So, which is it, now or later? 
I vote for earlier. 
2 Likes
So when I asked this question, I was not just asking about products or technology.
But also about philosophy, mind set, types of interests, personal modeling goals. What do you find fun about the hobby?
Is there a lot of common ground between modelers or not so much anymore?
I will share one specific personal view about my own modeling. While I have embraced some aspects of the technological revolution in the hobby over the last 25-30 years, it has had only a minor effect or influence on my interests and goals.
In fact, I tried building a double deck shelf layout 20 years ago and found it was not for me before it was ever fully operational.
So I have returned to building a more traditional layout like many of those built in the 60âs or 70âs and before, despite the typical criteriums from others about such layouts.
Sheldon
1 Like
I am building a small clockwork operated garden railway. Is that earlier? 
1 Like
but who else understands and uses such an approach?
arenât you the sole proponent because itâs complicated, requires much more electrical circuitry, requires more planning and any changes require resoldering or adding components (i.e. relays) instead of simply reprogramming?
and havenât all those features in that long list been supported in various other ways.
mayeb thereâs more feeders, but they are just to a common track bus, not back to a panel with switches connecting the block to a particular throttle
my partially completed layout has just one feeder to the mainline and one feeder to a manually controlled reversing section. And DCC allows 2 operators running on the same mainline
using relay technology is NOT where âthe hobby is goingâ.
3 Likes
I donât think that anybody knows where the hobby is going until we get there.
By then it will have advanced further on.
using relays is where the hobby has been already. are you suggesting the hobby might move backwards?
relay logic was abandoned for digital logic 50 years ago
1 Like
Hate to hear that. There is a couple of others that are closer to you. Rail Tales in Charlottesville is a pretty good shop. There is also a small one on Beverly Street in Staunton- they do primarily plastic models but have been adding trains since the other one in Staunton closed. Great selection of paints though. While there there is a nice train booth in the Factory Antique Mall in Verona just north that has quite a bit plus there are a couple of others that have a few trains.
This brings up a thought- how many hobby shops are there out there that people are not aware of?? The same goes for Model Railroad Clubs. At one point MR had a listing of clubs here- it has been inactive and âcoming soonâ for forever- when Kalambach owned it they kind of blew off questions about it. The same for show listings. Why not let people submit club info and even hobby shop info? The more that is known about the better for the hobby. For those that travel it would be a great resource.
Jim
Greg,
I agree completely. But your approach is just as complicated to people who donât understand programing or know how to write code, etc.
Just complicated in a different way.
I never said my approach is the future of the hobby, I was simply responding to Mr Wood and his comment âfactually untrueâ. It fact I said âI donât expect anyone to do what I doâ.
Despite that a well known custom layout builder just recently build a layout for a client with a solid state version of my system for a client who wanted to stay with DC control. So I guess I am not the sole proponent.
Just because hooking up buss feeders is mind numbing repetitive work does does not make it somehow less work - 1000 wire termination is 1000 wire terminations - at least to someone with my skills and experience.
A layout the size of yours should only need one feeder with DCC. 1600 feet of track is a different story.
My operators can run 8 trains on my 420â continuous double track mainline at the same time⌠Yes they have to stay in the blocks assigned and obey the signals.
The prototype goes to great effort to prevent two trains from occupying the same space at the same time - a prototype practice I like.
As mentioned above, a large custom layout was just built with the same type of controls.
Lots of people used similar approaches long before DCC was developed. And you could buy a couple copies of MR or RMC and get complete instructions on how to build Ed Ravenscroftâs MZL Control or Bruce Chubbâs integrated cab control and three color signal system.
I just added some features including wireless throttles and a walk around cab assignment process suggested by Paul Mallery way back in the 60âs.
Then I developed an integrated turnout control system that allows the same turnout to be controlled from multiple locations and only requires one traveler wire per turnout position. And that turnout control system directs track power and provides interlocking signal logic.
And I simplified the wiring by decentralizing the hardware, putting each group of hardware close to its field connections.
You may like not having control panels, thatâs fine. if I was building a layout like yours I might be OK with no control panels, and may very well choose DCC.
But I donât have any interest in solely building a layout that is primarily switching.
My interlockings need towers, my operators need a dispatcher (or two). I donât want computer screens for panels or cell phones for throttles.
No matter what others are doing.
Sheldon
Greg, your layout choice is one example of where the hobby might be going.
A simple, smaller, easier to build approach. That is actually much more popular today, even among skilled experienced modelers, than it once was.
Many layouts back in the day tried to selectively compress a lot of railroad in to the available space. The trend is away from that thinking.
