Lions and tigers and bears, oh my....What are your issues with DCC

Model Railroader Electronics and DCC
1

The famous line from the Wizard of Oz was one of fear for what might lie ahead. Such is the case for many neophyte MRs in the modern world of DCC.

Many of us old timers became used to DC operation where a good degree of mechanical and electrical skills were developed. On a pike of any size, there was the inevitable rats nest of block, switch and signal control wiring…Literally hundreds of wires routing their way to some important destination from a very busy master control panel. Today, only moderate electrical skills are required with about the same mechanical skills as in days of old.

Electronics skills are now at the forefront, but not very complex ones. Basic computer savy and a basic understanding of CV settings within the framework of the DCC’s micro controller are very important to get the most out of that sound decoder. Undertable wiring on all but the largest pikes can be reduced to viritually nothing if you DCC control everything. The old slap and slam switch solenoids of the DC days have given way to silent slow motion switch machines controlled with no toggle switches or significant wiring, if desired.

In DCC, we traded in the old 110 watt weller “under the table” soldering gun for the 15 watt pencil iron, installing sound controllers. A single heavy gauge “buss” now replaces many long runs of wires of yesteryear. Model railroading has gotten much easier for the modern guy and a bit more expensive, if he goes full featured DCC all the way.

DCC can be forbidding to a startup guy as well as the old hand, in some cases. Many old MR’s have long torn down their old layout of the 90’s and rebuilt around the less copper filled 21st century form of model railroading. If we old guys have “kept up”, then the transition was only moderately painful to the brain and the wallet. We learned new skills

2

Honestly, your opening post seems a little … well, overwrought.

For me, and for many I know, DCC was a pretty painless transition. The trickiest bit can be decoder installation, but with more and more drop-in decoders and factory-equipped DCC, that issue is diminishing, even in N scale.

To graybeard and newbie alike, I would say, “Come on in, DCC is fine.”

3

DCC is indeed fine and I would have my current MR’ing no other way, but we all see, daily, the trials of others here. Many, often have an air of despondency in their post, but it is more frustration than disappointment, I think.

I wrote my post to find out what the most common complaints might be since few post here with anything but problems that need solving. And, this is not necessarily a bad thing…It is what we are here for…DCC/electronics issues

Richard

4

I will note that only those with problems post, and a good many of those problems are self-inflicted. Folks who don’t know what constitutes a reversing loop, for example, will have trouble with DC or DCC. A good introductory reference such as Basic DCC Wiring for Your Model Railroad: A Beginner’s Guide to Decoders, DCC Systems, and Layout Wiring would answer many of the questions seen here, but most fail to RTFB (Read The Fine Book). Others ignore the documentation that came with their DCC system.

Those for whom DCC went well don’t show up here, so there is a built-in bias.

5

For the moment, my feet is still firmly in both camps. DC at home; DCC on the HOn3 modules when used in a club setup.

There are several things that irritate me about DCC.

  • First is the attitude of many (but by no means all) DCC-only users. There seems to be a belief that modern (in terms of electronics and operating capabilities) model railroading started with DCC. The attitude that those DC dinosaurs couldn’t possibly appreciate or understand how great DCC is. Truth is that virtually all the capabilites of today’s DCC were available (albeit with considerable effort in some cases) to the interested model railroader before the Coming of DCC. Yes, automated routing, command control, radio control, incredible slow speed running, slow speed turnout motors, and even great sound were known and available before DCC appeared. What DCC did was bring these known capabilities and technologies (along with significantly higher locomotive prices) together to the average model railroader in the form of a couple of well-disguised programmable black boxes.

  • Second, the cost of DCC systems make many users brand-centric in an effort to justify the price they paid (or will pay). At the same time, this brand-centrism causes its users to overlook the drawbacks of their particular brand of DCC (they all have their own drawbacks). What is a very minor nuisance to some is a major drawback to others. Because of the brand-centrism, many looking for advice on their DCC selection get advice which does not account for individual priorities for their DCC system.

