Anybody tried DCC and went back to DC?

Thanks Stein. However I would direct your attention to the subject line, which is what I have been attempting to comment on.
DCC fell short of my requirements, but apparently I'm not allowed to mention the shortcomings of the religion of DCC or the wroth of it's zealots is brought to bear on me.
Regards, Greg.P.
PS I also operate "switching" moves etc in addition to watching trains run by. My whole point is to have as many forms of operation open to me as possible so that I can take on any railway role I feel inclined at any given moment to tackle.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg.P. wrote:
> Thanks Stein. However I would direct your attention to the subject > line, which is what I have been attempting to comment on. DCC fell > short of my requirements, but apparently I'm not allowed to mention > the shortcomings of the religion of DCC or the wroth of it's zealots > is brought to bear on me.
You cop a flogging because you're a liar who deliberately distorts and misrepresents the facts to support your position, and then post futher distortions when you get called on it, nothing more.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'd be very interested to know how you reach that conclusion!
who deliberately distorts and

You can quote facts that I have distorted?
and then post futher

I'm sure you can back your accusations, otherwise you have just shown yourself to be a foul mouthed liar.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg.P. wrote:
> > >> Greg.P. wrote: >> >>> Thanks Stein. However I would direct your attention to the >>> subject line, which is what I have been attempting to comment on. >>> DCC fell short of my requirements, but apparently I'm not allowed >>> to mention the shortcomings of the religion of DCC or the wroth >>> of it's zealots is brought to bear on me. >> >> You cop a flogging because you're a liar > > I'd be very interested to know how you reach that conclusion!
You attribute comments and statements to people who never made them, and keep doing so after they tell you that they didn't make those statements - that's lying in my book.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm responding to more than a dozen aggressive posters each session, many with multiple responses. I'm not bothering to memorise or separate those in my mind, only those who are prepared to discuss reasonably. If you post obnoxiously you can take responsibility for Roger's and Obnoxious Pratt's etc statements until you take them to task also.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:47:15 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"

Gee, I wonder why?
Did it ever occur to you that you are one obnoxious guy? -- Ray
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
instead replied:

It's certainly a possibility. However as I seem to be well liked outside of this ng and find myself welcomed most places I go I tend to think the problem might be elsewhere.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:48:12 -0700, I said, "Pick a card, any card"

Trust me, Greg. It's you. -- Ray
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ray,
This hobby is awesome. Here is a fine example of inventing a reality and then pretending you actually exist in that imaginary fake space.

Greg is the center of his imagined universe and has trouble differentiating reality from imagination. He craves the attention. Killfiles are your friend here.
Paul
P.S. - If you stop responding to him I will never see his nonsense and I would really, REALLY appreciate that. *8^)
--
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
instead replied:

Anyone who starts sending me obnoxious and offensive emails and demands that I don't respond isn't any sort of judge on who is the problem.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg.P. wrote:
> I'm responding to more than a dozen aggressive posters each session, > many with multiple responses. I'm not bothering to memorise or > separate those in my mind, only those who are prepared to discuss > reasonably. If you post obnoxiously you can take responsibility for > Roger's and Obnoxious Pratt's etc statements until you take them to > task also.
You're a true Hun. No wonder you model German railways. I take responsibility for my own posts - and no-one elses.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The moment you support someone else's proposition by arguing that my position is wrong then you are supporting that proposition - in this case that US railways use time separation (+ rules + train orders) to keep trains apart.
Time separation cannot by itself safely keep trains apart (given rational, same day periods), so I'm puzzled as to what sort of rule or train order can change that. I'm wide open to being informed by those in the know!
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I suspect that what you are getting irrate replies because you make rather sweeping claims with little or nothing to back up your claims.
By all means - you don't like DCC. Fine. No problem. You think the extra of going DCC is not matched by enough extra capability to offset the cost - to you. Again fine. No problem.
Where you go off the tracks is when you start making claims like (paraphrased) : "only way of modelling the way real life railroads assign time slots to trains on a busy line is to cut the model RR tracks into separate electrical blocks". Just because one uses the word "block" both in the sentence "separate electical district on a model RR" and "part of a RR line between two signals in real life", it does not follow that the *only* way to model prototypical practices is to wire each section of rail as a separate *electrical* blocks.

Which is exactly the same as DCC. What role you want to play is not dependent on how you decide which trains will move and how fast. You can play train driver just as well with a DC layout as a DCC layout. You turn a knob on your controller to adjust speed and possibly direction.
Only difference in principle is how you select which train or trains your controller controls.
Grin, Stein
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I suspect I'm getting irate replies because I attempted to give a factual reply to the original question and that the respondees aren't smart enough to comprehend that the reply related to my experiences but instead see them as an attack on their religion.

Thank you!

I was talking about my modelling/prototype. Around the 1870s those railways that ran relatively intensive services realized that "time slots" didn't keep trains safely separated and so instituted other means of separating them.

The whole point of signals is to keep trains separated. Certainly it isn't the only way, but if you're going to have signals and train detection and independent *electrical* ;-) blocks then ...why bother doing it some other way.

