in new system area with MRCs new wireless system … the PowerCab now has a computer interface … NCE’s new Rev 3 wireless is super reliable … EasyDCC’s had isolated reports of more loco runaways with their latest firmware upgrade … Digitrax has a new wireless pending release … the decoder price-performance ratio just keeps getting better and better – and in the meantime new DCC features keep coming out.