Yet another "what were they thinking" from someone who wants to be a DCC alternative

Model Railroader Electronics and DCC
1

In the September MR (yes, I already got and read mine - digital subscriber!), the review the LocoFi system. It’s direct WiFi control, the decoders can take power from batteries, DC, or DCC, so you can use this alongside DCC. Sounds good so far. Right now, they only have an app for Android, not IOS, so I’m already out. In the article they mention the huge flaw - their lated decoder has an 8 pin socket matching the NMRA DCC 8 pin connector - which might sound great at first, making it ewasy to connect. But they blew it - on their decoder, the function wires are positive and the commin is negative - exactly opposite the DCC standard! So you can’t just plug these in to a loco that has LED lights. How on earth can you make that msitake? Granted, MTH does the same, but they aren’t trying to make a product that plugs in to existing sockets to easily convert a loco.

Their web site reveals additional details. These decoders have sound., Well, as stated on their weeb site - 8 bit, 3 channel sound. Making it the equivalent of the Loksound 3.5 and the original 8 bit Digitrax sound decoders of the early 2000’s. My feeling is, if you are going to market a product against the current defacto standard, you need to be at least as good as the current products, and if you’re going to use a compatible connector - make it electrically compatible as well, or people are going to be confused when their lights don’t work. Given that the MSRP of an equivalent 8 bit sound Digitrax decoder is half the price of one of these - it’s gonna be an uphill battle.

–Randy

2

They are probably targeting those who believe that DCC systems cost a fortune and that they’ll have to convert every locomotive they have immediately.

So they can sell something that is like DCC but isn’t DCC. They just omit that their product is lightyears behind what a current DCC decoder is capable of, and incompatible with the wiring of the lighting in a typical locomotive today.

Being proprietary, it is all good until the maker loses interest in supporting the product or the software.

3

the power to the LEDs is backwards ??

so they aren’t NMRA compatible …

seems kinda useless??

4

Well first off, I’m not interested in anything that uses a smart phone as a throttle, so that leaves me out.

And plug/polarity thing is stupid beyond stupid.

But DCC is expensive and you do have to convert all your locomotives if you plan to actually run them. I don’t have any shelf queens, I don’t have 20 locos and a shelf layout…

I have 140 powered units, I’m about ready to start a new layout that will fill 1500 sq ft, support the operation of 8 trains at the same time, and stage 30 trains.

It takes most of those 140 locos to “protect the schedule”.

I still run DC, I have no interest in sound, and no use for ditch lights, consisting, etc.

I have wireless radio throttles with pulse width modulated motor control. I have CTC, detection and signaling fully intergrated with my turnout controls and I use an Advanced Cab Control system that makes the operator experiance much the same as DCC, especially with a dispatcher on duty.

Why I am on this little rant?

Because your opening line, and to some degree, your whole post is condescending to those who have decided not to use DCC.

You are saying this product is aimed at the “stupid” people who have not gone DCC.

How much are 10 DCC wireless throttles and 140 decoders? My system did not cost that much.

And I have CTC,

5

Sheldon,

Sometimes I think you go looking for threads with the intent of finding “something” to be offended at - real or imagined. You are reading an entirely different book than I am in betamax’s response. [:S] Yes, get some sleep.

Tom

6

Sheldon,
You know he didn’t say “stupid” yet you put it in quotes as if he said it. That’s not right, man.

And he’s correct in that there are some people think that DCC costs a fortune, yet a good starter system costs the same as one Athearn Genesis SDP40F without DCC or sound.

We’ve debated many times the cost of your DC system, and IIRC you got your relays and other electronics at incredibly low prices, correct? Hardly a fair comparison. And BTW, DCC can have Automatic Train Stop, so you’re incorrect about that one. It’s not easy nor widespread, but then neither are detection and working signals that are needed to make it work in the first place.

Is DCC right for everyone? No. Is it right for you? Absolutely not. Is DCC the best solution for the majority of model railroaders? Well, I think the market has spoken on that with a resounding, “Yes!”

