Re: DCC Controller Features

Huhh, all this time I thought you were trolling ME!

cack-handed

household! ;-)

Nope. Personal layout, in a friend's basement. One of several similar layouts, such that the owners and friends circulate in round-robin fashion, operating each in turn on successive weeks.

Let me know when you're coming, I'll fill up the chilly bin and we'll go tour them.

As if!

I have not seen anyone using that as the reason for their choice, it is you who brings that up each time. The beginners who are seeking the advice just disappear in confusion as soon as the argument starts. A beginner is rarely knowledgeable about the intricacies of 1920s German prototype operations or 1990s North American operations or whatever. All that will come much later as interests develop. For a beginner now I see DCC as a good choice since it is clearly the way the hobby is going for good or ill. For a beginner there is little or no cost difference, the various 'starter sets' get you in at bargain prices and buying a decoder with each loco its not significant. Getting started with traditional DC gets you into the situation complained of by so many when they realise that DCC is the way to go, "I can't afford the huge expense of fitting by 100+ locos". Which does make you wonder how he afforded the 100+ locos in the first place, with DCC from the outset you afford the DCC in the same way.

Issues of block working, prototype operations, manual versus computer control etc. are a distant future for the beginner and can be applied to either system, but for anyone not into DIY electrics commercial offerings will increasingly be DCC only. Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Indeed, each time you insist that DCC will not allow you to run all these multiple trains by yourself as it only allows driving the one or two trains when you weant to drive the whole layout with trains automatically obeying signals. To drive the whole layout you have to have another layer of complexity to stop and start the trains in accordance with the signals, if you don't you are back to driving one or two trains at a time using the controllers, which is the limitation you are attributing to DCC. If you want hands off automatic block working it is, at present, still easier with DC and indeed at MERG we have developed a block control unit specifically for that purpose which does an excellent job.

No doubt your way works but espousing it as the best way for a beginner without mentioning the conditions that make it best for you is not helpful. Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit Garratt photos for the big steam lovers.

Greg, forget it. You distort everything everybody says and you don't present anything useful. You're obviously just using this thread to get some attention. I showed you an explicit example of how the prototype operates and you still say it's wrong. How about you go to Edmonton and tell the crews that what they're doing doesn't fit your DC system. I'm sure they will fire their managers and hire ones that follow your safety practices. Would you like North America to reguage the track as well? Please indicate which rail spacing would be best. I'm sure it will change every mile or so.

If there are any newbies trying to determine if DCC is for you, do your best to ignore this whole thread as it will only confuse you and will not aid you either towards or away from DCC.

Jb

There's the whole thread in a nutshell.

I wish I could have been this clear and succinct 500 messages ago...

There a a number of purposes served by coupling the locos together as seen in the photo.

The hostler/shed driver can move all the locos as a single unit, instead of individually, if they are all required in the same place at once. Which is useful if, for example, the engine terminal/depot has a wash plant, and you want to give the locos a tub. Until the wash plant in my depot was closed in the mid-nineties, we would regularly have a lash-up of ten locos come across from another depot for cleaning. Being coupled, the job only required one crew, instead of ten.

Or perhaps, as mentioned earlier, you have to run a light engine movement to another depot to balance power, or transfer units to a workshop for periodic inspection or maintenance. Again, it only takes one crew, instead of many. One of local freight operators frequently does this - it's not at all unusual to see five or six locos trundling along light engine.

Another purpose, not immediately obvious to the casual observer, is that many railways/railroads now require stabled locomotives to be coupled for OH&S reasons. By coupling them, employees are prevented from walking between locomotives and exposing themselves to the risk of injury if anything moves unexpectedly.

Of course, the most obvious reason is probably that the hostler has made up consists of locomotives ready to be attached to their respective trains. Bear in mind that most North American roads run long, heavy trains, and sizeable consists of locomotives are commonplace.

bit cack-handed

household! ;-)

Someday - hopefully this year is Europe. :-)

There is, or should be, a third option of adding a bit of tecnology to analogue control.

That's easy - I started collecting in 1959. Add a new loco every year and the number soon adds up!

Sure you can go DCC from the beginning, but as I've pointed out it's not all advantageous.

I see a parallel of sorts with newcomers being forced into buying MS products. (try buying a new computer without MS operating systems bundled in)

Regards, Greg.P.

Ohh, so it's not just me who has problems getting my message across! ;-)

That's funny, here I was thinking everyone was distorting everything I said!

No, I'm sure that was you telling me that my prototype used a minority operating system and my understanding was wrong.

Edmonton is fine, I have family there. I was questioning your translation of prototype practice to model, not saying the prototype is wrong. The prototype uses a variety of systems to keep their trains apart but you've been busy telling me of the exceptions and extolling the virtues of being able to bring your trains into conflict. (ok I'm losing track of who actually said what over the last 500 postings)

Nahh, you've gone with the proper English gauge - stay with that!

Fair point. Let's summarize for the newbies:

- go DCC and you'll never have to learn anything about electrics or railways but you'll always be reading manuals on how to set CVs.

- go DC and you'll spend your whole life learning lots of useful stuff with relevance to everyday life, but there's no manual.

You've summarized very well.

That sentence works for both DC and for DCC - which is where I came in.

Regards, Greg.P.

That's easy. You buy an Apple Mac.

That's not what Newton, or anyone else has espoused. Damnit Procter, do you have a comprehesion problem? or are you just deliberately refusing to understand? What DCC does is removes the necessity of being an electrical engineer or an electronics hobbiest in order to operate your trains in a realistic fashion. Nobody gives a rat's ass if you want to do it or not, but you spew irrelevant and erroneous information about it. To hear you talk, no one who elects to use DCC can ever hope to operate a model railway in a prototypical fashion. That is Demonstrably bullshit. In fact, it almost completely around the other way. Controlling the track instead of the trains is clearly the poorer of the two choices. EMD

Why not? What difference does it make? We use manual uncoupling, so we don't have to drag around in search of a magnet. Just walk over to where they sit and slip the uncoupling rod into the knuckles. Voila! uncoupled. Not everybody can do that, I suppose, but probably 99.99% can, and that's really who we're talking to. EMD

OK, but quite simply, in almost all of the above cases, the locos are coupled together _when_ there is a reason, not just because it looks neater to couple them all together. To couple them all together and then have to uncouple them to use one, or two, or three from the parked line is an additional two man task which could be avoided simply by not coupling them in the first place.

You couple them 'because you can' and then uncouple them 'because you can' without any known purpose - yeah, ok.

Geg.P.

That, of course, will be 7' 0.25" as espoused by that greatest of engineers Isambard Kingdom Brunel. :0))

Or do you mean the Northern Colliery narrow gauge of 4' 8.5"?

Gregory Procter wrote:

snip

snip