Even my own layout, at 1400 sq ft only tries to model a stretch of mainline passing thru a single small city, using staging to simulate the rest of the ATLANTIC CENTRAL and the world beyond.
But flat industrial scenery does not do it for me. And only modeling the 200â around the Right of Way does not do it for me. And only switching cars and running local freights does not do it for me.
50 car mainline freights and 12 car passenger trains do it for me.
This is what I think is more important than the latest electronicsâŚ
Sheldon
iâm advocating that there are commerical processor based approaches that most modelers use today. iâm not advocating developing your own hardware using processors. But is seems you are advocating that your approach is much better than todays commercial products.
DCC doesnât require multiple feeders. As I said i have just 2 feeders.
It seems that youâre suggesting using DCC requires numerous feeders that complicate track wiring. It doesnât, just like your approach
are you suggesting this is unique to your approach?
are you suggesting this is unique to your approach?
why do you think duplicating logic hardware insteadl of using a single processor and just using remote I/O connected (C/MRI) with a simple 2-wire bus is simpler?
it doesnât need to be a PC, could be a smaller processor like an esp32 that also support WiFi
iâm sure most layouts require them for this purpose as well, but it doesnât mean that they need to be screens. Remote I/O: switches, detectors, siwtch machines and LEDs can be cotrolled by processors that are easily reprogrammed and expanded
you say that alot
but you seem very focused on your electrical control system
1 Like
Greg, you are reading a bunch into what I say that is not there.
Never said my approach was better for anyone but me,
Without soldered rail joints large DCC layouts generally need lots of feeders.
Iâm not any more focused on my control system than you are on the work you have done for various clubs. I just made the point that exceot for smaller layouts the two wire DCC claim is false and if you want signaling it has similar wiring requirements to advanced DC systems.
Mr Wood took exception to that, I replied.
As for what I have interest in, I was âwell rounded until I learned what I really likeâ.
I never said my way is simpler, you are tring to put words in my mouth. In fact I said that both ways are complex, just in different ways. Both ways require wires to each device.
Change is not an issue for me, my house is not a club run by committee. I am very unlikely to make many changes. Reread the âwell roundedâ statement.
Sheldon
Not at all. What I am saying is that the answer to the question requires pure speculation because no one definitely knows the answer.
Exactly. The hobby is in constant motion. It is not static.
I guess that the answer to your question is . . .
. . . forward.
then you can say almost anything. (including whatâs already been done)
it seems most of the comments are about whatâs already been done. Batteries and direct radio control (e.g. Blunami) have been implemented but are not popular.
i asked what are the todayâs shortcomings? some are technological, size, but i believe most are economical or ease of contruction (totally wireless, as youâve said).
And many have already . . .said anything, that is . . . because no one knows exactly where the hobby is going.
Look. Can we all agree that there are many different ways to wire a railroad? Thereâs my relay-based hybrid computer RCC, thereâs ATLANTIC_CENTRALâs âsuper DCââalso with relays, thereâs DCC itself, thereâs the possibility of battery power, and about five million other systems. Iâve been working on a railroad (sadly, Iâve been hired to dissasemble it) that was more or less completely automated with relays and the like! None of these is perfect for everyone. Both RCC and âsuper DCâ are electrically complicated, as is (perhaps to a lesser extent, depending upon the specifics) DCC. Battery power, if it would even be a viable option (that remains to be seen), is not ready yet except, perhaps, in the largest scales.
And richhotrainâs right: we canât know for certain where model railroading is headed. But we do know that it will undoubtedly change as time goes on.
1 Like
This is starting to get philosophical. What moves the hobby forward is innovation, the process of creating value by implementing new ideas, products or processes to solve problems and improve performance. One way to come at this is to work backwards. What has been the most recent innovation in the hobby?
I came across a relatively recent article that listed 20 innovations that changed model railroading, ranging from Kadee couplers to flex track to DCC and everything in between.
It reminded me of Neil Armstrongâs now famous quote, âOne small step for man, one giant leap for mankindâ. In that list of 20, the rise of DCC was a giant leap and Kadee couplers an important but small step in the advancement of the hobby.
So, I suppose that DCC has been among the most recent and most significant innovations in the hobby. Letâs say that is the most recent and significant innovation. What preceded it? It does seem like technology leads the way, certainly more significant than innovations like hobby paints and water slide decals which were also in that list of 20.
My layout is DC and I run it with two MRC packs but if I want to run it with a battery I just turn a nine v battery up side down on to the rails and their she goes.
1 Like