DCC (and DC) would seem irrelevant to that particular point.
What role you want to play is not

True.
Very true. However I (probably) wrote the above quotes in relation to whether or not automatic loco driving was relevant to operation. I use automatic loco control in an attempt to achieve multiple train movements on my layout. (that's trains moving from a hidden staging yard, through a section of visible signal blocked main line to my main station) My prototype was a heavily trafficked main line section where the train movement capacity was always at it's limit, so one operator/one train would be a physical impracticability. There wouldn't be space for that number of operators to stand in front of the layout, and as each train appears once (or twice) in an operating session and then returns to the staging yard. Amongst this organised mahem I can take a task such as running the local goods, picking up and setting down wagons at each industry while threading through the mix of suburban commuter trains, medium and long distance passenger and goods trains. DCC didn't add enough advantages to offset the inherent disadvantages, _in my situation_.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That would seem to be a reasonably rational decission given what you apparently want to be the main focus of your model - a lot of trains moving essensially *on autopilot* at the same time, to create a heavy traffic situation.
Which is not to say that the same local freight job could not *also* be modelled equally well by using DCC to stop the local freight at a switch, witch your controller to pick up a train that need to pass on the mainline and drive the other train past (and into staging) before you again pick up your local freight and continue down the line to the next industry.
Essensially, in the situation of taking a local out to pick up or put out freight cars at local industries, the only difference is the *viewpoint* of the person driving that local.
Whether he in principle represents a god-like creature who hovers in the sky above the area and sees the whole area and all trains in the area moving at the same time as he runs his one train, or whether he represents a train driver who concentrates on his own train and his closest environs.
I agree that the god-perspective must look cool when a lot of things are happening at the same time, and that it takes a heck of a lot of skill to make it come off well - so things actually can run on auto- pilot, and yet be controlled and changed when needed.
I just do not agree that having lots of trains operating on auto-pilot at the same time is the *only* sensible way to model a given prototype. Especially when the prototype you are modelling did not have ATC.
Grin, Stein
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, but why?
I do have Trix EMS, which uses HF signals imposed on DC to operate a shunter in conjunction with analogue trains for my industrial branch. It does the basics of what DCC does, allow independent control of two locos in the same block. It's barely worth the trouble.

Sure, I could ignore all other train movements and just run one train - a major part of the interplay operation would be missing.

It's the only practical way to model lots of trains moving with one or a limited number of operators available.!

They did have A.T.Braking for signals in 1932. It had first appeared operationally on the GWR in Britain in (from memory) 1912.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Until this moment, no.
Essensially the same as the KISS principle
That one I know. (and generally practice)

The situation in hand is to make the track layout and traffic as complicated as possible so as to replicate the chosen prototype. I can't be the only person who wants to replicate complex prototype situations.
My control philosophy is to make the hands on operation as simple as possible by transfering the complication to either hardware/hardwire or on this present layout to software.

Go stand at any medium/major railway station and watch the traffic. You no sooner focus on one arriving or departing train than another interesting movement occurs. If I wanted minimalism I would model the railway that runs past my front window, where one, or on a busy day two, trains will roll past and return an hour or three later. (actually, I am modelling it, but in G24 scale in the garden)

Certainly, but after 47 years in the hobby I've figured out which parts of the hobby I enjoy, and operating complexity is right up there with operation, as is loco construction, signalling etc etc.

Exactly, and that's why I tend to jump in when beginners are told that DCC is the Holy Grail.

You have another - please, do tell! (what have I missed??? =8^)

Touchee.
The difference I see is between replicating the/a prototype and justifying having a huge collection of models. ;-)

True, but I've tried and discarded all the possibilities I have been aware of.

I always do.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Which is perfectly fine. Some others prefer to go the other way in their modelling - abstracting away some of the "other traffic" and instead focusing on hands on operation of one (or a few) trains per operator.
Either way is a perfectly legitimate way to model. Either way can be called "operations".

If that is what you *want* to model - trainspotting at a busy spot. I like trainspotting - but I don't want to try to model it in H0 scale. For me the cost of such a scheme would be far higher then the benefit.
If I want to do virtual trainspotting (ie at some age or some spot not easily accessible to me in real life), I probably would put a DVD or video in the player and plop down in the comfy chair :-)
If what you want to focus on in your model is e.g. picking up and setting out freight cars at industries, or passenger trains arriving at a station to be turned around or quite a few other things, then you can abstract away much (or even all) that other traffic without losing anything important to you.

Ah, that is an argument that is hard to counter. If you need to justify having a huge collection of models, then any argument which is accepted by the commander-in-chief is a good argument :-)
Grin, Stein
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sure, but isn't 'abstracting away' rather like playing soccer/football all by yourself on the field? ;-)

Why would I want to incorporate a (sort of/nearly) prototypical signalling system and then not use it?

That's a good argument, but how do I know it's right until I've tried? My layouts have been a progression of development over my time in the hobby. Some have focused on one or a limited number of activities and have had short operating lives. Others have been limited in scope by available space or money or knowledge or imagination :-) I figure I want the potential to replicate all the obvious operations of a railway, but I recognise that I can't be the entire staff of my railway at any given moment, nor will I accept only being able to operate once a month or once a week when I could assemble enough operators.

I just hide most of my collection, either in hidden staging or in boxes.
My current move has brought home to me just how many boxes I had stashed!
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Klick back to the beginnings of the various DCC threads.
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.