FWIW, on my old 25’ x 50’ layout, the full retail value of my DCC system was just under $1200, plus the cost of my DCC decoders at $20 each for 30 engines. Of course, I did not pay that; it was at least 20% off that price. So I was probably out of pocket just under $1500 for a Zephyr, a radio receiver, 3 radio throttles, 5 panel plugs and 30 decoders. Better still, my club friends would bring their own throttles that worked with my system, so I could easily have 7 more engineers and it didn’t cost me a dime. Yes, $1500 sounds like a lot, but not when you consider that I also bought $1500 worth of turnouts and $1000 of flextrack.

Best part is that my entire layout worked with just two 14AWG wires under the 200’ long double track mainline (with 22AWG feeders every 9 feet) and a 6-conductor flat telephone cable behind the fascia. And that’s it.

7

Paul, I know that you can do ATC with DCC, for me it is a free feature built into the design of the cab control and would work without the detection or signaling, it requires no extra cost or effort.

While I bought some of the relays on the secondary market, many were purchased new, bulk, directly from a manufacturer/importer, as well as my lighted push buttons. I also had relay boards custom manufactured.

Where DCC gets expensive is decoders for larger fleets of locomotives, you had 30, I have 130. Even at $20, that is big additional expense - and that is one of the main things I am offended by when this comes up - the idea that I should/could do with less locos so that I can have DCC. $2000 buys a lot of wire and widgets.

Because I don’t/have not bought locos with sound and DCC, and only bought a few with DCC only, the cost of my sizeable loco fleet is pretty low - dollar cost average about $100 each. And it is all nice stuff, Proto, Genesis, BLI, Spectrum, Intermountain, etc.

Do you know how many times someone has said to me “you don’t have to convert all you locos at once” - if I had a dollar…

My investment in track is similar to yours.

You had three throttles, I have, and would want/need 8-10 throttles. I get the buddy thing with the extra throttles. Not something I would rely on. I can display run six trains at once. I like display running as much as “operation”. Guess I need my 10 throttles so I can have a few people working the yards while trains display run on the main.

Like so many people consider sound and/or DCC essential, I consider detection and signaling essential.

I completely agree DCC is the best choice for most people, and most people have no interest or ambition for signaling or CTC. Many people have no interest in display or casual running, I do. Different goals, different needs.

Most of my “wiring” is done on the work bench. My double track mainline on the new layout will

8

I used to feel the same until I saw/heard Kato’s sound system for their DC throttle set-up. The Smart Phone throttle worked good, and it solves my desire for a wireless throttle and a good sound system I can run through a 100 watt amp with a sub-woofer.

Sound that sounds real, can shake the room, a wireless throttle… and no locomotive modifications.

They have a sound card that goes with my Kato NW-2, so that is convenient.

Of course, my train room is small enough that a stationary powerful sound system makes better sense for me than on-board sound.

I am sold.

-Kevin

9

Kevin,

Good sound, one train, intimate viewing of that one train, I might be all in for sound.

But that does not satisfy my other modeling goals.

6-8 trains moving at once, no matter how low the volume, or how big the space, just turns into a din to my ears, especially when you throw in some humans trying to talk over it all.

If I wanted the one train intimate experiance, I would model 1/4" two rail.

Sheldon

10

There was a sort of cottage industry in DCC alternatives back when DCC was pretty firmly entrenched but the decoders still had to be separately installed and few if any locomotives came DCC equipped. I think as long as there are garage tinkerers there will be ideas and systems floated that have their positive points and maybe even genuine improvements and some curious customers will buy in, but it is tough to dislodge a proven and accepted method which has become entrenched.

One that interested me at the time was an outfit called Signal Research which was DC and block control but a system which supposedly “learned” your layout and assigned power to blocks (and turned it off to other blocks) more or less automatically. So if I understood it correctly the array of toggle switches would not be needed - a “black box” took care of everything, all the blocks.

