Anybody tried DCC and went back to DC?

Roger T. wrote:


Roger, you're wasting your time trying to get Greg to understand and acknowledge your point. He has a passing acquaintance with German safeworking, and mistakenly assumes that all railways throughout the world operate in the same way as his prototype. In his myopic view, *ANY* operation that doesn't conform to his criteria is just "slot cars"...
Cheers,
Mark.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark, old buddy, I've had DCC since you were in nappies.

Any layout where the total extent of operation is mindlessly running trains along a track is, IMHO, just "slotcar operation".
I've tried DCC - it doesn't add as much as it takes away from my style of operation, plus it costs far too much for an established hobbyist and loco collection.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Greg.P."

But you wrote: -
"Yes, I went back. I run a model railway, not individual slot cars on rails. ie the layout is not about driving individual trains around tracks but about numerous trains operating at once to give an impression of the way _railways_ operate."
You're contradicting yourself. How can "not driving individual trains" and "mindlessly running trains" be the same? They are two entirely different things.
-- Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the Great Eastern Railway http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My being perfect is in _your_ mind, not mine! ;-)
Actually, I'm not entirely sure in what way you see a contradiction.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Are you suggesting I should give up my model railway locomotives in favour of electronics components??? Why?
I am, and have been for the last 35 years, been building up a roster of locomotives to enable me to run almost anything that ran on my prototype railway 1918-32. Why would I want to reduce that roster in favour of a control system that can't achieve all that my present one does?
You aren't making any sense.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg.P. wrote:
> >> >>> I've tried DCC - it costs far too much for an established >>> hobbyist and loco collection. >> >> LOL! And what, the loco collection cost nothing? >> > Are you suggesting I should give up my model railway locomotives in > favour of electronics components???
I'm suggesting that the cost of DCC is a subjective figure. You knew that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's a very large figure that would need to come out of my wallet. Figure 100 locos at circa $60- each, plus a control system and hand-helds; we've reached $7000- without any change. Fitting the decoders would be a year's work, setting the CVs another year ... Five years after starting, technology would have moved so far that I would be compelled to replace all the decoders. Meanwhile, I would have a control system that wouldn't do what I need of it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bullshit! What a crock of rubbish!
Regards, Obnoxious Pratt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Maybe he went a little overboard on the time needed but for someone else that has on that order a number of locos (when you can claim to have much of the railroad you're modelling types you generally have a lot of locos, especially when you can claim several of one class AND also be able to do that iwth diesels!) then the cost of adding decoders is a major issure. Those of you that are running 5-10 locos don't see the expense involved. I'd rather walk into a club layout in some strange town and not be able to run my locos because of them being DCC than to try and convert a DCC loco to DC for an operating session on a DC layout. BTW, what do the really large layouts use? DC or DCC? Also, what happens to a layout when a good 100 locos are all running at a time? As far as sound is concerned, it is easy to do sound on a DC layout. It is, however, a bit expensive if you buy the commercial equipment as there aren't that many sold and thus the price is high. I've heard excellent sound from locos 30 years ago with the PFM sound system and it is a simple system ot implement - just mix the sound with the track power through a transformer and pick it up in the loco with a cap to drive the speaker.
-- Yeppie, Bush is such an idiot that He usually outwits everybody else. How dumb!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You have to have a pretty old, or strange, decoder that won't run on DC.

What is a really large layout? The club I belong to has a 15'x100' layout. With DC we are limited to 6 cabs. With DCC we have run 8 trains on the main (it's a pretty busy dispatcher at that point) and some switching in the three primary yards. So we probably don't qualify as a really large layout?

