Have you heard about the latest from Crest

Model Railroader Electronics and DCC
21

Back in the April 1980 issue of MR there was an article by Andy Sperandeo where seven command control systems were reviewed. These systems were by Alphatronics, Dynatrol, EMS, Onboard Control, Rail-Command, RFPT, and Salota. In addition, in the following May issue there was a review of an MRC command control system called Protrac R/C I. Of course, none of these systems would interface with another. Each of these systems utilized a receiver which was also not compatible with anyone else’s system. So far as I know, none of those first seven companies are viable today. And MRC, while still viable, probably does not offer any support for the Protrac. So anyone who had invested any amount of money in those systems is out of luck.

Actually, Rail-command, made by CVP Products, is still fully supported by them.

http://www.cvpusa.com/railcmd_system.php

They are also in the DCC business with their Easy DCC product line, and in the large scale direct radio with their AirWire900 and have now introduced a small scale version of that system for smaller scales.

http://www.cvpusa.com/mini_airwire_convrtr.php

Be it track powered or battery, there are a number of advantages to direct radio. The obvious one is reduced under layout electronics - especailly for large layouts, which with DCC can require numerous boosters, circuit breakers, reversers, radio throttle repeaters, etc.

Battery power reduces that under layout infrastructure even more.

All comments about Crest or other recievers fitting in locos are a straw man - not every loco easily accepts a DCC sound decoder and speaker. The sizes of the CVP and Crest recievers are similar to most DCC decoders - batteries are the other part of the story.

BUT, even track powered, direct radio uses simple filtered DC - becaue it is just the power,

22

Well put! I will have to check out airwire. I do think Crest is on to something in the fact that theirs plugs into existing DCC sockets, that certainly keeps it simple. The reason I have not gone DCC is I have seen too many fried decoders already, luckily non were mine. Also I was not happy with the sound cutoffs due to track in a couple of sound decoders, they were just too picky.

23

This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not “slowed to new entrants” around here.

DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone.

As far as direct radio battery DC, the Original Poster has started a number of threads like this one. And as long as the products don’t quite exist yet for HO, it is easy to imagine them as a panacea. When Crest publishes photos of actual HO engines with on-board batteries and direct radio receivers installed and demonstrates them working on an actual layout with people in the aisles, it will be a newsworthy item.

24

I’ve operated on dozens of layouts totaling hundreds of engines and have only seen this happen once or twice – and always due to human error. The danger is vastly overstated

On the other hand, the potential dangers of over-charging lithium batteries in confined spaces leading to overheating and fried equipment is also real, although it will happen rarely. Ask Boeing.

Nothing’s perfect.

25

Been DCC for 10 years and I saw my first fried decoder just this summer. And it wasn’t one of mine. One of my fellow club members was working on an Athearn loco he had a decoder in, on a LIVE TEST TRACK, with most of the wires just twisted, not well trimmed, and not soldered. You can imagine what happened next.

Not going DCC because you fear blowing decoders? Haven’t blown one yet, nor have I seen any otherwise working ones just blow out on a large club layout where a given set of locos will run continuously, pulling long trains, for an hour or so at a time.That includes both user-installed and factory equipped locos.

Tam Valley’s radio system also connects to a standard DCC decoder.

–Randy

26

Well northern California must be behind the curve, because here in the Mid Atlantic nearly all those “social type, operating session” modelers have already converted to DCC - and for the most part I understand their reasons.

I’m sure that there are a a few modelers left who have not converted but will, and I suspect most new people will go DCC for the forseeable future. Butt there are many “lone wolf” modelers, who’s layouts are by no means “neglected or dusty” who have not imbraced sound and have no interest in DCC.

Or, should we assume they are

27

Well stated and it holds true for my area as well. DCC around here hasn’t slowed and continues to grow. The LHS has more DCC items in stock now then ever, and it’s moving, not sitting around. Different parts of the Country can/may have different trends. That stands to reason. But I personally do not see a trailing off/slowing of growth in expanding DCC or entry into DCC in my area. I also personally have not seen enough blown decoders to warrant being frightened to take a step into DCC or full on DCC conversion [:|]. It’s probably best to simply say "

28

The blown decoders is just one of the reasons, so don’t take that as the only reason and also I was stating for me, personally, not as a trend as far as DCC. Also, on a forum it is hard to relay where one is coming from. I have always thought at least 10 years out, I tend to throw all my eggs in one basket including financially, I tend to be a lone wolf because I find it hard in my area to find people of the same mindset as me, not that I avoid being social. DCC is great for some and for clubs, it is really the only game in town but it is not without issues and through various forums, I talk to a lot of people and we all communicate our problems so I am exposed to more than my group of friends and have knowledge of what goes on at a half dozen large clubs as far as what’s happening and where they are going (right now two are DCC only, two are being built as DCC only, one is both and one is being converted to both from just DC). As far as batteries are concerned, unless you follow this stuff, most don’t have a clue to the daily breakthroughs. The only thing limiting the adaption of total onboard control is not the battery but the electronic components in the controllers and if you know Moore’s law, you know that that will soon not be a problem! In fact, due to photonics, one university just announced a major breakthrough!

