DCC - why not?

"Charles Davis" wrote

| Ivor wrote: | > Honest question - what's wrong with using common return? I haven't | > started my layout yet (and it'll be a while yet) but I'd prefer to do it "right | > first time" as much as possible. I would have thought that common return | > would save some effort and money? | >

| > Ivor | >

| >

| For Analog DC, common rail is usable, WITH the understanding that it has | it's own set of 'Quirks' for handling "Reverse Loops", 'Turntables", and | any other 'polarity reversal' problems associated with 'Two Rail' | wiring. Converting from a 'Common Rail' wired layout to 'DCC' shouldn't | be any harder than the "normal', two independent wires to every block | that is the common situation. If you have handled the 'common rail' | quirks successfully, they shouldn't 'bite you' too often during the | change, because you are already aware that there are differences. | | If you are starting from scratch. I.E. New layout headed for DCC in the | near term, don't even wave at 'common rail'. JMHO | | Chuck Davis

Thanks Keith and Chuck - I will be starting straight off with DCC, so no common return then.

Ivor

The cost and the effort.

I'd love to be able to have different brands of engines be able to run at the same speed. Plus, not having to have blocks.

Chris Curren

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 22:15:59 GMT, "Chris Curren" the same speed. Plus, not having to have blocks.

The whole concept of controlling your trains and not having to control your track is completely lost on Flynn and a few others. They just don't get it. Flynn seems to be proud of his ability to jump through burning hoops with regard to mimicking many of DCCs features with DC. Bully for him. I can't be bothered with trying to prove to the world that I'm as smart as Keith Gutierrez, or A. J. Ireland, or Bernd Lenz, or Jim Scorse, so I run my trains with a command station and two wires to the track. Bugger all that DC and block control crap. I'll take plug and play, all the way. Oh yes, one other thing. Don't give me any knicker stains about having to install decoders. After you do the first one, it becomes a no-brainer.

-- arf arf

Diesel Dog

Unless you're in N scale. Then, things can get interesting!

fl@liner

This tagline has been certified to contain no political rants.

Even more interesting if you are into Z scale, but scale is a personal choice. You make your bed and you lie in it.

-- arf arf

Diesel Dog

Bah.

I've done dozens of N scale SW9/1200s, and even put a decoder in a 3 axle industrial switcher (about 20-25 scale feet long). The only N scale loco I've seen that couldn't be DCC'd was the Bachman 4-4-0... and even that one has been done by putting the decoder in a following car.

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 17:58:57 GMT, I said, "Pick a card, any card" and Diesel snipped-for-privacy@comcast.net instead replied:

Some people lie everywhere, even on USENET. Beds are for laying.

-- Ray

in article snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, Ray Haddad at snipped-for-privacy@iexpress.net.au wrote on 8/8/06 12:49 PM:

Most folks seem to forget which is which. Remember it as follows:

LIE in an intransitive verb (whether to indicate prevarication or reclining); so you LIE about something, or you LIE down. It means to be in or move onto a surface. To LIE in bed.

LAY is a transitive verb and takes an object: I will LAY on the bed; I LAY bricks. It means to put something on a surface

Remember: brick layer (one who LAYS bricks) remind yourself of which one is the transitive and takes an object, then use appropriately.

You make your bed and lie in it. You made your bed and lay in it. (Lay is the past tense if to lie).

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:26:22 GMT, I said, "Pick a card, any card" and "Edward A. Oates" instead replied:

It's all good fun here on USENET. The absurd notion of getting into bed just to tell tall tales amuses me.

-- Ray

in article snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, Ray Haddad at snipped-for-privacy@iexpress.net.au wrote on 8/8/06 1:29 PM:

I can think of lots of folks who tell TALL tales prior to getting into bed, just to have their tails belie them.

Edward A. Oates spake thus:

I was lying in bed. As I lay there, I lied, so I was lying in bed. (I lied by telling a tale.) As a result, I was punished and grew a tail. My tail was lying in bed with me as I was lying in bed (telling a tale) while lying in bed.

Now I have a tell-tale tail.

And so explains why English (American) is hard to learn and even harder for those of us for whom it's a native language.

Agreed Ray, and they're also for sleeping.

Jim

Sorry to wade in late on this topic, one of the few I've followed the thread through. I've just begun my third layout of my lifetime (literally laying subbed and drilling for switch throws as this thread has progressed), and am intending to fully implement DCC to the best of my abilities.

My reasons for this decision are many. Mostly, I intend to operate switching on locals and yard jobs, while DCC with a computer act as dispatcher, clerk, express agent, or any other job I can hope to automate to a schedule. Routing and signaling are icing on the cake. Car tracking is also something I wish to include (anyone going to Denver? Can I get a progress report on the chip scanning tech?).

I understand that both my layout concept and my wishlist are overly optimistic, but it is time to DO something aside from collection and reading. I'll likely operate the layout alone, so I will be trusting DCC to do what it can so that I will eventually enjoy the theatrics I'm building.

Steve Woodall

I wish to include (anyone going to Denver? Can I get a progress report on the chip scanning tech?).< There is a really good discussion about RFID going on now on the JMRI list. Have you been following that.

That is something I am not familiar with. If you have an addy or URL for it, I would appreciate the jesture and give it a look over.

Steve

I laid down to lay some pipe?

in article 1soaifpazo9zp.10as91sciypag$. snipped-for-privacy@40tude.net, Steve Caple at snipped-for-privacy@commoncast.net wrote on 8/8/06 9:58 PM:

I believe that is

"I lay down to lay some pipe."

"Lay" is the past tense of the intransitive verb "to lie:" in your sentence above, "laid," being the past tense of the transitive verb "to lay" in incorrectly used. In the second use of "lay," you are correct since it is used with an object, "some pipe."

Yours in remedial English (which I took at Cal as "Subject A" some years ago....). I'm pretty good at mechanics, lousy at actually writing.

What brand of decoders do you like best? And what do they cost? I have a dozen or so HO locomotives. What's it gonna cost me to decoderize all of them?

David Starr