There were several threads about it at the time on these Forums, one of which is this one

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/3657.aspx

I read everything I could get on the subject of the Signal Research Trainmaster (it was reviewed in Model Railroader but the review was sketchy and it was not clear from reading it that the reviewer had actually installed it on a layout) and contacted the company via email but I could never get a straight clear answer to some pretty basic quetions, one of which was, OK if this is a DCC alternative just how do multiple operators run multiple trains?

I have been around long enough to recognize that DCC is highly unlikely to be the “last” power/control system in model railroading, any more than the compact disc proved to be the last word in recorded sound (despite claims at the time that it would be). A buddy of mine has gone whole hog into RailPro and extols its superiority to DCC at every opportunity (before that he was into RailLynx and Dynatrol). I hope for his sake that RailPro exists as long as

11

Sheldon,
I had to take down my layout because it was in the basement of my parent’s bookstore. After 25 years of ownership, my folks decided to retire and close the business in 2014. The bookstore basement was a former commericial space, too, so was well lit, had HVAC, and about 90% finished with a tile floor, drywalled, etc. (the back corner didn’t have a ceiling). I always knew I’d lose the space someday, but I knew that for years I would have a great layout space and it seemed foolish to waste it.

I still have every wood piece of my layout; all the wood is stacked inside my shed at home, and all my track is stored in the basement. But I don’t want to build a layout in my basement due to the dirt floor cellar and fieldstone foundation, and while I do have an nice upstairs attic that can turned into a layout room, it’s full of 80 years worth of family stuff.

Besides, I’m still a member of one of the largest model railroad clubs in the USA, the South Shore Model Railway Club in Hingham, Mass. with our 10,000 sq. ft. building. If I didn’t have the club, I would totally feel the pressure to build a layout again.

12

In computing terms DCC is already seriously outdated. The NMRA standard has proved to be a double edged thing, as these standards often turn out to be.

Using Function keys isn’t even convenient for actual computer work. DCC still requires some understanding of the concept of programming at the level of the bit.

It isn’t necessary now to run power as an AC mimic and the control signal as DC piggybacked on the same wires.

Each locomotive only needs a variable DC voltage throttle and wireless link. The rest of the DCC control software isn’t necessary at all.

The iPhone throttle is just the thin edge of this technology wedge. The problem is the heavy financial investment made when NMRA governed DCC got started in the 90’s which, unfortunately, could not look far enough down the road at that time. Changing over to bluetooth or Wifi LAN software now would be very expensive but ideal. Recall that the Windows 95 era is contemporaneous with the currently valid NMRA DCC…

13

EDIT: for future readers going through this thread, the initial premise was that LocoFi was using ‘the same’ 8-pin connector as NMRA standard DCC. They subsequently comment in this thread (about 6 pages in) that their connector is NOT NMRA plug-compatible … by that, I assume they mean it will not mechanically fit; that the connector tracking is different, and the two will not mate. This should be confirmed by the reader before they get further into the trash and treasure that the rest of this discussion holds…

Can you explain what this sentence means as written?

Meanwhile, in my opinion, a proper ‘replacement’ for DCC, whether dead-rail-based or not, needs to follow the Vail model of evolution in the Bell system as it evolved. Relatively simple overlays, glue logic, and emulation can provide compatibility with the great mass of older equipment and know how, and it will run even if no more than thunked in a corner of what a modern ultra-low-power processor and radio setup provides. That in turn allows different paradigms of operation to work – as preferences – on a newer system.

Some of us want the locomotive to accelerate as soon as throttled up, others (including ESU) only when the prototype has ‘developed power’ to move the train. This shouldn’t be a global setting, but it should likewise provide a locomotive owner no surprises when he plunks his programmed engine on any layout as a guest. To make a complex system ‘just work’ like a competent walled garden takes much more than careful programming… but we’ve learned quite a bit since Win95 was deprecated.

One thing that will be interesting is DC compatibility; another will be to see if the not-too-difficult ‘fix’ for using both kinds of 5e four-pair Ethernet cables interchan

14

Lastspikemike,
Yes, DCC is old tech. In fact, it’s older then you think. It started back in 1989 with Bernard Lenz and Marklin, was investigated by Stan Ames in 1992, and was proposed as an NMRA Standard in 1993. Which means it’s more equivalent to an IBM 486 running Windows 3.1.