29

Compared to your 40-year-old MZL?

Thanks, that was good for a laugh.

30

That doesn’t seem correct at all. For HO and smaller scales, batteries are the largest volume and weight element and lag the components significantly (since batteries don’t improve with Moore’s Law)

There is also an array (pun intended) of RF (radio frequency) issues that come into play in antenna design and frequency and modulation choice for direct radio. Polk obviously made some wrong choices there earlier, which is part of the reason they say that they are going out of business.

Direct radio DC battery will likely come* for HO at some point. But until folks like you can show us photos of working installations of Crest’s system in typical HO engines (with or without sound), it’s vaporware.

  • Edit: I should say something like "“practical, widely deployed drop-in direct radio DC battery will come for HO at some point”-- obviously early systems are out now.
31

Glad you are entertained, I make no apologies for for the fact that I use old technology. My signal system uses relays - and solid state inductive current detectors.

And while my system is based in part on Ed Ravenscroft’s MZL, it is enhanced to provide true walk around with the Aristo Train Engineer throttles - relays do that work too.

I find it interesting that you seem to define who is a real “model railroader” by their interest in group operating sessions and/or their use of DCC. Yet my control system is designed for group operating sessions - AND it is designed for display running and solo operation.

I chose to build my own control system to suit my wants and needs, I know my wants and needs are outside the “mainstream”. My system is focused on what I want, leaving out what I don’t want, and for my list of goals is 100% more cost effective than DCC.

And I don’t have any service or support issues. The commercial products I do use are easily replaceable with other products, the rest is simple generic electrical hardware. I like it that way.

I full well agree and realize that for most people, right now, DCC is the best choice - I’m not most people.

After careful consideration at two different points in time, I did not choose DCC for the following reasons:

130 decoders is a lot of money, and a lot of work to install.

I don’t like onboard sound in small scales. I don’t need ditch lights, or to turn loco lights on and off, or to control sounds.

I want signals and CTC - I was going to need blocks anyway.

I run lots of matched set diesels, DCC would mean more work speed matching and setting them up - they work just fine in DC

32

I accually have one of the old radio control onboard but without battery, uses track power, so this stuff has been around for a long time! As far as battery power, did you not hear the 2000 times as powerfull, a button size battery may be enough.

33

Oh, and by the way, youtube has a few running battery powered HO radio controlled trains, and using old equipment and batteries.

34

rrebell,

I share your interest in the future of direct radio and direct radio with battery power, and as we know, it is already the system of choice in large scale, and is now very practical in O scale.

It will come to HO as the technology advances, but just like I am still running DC using track side radio throttles, don’t expect too many people to leave DCC and move to direct radio.

The more likely market for these products is people who never did switch to DCC, and never invested in radio throttles or other advanced systems. And once some of the radio systems are highly developed for HO, you may well see a percentage of new modelers go that way rather than DCC.

I still have big concerns about decoder/reciever costs and installation - with any type of command control system. And if I can’t convert every loco - I will not convert any. Even at the modest price of $30, decoders or recievers for my fleet would cost $3900. And before you or any one else says I don’t need to convert them all, or all at once, my modeling goals are such that all of these locos are needed for the operational theme of the layout - it is all or none.

If I was in two rail O scale, or even S scale, I would already be in direct radio, likely with battery power. But as it stands, I am interested to watch the developements, but am unlikely to change any time soon.

I do own a Crest Revolution, one of th first available Beta test copies, and do plan to try it out in several ways, but life has been busy. I will be interested to see the new HO recievers and could easily do a track powered loco as a test with the transmitter I have when those recievers are available. And I was thinking of installing a direct radio reciever in my On30 Chirstmas train set with the

35

See, this is what I really don’t understand with threads like this. Why do people need to be sold on, convinced, or have their minds changed or second guess their preferred method of train operation if they don’t want to? This “us vs them” or “mine is better then yours” attitude makes absolutley no sense to me. It all comes down to the individual end user…period. If operating in DC makes you happy and works for you then outstanding! Go with it and be happy and don’t look back. If operating on DCC brings you enjoyment and works for you then be content with that, be happy and don’t look back. If operating on some custom hybrid of either of these two operating systems or neither of these two operating systems works for you, brings you enjoyment, then fantastic! Bottom line, in my ever so humble opinion, NO operating system is better then another…NONE…not even this RC mumbo-jumbo…EXCEPT whichever operating system works best for you! There is no Shangri-La, no utopian operating system (even RC…). At the end of the day, whichever system you choose will only be as reliable and function properly if the basics of model railroading are met (good track planning, good track plan, good bench work, good track laying etc etc). Bickering, taunting, challenging, or attempting to convert people from one operating system to another is pointless, again, in my humble opinion.