  • Third is the difficulty in getting a large group of modules built by a dozen or more individuals to work together properly under DCC control. It usually takes a couple of hours at every setup to get all modules working under DCC, regardless of DCC manufacturer. Even the club DCC experts get stumped by anamolies they don’t understand, a

6

This is an issue in a couple of other web forums I attend. No one wants to read anymore. It is a lost skillset for many of the youngest, especially. They want the answers dropped in their laps. It is just too much work, it seems. The same that simple to answer questions are repeatedly asked over and over again.

In answer to Fred. The assumption in my post was that the folks queried are in DCC, are paying the price and gaining the benefits of DCC operation and not whether DCC is good or bad. It is here and many people are in it to stay.

Still, for those old guys and the new guys…What were your key issues after leaping into DCC. (Assuming you did some homework like I did, prior to your leap)

Richard

7

Independent train control anywhere on a layout comprised of modules built independently by many different modelers would likely be even more difficult with DC, wouldn’t you say?

Not to say that DCC is perfect, but you are describing a demanding environment unlike what folks experience with home layouts.

8

I can’t say that there was much intimidation into the decision, or much difficulty in the transition. Mine was always about having a reason to switch. The desire for onboard sound prompted me to buy a DCC system. Operating it really doesn’t take much learning at all, even programming CV’s. But I tend to be the type of person that buys things to replace something that is broken, not necessarily to keep up. I only recently bought my first flat screen lcd/led TV w/in the past year because the tube on the old Sony finally gave up. Probably would not have considered a different operating system like DCC if it wasn’t for the newish feature of onboard sound.

I suppose the source of some frustration would lie in having to press too many buttons, especially when an errant finger presses a wrong one and you have to start over.

9

Admittedly, it was seeing and hearing Tsunami sound and the Blackstone HOn3 locos in action that dragged me back into MR in 2009 after a 15 year dry spell. I had always dreamed of an HOn3 layout since the 70’s. DCC was just a tag along rider to get at the sound. I had no great trial with DCC and certainly no issues with the soundtraxx decoder or the CV’s. By reading and in the doing, plowed into DCC with only a little gear grinding.

I am happy to let my 5 DC MRC II power packs, 30+ HO locos and 50 odd pieces of rolling stock of yesteryear, just rot in storage. No turning back now, except to remember an era where I had a lot of fun, but it’s nothing like the fun I am having now.

Richard

10

I totally agree that we have a very demanding environment, that none of the popular control systems (DC, DCC, proprietary) anticipated in their design and implementation. The real difference between trying to do a multiple builder modular setup in DC and DCC is the troubleshooting tools and knowledge - not the number of issues.

For DC trouble-shooting, a few multimeters will generally suffice. However, even with lots of pre-planning and the addition of extra wiring, DC will never be as flexible for operations in the modular setup environment as DCC. Which is why no modular group I know of still uses DC.

But troubleshooting digital circuits and links is not as easy. There are 2 separate signal links in DCC - track power and throttle bus/Loconet - and both must function correctly and simultaneously across multiple modules and wire couplings. The tools to accurately monitor the links are quite complex compared to a multimeter. Unfortunately, DCC track power has less tolerance for signal loss than DC.

Radio control has been seen as a solution to get rid of the

11

To be honest, I didn’t really have a “difficult” time with the transition from DC to DCC; nor was I worried about making the jump. I just had a willingness to learn, make mistakes, learn from my mistakes, and enjoy learning - which I still am in the process of doing.

I don’t have to get into the nitty-gritty of programming to enjoy the benefits of DCC. It is nice though to have the option - i.e. should I decide to wade into the deeper end of the pool on occasion. [:D]

Tom

12

I’m no greybeard (mainly because I shave every day…) but I was born before personal computers, though I did start young - I was 11 when the TRS-80 Model 1 came out, and I took to it instantly. I’ve always been inquisitive along those lines, my favorite toys (besides trains) were lego blocks and Erector sets, and any other sort of building toy - along with any number of those various X-in-1 electronic kits from Radio Shack.

So when I finally broke out of the DC world and bought by Zephyr - in reality the transition was extremely smooth. They day it and my first decoders arrived, I popped int he decoders (DH163L0 in a Proto 2000 Geep - so it took longer to take off the shell than install the decoder) and I wired it to my little test loop of Bachmann track and off I went.