I use computer keyboard function keys all the time when I’m using programs that use them.

You don’t need to know bit programming for DCC. That’s why they have charts. In 20 years of using DCC, I have never added up bits to figure out, say, CV29 values beause I use the chart.

You said, "It isn’t necessary now to run power as an AC mimic and the control signal as DC piggybacked on the same wires."

Um, no. That’s not how DCC works. It’s a square wave AC signal, with the length of the wave determining if it’s a 0 bit or a 1 bit. With DCC, the power is the signal. DC is not piggybacked on anything.

Each locomotive only needs a variable DC voltage throttle and wireless link. The rest of the DCC control software isn’t necessary at all.

What about lights, sounds, and functions like brakes?

Personally, I don’t like touch screen controls for a throttle. If I have to look at the throttle to control my train, it isn’t worth it for me. I use a switcher way too often, and I want to watch my train couple up to another car or spot a car to be constantly looking at my touchscreen throttle.

15

Not to me, it wouldn’t. I’m with Paul. I can operate the speed steps of my “outdated” Power Cab throttle without even looking at the buttons…AND one-handed. I couldn’t do that with a touchscreen throttle.

Advancements in technology don’t always make for improved MRRing experience.

Tom

16

Same here, DC, DCC or whatever, no touch screens for me. It needs to be one handed without looking at it.

I can hold my Aristo Train Engineer wireless throttle in one hand and speed up, slow down, change direction, and apply the emergency stop without ever looking at the throttle.

A touch screen device would be a step backward in terms of ease of use.

If you are guest operator on my layout, and we have a dispatcher on duty, your user experience is easier than DCC. I hand you a throttle and say there is your train.

The throttle has five buttons, easy to identify by feel - FASTER, SLOWER, EAST, WEST, EMERG STOP.

You just make your train go and obey the signals.

The dispatcher sets your route and clears your signals.

All done with “old school” tech…

Sheldon

17

You know, I KNOW how Progressive Cab Control with relays works. Not only did I read all the MR articles on it from back in the 50s and 60s, I was a member of MIT’s Tech Model Railroad Club for seven years, and they implemented PCC on their layout.

It is neither simple nor easy. If Sheldon has the knowledge to implement it, good for him. But to push it as something any modeler can do is just errant nonsense. It’s like saying to play the flute you blow in one end and move your fingers up and down.

18

First of all, I know what Progressive Cab Control is too, and that is not what I use.

I use a CTC/TOWER CONTROL version of MZL Control developed by Ed Ravenscroft, and partly based on Bruce Chubb’s original relay based signals and CTC, adapted by me for use with Aristo wireless throttles (or any similar base station radio throttle).

The system uses a number of different ideas suggested by Ravenscroft, Malory and others to provide a simple user interface for DC.

There are no block toggles, turnout control is “one button” route control, which automatically routes track power correctly thru interlockings, reducing the number of block command inputs by half.

It allows full walk around operation by operators with no more buttons or switches than DCC with track side turnout controls.

OR, it provides a complete CTC experiance with a dispatcher on duty.

Cabs are correctly and automatically connected to the proper route with the push of one button to clear the next signal to green.

If an operator runs a red signal, his train simply stops, he will not enter trackage controlled by another throttle.

The Aristo Train Engineer wireless throttle provide smooth speed control using the same pulse width modulation technology as is that used by a DCC decoder.

Turnout and cab

19

i looked at both when i was making my layout, 15ft by 16ft …

DCC was less work AND less money, sold!

20

My layout is planned for several different operating schemes to maximize play value.

One of these schemes is simply a single switch locomotive, like the NW-2, working the car float. That is when I would use the Kato sound system.

At other times, it would not be appropriate.

I have a 4 pole 3 throw break-before-make rotary switch to select which throttle set-up controls the local. It can be Kato wirless, panel control, or tethered walk-around.

For different operating schemes different controls would be appropriate.

-Kevin