As far as RC goes as applied to HO and N scale, as has already been stated numero

36

The reason is economics, the more demand, the lower the price and everyone wants availability of their choice and the cost to be less in their choice, simple economics! The nice thing about the system from crest is you can run it with DC or DCC or whatever if it is on battery power so you only convert what you want to. Changes the whole game a bit because now you are talking taking over one engine in Sheldons vast fleet! By the way Sheldon, how did you like the beta test you did back in 1988???

37

EMD Don,

Well I am in nearly complete agreement with you. I have spent years on here explaining that the best control system is the one that fits a partular users specific layout, operational, modeling, cost and skill level goals.

But I must say, that over the years, most of the resistance, criticism, name calling, attempts ot convert me or others, have come from those using DCC, and who think everyone should.

While those of us still using DC - be it simple or advanced - have spoken out to explain what we do, why, and why we have not chosen DCC, I can’t recall one person trying to “sell” others on not using DCC. Sure if someone asks about my control system, I’m going to explain what I see as the features and benefits. And if someone asks the DC or DCC question, I’m going to give them my view - I have that right as much as the next person has the right to tell them what they like about DCC.

But over the years I, and others still using DC, have been called “scared of technology”, backward, stupid, cheap, and more - sometimes directly and sometimes by innuendo - because we will not “see the light” and go DCC.

I’m not the super computer/electronics/solid state wiz kid, but I do know a little about electronics - likely a bit more than the “average” DCC user does. I did design relay circuits for years and programed some of the first PLC’s used in industrial control. I have used DCC, I know a moderate amount about it. I’m very tired of hearing “if you try it you will like it” - I have lots of modeler friends who have it, I use it on their layouts all the time, I’m still not sold - as it relates to MY LAYOUT AND MODELING GOALS.

As for the idea that we are all model railroaders, not according to these kinds of comments:

"Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone

38

rrebell,

Respectfully you are putting the cart before the horse. Henry Ford did not presell Model T’s so he could lower the price. He made the car at the lowest possible price, it proved itself in the marketplace and that success allowed him to lower the price even more. First Model T in 1908 cost $850, by the end of production in 1927 the base model could be bought for $260.

The Train Engineer Revolution I am refering is the first version of what they are selling now - only about 4 years old. I have had very little time to do anything with it yet, but do plan to run several tests when time allows, including onboard HO recievers when they are available.

My layout uses 10 of the older 10 Channel 27 Mhz Train Engineer throttles as trackside units, connected to the layout through an advanced cab control system similar to MZL and intergrated into a relay based signal system based on Bruce Cubbs original signal system.

Sheldon

39

I hope you didn’t take away from my previous post that I was suggesting that you or anyone should just be quiet. I do not believe I intimated that whatsoever. If it came across that way then I apologize as that was not my intent. I was merely trying to make the point that threads such as these seem to always degenerate into “us vs. them” and “mine is better then yours” from all sides (including the OP if you re-read previous posts on this RC subject over the months and even some comments made herein) which is pointless and not at all productive. Challenging people on their chosen operating method will always ruffle feathers. Frankly, so it should because how each of us chooses to operate our model railroads is personal and what we deem to be best. So why bother making the challenge at all? I don’t know the answer to that question. As I have stated here and in other threads, I use both DC (N Scale) and DCC (HO Scale) and I love both systems. I personally see benefits and drawbacks from both. But in the end, I get enjoyment from using both and that’s what matters to me. That certainly doesn’t make me wiser, smarter, more efficient or better. It’s just what I do and what provides me enjoyment and entertainment in the hobby.
The other point that I was trying to make (and I may be mistaken but I also believe you and others here were as well…just from different angles), is that until such a time as we get actual new build RC systems designed from the outset to operate HO and N Scale model railroads, until we get pu

40

You obviously have way more time to post many more words on the forum than do I, but in the future please do not quote me out of context in an attempt to put words in my mouth.

Here is the full quote in context, which was in specific response to your erroneous contention that no additional established layouts were converting to DCC:

Note that I prefaced it by saying that this is what is going on around here. And I added my belief that both DCC and DC are fine choices for specific needs. I don’t ascribe to the notion that there is only one way to model railroad and it is inaccurate to attempt to paint me with that broad brush. Multiple-operator layouts are great, single-operator layouts are great, anything in between is also fine.

I have a few clients and friends who are happily running DC. But of the 100+ layouts I have designed for others over the last ten years, the owners tell me that more than 90% will be operated with DCC for the foreseeable future. Just the facts.