Dunno! Depends on what features the locos have, if they are all BLI sound equipped you need lots of power districts (boosters). We just upgraded to the 5 AMP boosters because we found that two 4 engine (all BLI w/sound) trains (with all the lighted and sound cars) drew too much power for the old <4 AMP boosters.
Paul
--
The lotto must be rigged, I should have won by now.
Modular furniture is cruel and unusual.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'll take that as an obnoxious insult from an ignorant and uninformed bnoxious ratt.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are not one to speak of uninformed, as little as you know. I don't believe you even have a complete knowledge of how your prototype of choice operates. I think you just make it up as it suits you. You are clearly uninformed on railway workings around the rest of the world. It remains to be determined by someone better qualified than you whether I am ignorant or not. Obnoxious? Yes. That is deliberate, but ignorant? Hardly.
Regards, Obnoxious Pratt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm qualified to declare you ignorant.

See, you don't even know that you're ignorant!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Model railways is my _hobby_.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're not the greatest when it comes to thinking, are you!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah yeah, playing drivers is a different hobby to modelling and operating a railway.

We're accusing each other of the same thing. ;-) You're playing engine driver in isolation - I'm playing railway operation.

I don't believe the set-up time is greatly different between the two systems. - I cut the rail and wire in a $1 toggle switch, or equivalent. (in my case a 78p relay) - you spend hundreds/thousands of dollars on DCC control systems and decoders with a maximum of 5 year life before replacement, and then spend many hours milling chassis and soldering in decoders, more hours setting up CVs and posting queries to news groups asking why ... - I click on the section of track on the diagram I want switched off. - you look up stock tables to find loco addresses, input numerous numbers and settings and memorise totally non-prototypical strings of commands to cause your locos to co-operate with one another and a hand controller. - I click a single switch to link block and controller to run the train.

Unless your track and turnouts move along with the train, why would you need a mobile control position for them? ;-)
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Greg.P."

Greg, do you really have a grasp on what North American prototypical operation is all about? From your comments, I think not. My crew are not "playing driver", if anything, from what I gather, that's what you do. You run multiple passenger units from station to station. Now that's "playing driver".
My crews, and the crews on other layouts I have operated on, move freight and passengers using car-cards and waybills. The CC&WBs give routings and it's up to the crews, as in real life, to forward those cars in the most expeditious manner using the trains available. Some trains operate to a time-table, usually just the passengers, but almost all the freight is run as extras.
On the layouts I have operated, nobody is "playing engine driver in isolation". We are all part of the railway, moving passengers and freight in a logical and realistic manner all co-ordianted by a dispatcher and yardmaster(s). Our trains interchange with each other and we need to conduct meets and sometimes passes in order for the whole railway to run efficiantly.

Nope, just enter the engine number into the throttle and away we go. BTW, you need to catch up a bit. There's no need to mill any chassises these days, the decoders are small enough to fit in almost anything. They all fit easily into all 50 odd of my locos.

As do I but you play trains. I run a railroad.

Because all my operators and the same on other model railways I have operated, walk around the room following the train they are controlling. We don't have central control panels where the operator remains all the time, we follow our trains and line the switches as required, right at the switch, just like the prototype. Big central control panels went out with the dinosaur, even when I used straight DC I had walk around panels. I've never built a single model railway with a central control panel. Not in the UK and not when I moved to Canada. And I built first layout as a teenager around 1962 or so. I've always used remote panels and walk-around controls.
At best, we have a local panel (Which these days is more a track diagram than a control panel) at various stations, yards and junctions, that may have a few toggle switches that can isolate a track or two, if that's required. I still use on/off toggles in engine yards and staging tracks for example, so as to prevent accidental operation of locomotives and or trains in these locations. After all, humans make mistakes and it's possible for an operator to dial up engine No.118 instead of engine No.119 where engine No.118 is in staging. This could have disastrous results. :-)
Anyway, you continue to play trains with your roundy-go-roundy multiple units and I'll continue to operate the Great Eastern in a prototypical manner.
-- Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the Great Eastern Railway http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think I have a reasonable grasp of the subject, after all I've read most that's been written about the subject over the last 60 years.
My crew are not

So driving trains is not playing driver???
You

You're saying that running one train is not playing driver but running multiple trains is???
I would consider it "playing signalman".