–Randy

13

It has been a long time…a whole eight years ago. I honestly don’t remember the details well, but I do recall having to call Soundtraxx and asking them why a DSD-100LC wouldn’t run after I tried to programme it. I guess I did a Paged Mode, which Digitrax does with a power-off to the track. Or…whatever. I was stumped, but apart from forgetting a couple of times and having to go back to the manual, my Super Empire Builder (yes, Ye Olde Clunk) has been a robust, reliable, and most excellent joy and boon to my mrr experience.

I did start in DC with one of those Christmas themed On30 sets made by Bachmann. I was thrilled to have it after 46 years of no trains. Then, six months after retiring in 2004, I had an opportunity to vist an LHS, now closed, and I came away with a BLI TH&B Hudson modelled after the NYC 4-6-4. With sound. I had the DC controller, so I put it to good use for the first year. Then I purchased the lamentable EZ-DCC from Bachmann. Worked fine…no problems, but it was like a Porsche Targa with a Beetle engine in it. Meh.

I opted for a Digitrax SEB only because my LHS sold them and took back the EZ-DCC with that recommendation. The rest is a blur, but a pleasant one.

To close, my chief complaint with DCC and sound is that the sound decoders are mostly largely intolerant of poor pickup or dirty track. Fortunately, my stalls and sound drop-outs are attributable to track problems that I find and can fix, but eventually I would prefer to have decoders with keep-alive capacitors that are not huge and that can run about 1.5 seconds with disrupted power.

Crandell

14

The biggest issue I’ve seen in a conversion to DCC was the layout owner trying to change too many things at once, to the extreme frustration of everyone involved in running his layout.

In the subject case, the owner tried to implement DCC, radio throttles and prototypical amounts of throttle lag/momentum/manual braking in his locomotives simultaneously. This was on a layout that had been operating with a high degree of reliability for 20+ years. The layout was taken out of commission for several months while a number of the regular operators converted over 30 locomotives to DCC (and sound), and command stations and a throttle bus were installed.

The first dozen or so operating sessions following the conversion were extremely frustrating. The key issue was the crews trying to adapt to running with the large amounts of momentum effect the owner had set up in the decoders, while at the same time trying to identify and overcome radio reception dead spots. If a train didn’t move, it was difficult to figure out whether it was a radio issue or the operator not being patient enough.

Eventually it got sorted out by relocating the base radio receiver and its repeaters, through trial and error, so that there were no longer “doughnut hole” dead spots right where people would most often be standing while switching towns.

A far better approach would have been to sort out the radio reception issues first, then go and complicate things for the crews by programming momentum and braking effects into the decoders.

In this case, DCC itself was not the problem, rather it was the migration strategy.

15

Fred,

In Free-mo we have experienced similar issues with setup. I don’t think DCC manufacturers really had modular layouts in mind when it came to design and setup of their systems. I wrote an article of an advanced user’s perspective of time pretty much wasted at setups trying to setup DCC on a modular layout. http://free-mo.org/node/304

Compared to DC the DCC system takes 3-4 times longer to setup. We were using a multi-cab strategy in DC that literally plugged in and was ready to go. Not so with DCC. DCC requires a throttle/booster bus plugged in and debugged, then setting up the booster farm, then routing power cables from the booster farm to each power block and debugging polarity for each. Typically 3 hours for setting up throttle bus, 3 hours for setting up booster farm, 30 min to 45 min for setting up power cables to each block and debugging polarity. 6-7 hours out of the setup day is A LOT! With DC we were up and running trains within an hour. A very much simplified and basic control system, but it was fast to set up. Looking back, the promises of DCC were so great and the operational control (including radio, which has proved to be unreliable) was so alluring that we overlooked the actual implementation time and weigh it against the old reliable multi DC throttle system.

Fortunately in most permanent layout environments setting up a DCC system is a one time event. Also fortunately DCC seems to be moving towards convergence and multiple protocol systems mean you can run Lenz, Digitrax, NCE inte

16

Richard.

When I started down the DCC trail decoders were HUGE and quite expensive too. It was a great day when the first one amp micro decoder for under $50 came out. Getting those giant decoders to fit inside loco shells without removing all the weight was a pain.

I would really like to see someone come out with an interface where different manufactures of throttles can be used on the same layout. It would be nice to have only one throttle for the different layouts I visit and operate.

Pete

17

I was very interested in hearing about the issues common to modular setups with DCC. I know modules are a popular way to take the “road on the road”. Most DCC folks are single pike owners though.

My own large shelf layout is single user with no guest engineers planned and not a single loconet plug in anywhere yet. If I do put in a remote plug, there will be no IR and no radio used. Only a direct connection.

I know that one of the main points in DCC is multi-user, multicab, multitrain operation, but I still went with DCC as a single user due to the luxury of not having to run many feet of wire to switches from a control panel and allowing remote control over any thing on the layout via DCC off a single pair of buss wires. All my old HO layouts down through the many years had a lot of copper in them that I don’t want to have to string up and fiddle with. The Zephyr Extra with its little 3 amp supply is all I will ever need for over 150 feet of track, 5 engines and 12 turnouts.

Most of the programming issues I have seen posted here are related to new installs of sound decoders along with a few wiring issues and a lot of lighting issues that are mostly electrical issues. A certain amount of new, out-of-box issues with manufacturer installed oddball decoders also pop up.

I am lucky. I have installed two Tsunami sound decoders in old brass with out a hitch and, fortunately, learned all I needed to know about CV programming from the Tsunamis factory installed in all my Blackstone C-19s and K-27’s. Staying with one sound decoder helps smooth the DCC trip a bit.

Richard Hull

18

What about you guys?

Richard

Richard, do I count? I don’t use DCC at home, but I belong to a round robin group and have operated on a regular basis on a number of DCC layouts, some of which I even designed the track plan for and helped construct?

I have no problems with DCC technology, I was programing some of the first PLC’s used in industrial control way back in the 80’s. While I don’t see it as “fun”, there is nothing about those aspects of DCC that is, or would be a problem for me.

My problems with DCC are in line with Fred W and his comments - Fred has very good insight into these things, him and I are on the same page - even when we have different needs and different solutions.

The biggest problem with DCC, every brand to some degree or another, is poor user interface design. All the throttles are a pain to use - period.

And Fred is right, everyone avoids that topic to justify their commitment to the brand of their choosing.

The other basic problem with DCC is extra work and expense to solve problems that may not exist for every modeler and that may actually create problems where none existed before.

Short story is, DCC does not bring any features I need, and does not make the features I want (signaling, CTC, working interlocking, ATC) any easier to implement - so I don’t need it.

Sheldon

PS - I have said this before, but to be clear, if I was building a layout or a different size, with a different theme and operating scheme, for which the features of DCC would have some real advantage, I would likely be all in for DCC - or, if it was in a larger scale than HO, I would choose direct radio.

Example, if I was building a smaller layout, and planned for multi train operation, some sort of comand control would likely be desired.

And in a larger scale, with a simple theme layout, I would seriously consider sound.

19

[quote user=“fwright”]

I totally agree that we have a very demanding environment, that none of the popular control systems (DC, DCC, proprietary) anticipated in their design and implementation. The real difference between trying to do a multiple builder modular setup in DC and DCC is the troubleshooting tools and knowledge - not the number of issues.

For DC trouble-shooting, a few multimeters will generally suffice. However, even with lots of pre-planning and the addition of extra wiring, DC will never be as flexible for operations in the modular setup environment as DCC. Which is why no modular group I know of still uses DC.

But troubleshooting digital circuits and links is not as easy. There are 2 separate signal links in DCC - track power and throttle bus/Loconet - and both must function correctly and simultaneously across multiple modules and wire couplings. The tools to accurately monitor the links are quite complex compared to a multimeter. Unfortunately, DCC track power has less tolerance for signal loss than DC.

Radio control has b

20

Which system did you choose? Can you share some pictures of your locomotives showing the battery installations?