Sure, that's a reasonable way to play, assuming that's what your prototype did or does.

So you can't play "dispatcher" or "yardmaster" etc if you operate alone. I can.
Our trains interchange with each other and we need to

Great, _but_ your operation is entirely dependant upon your having sufficient individual locomotive operators to run each individual train. That's a very definite restriction of either your system or DCC.

You need (as would I) the locomotive number to be able to do that. Hence my comment of look-up tables.
BTW,

I have a collection of locos from the 1970s through to 2006, as do most modellers who have been in the hobby that long. Many are modified etc so I'm not going to bin the lot, even if the prototypes I want were available off the shelf.

You drive trains - I run a railway. (model :-)

So localized turnout control would do the job perfectly!?!

Sounds like you don't know your railroad's operating system!
Big central control panels went out with

Model or prototype???
even when I used straight DC I had walk around panels. I've

You're suggesting the UK doesn't have centralized traffic control???

So we do agree that DCC has limitations better served by block control.

I think we've both just realised that you don't do that!
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It doesn't sound like you do.

Well, we are all "playing", are we not?

Perhaps, but we run our trains as there is, in many cases, no such thing as a "signalman". If we do have signalling systems, then it CTC and it's ilk and that's controlled by a dispatcher who (usually) controls 120 plus miles of track. Even without signalling, he'll still control 120 plus miles of track.

It does. As do all North American railways other than transit systems.

So can I when I operate alone.

It's not a "restriction", it's how we chose to operate our trains, everyone of them controlled by a human. No automation, no mindless roundy-go-roundy.

I/we don't look up tables, I/we look at the locomoitve and read the number from there. :-)

No, I run a railway that has a purpose and moves passengers and freight for a reason.

All my switches are hand operated, at the switch, interlocking, no signals, switch motors etc., etc..

Come on, don't be stupid.

Model.
No I'm not. I said that's what I did. I didn't mention anything else.

No more than DC has under exactly the same circumstances. "WHO HAS MY TRAIN?" Heard frequently with DC block control systems.

Geeze, I operate with time-table and train orders and use car-cards and waybills to generate freight. Obviously Greg, you don't have a clue what you are talking about otherwise you wouldn't be making a stupid statement such as that. I know more about prototype operation than you'd think, from two continents. I've worked for BR in the UK, as a 16 year old fireman and for a railway in Canada out of Montreal.
Now, lets hear about your railway experience.
-- Cheers
Roger T.
Home of the Great Eastern Railway http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra / You really don't have a clue how real railways work, at least in North America.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roger T. wrote:
>>> Greg, do you really have a grasp on what North American >>> prototypical operation is all about? From your comments, I think >>> not. > >> I think I have a reasonable grasp of the subject, after all I've >> read most that's been written about the subject over the last 60 >> years. > > It doesn't sound like you do.
Of course Greg doesn't have a reasonable grasp of the subject . In previous exchanges he's displayed a profound ignorance of North American prototype operations. And when he's called on it he either acts the outraged innocent, or claims that railroads "couldn't possibly operate in such a fashion as described".
>>> Anyway, you continue to play trains with your roundy-go-roundy >>> multiple units and I'll continue to operate the Great Eastern in >>> a prototypical manner. >> >> I think we've both just realised that you don't do that! > > Geeze, I operate with time-table and train orders and use car-cards > and waybills to generate freight. Obviously Greg, you don't have a > clue what you are talking about otherwise you wouldn't be making a > stupid statement such as that. I know more about prototype operation > than you'd think, from two continents. I've worked for BR in the UK, > as a 16 year old fireman and for a railway in Canada out of Montreal. > > > Now, lets hear about your railway experience.
He has *none*. And yet he the effrontery to continually tell those who *do* have professional operating experience that they don't know what they're talking about.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.