Re: DCC Controller Features

It's the only attention he gets???

in article snipped-for-privacy@optusnet.com.au, Mark Newton at mark snipped-for-privacy@optusnet.com.au wrote on 1/4/05 15:20:

Where DCC is concerned, my original, personal objection thereto was based on the idea of equipping approximately 60+ locos with decoders, which would have been cost-prohibitive, even with low or discounted prices, on top of buying a specific manufacturer's system to get started.

However, one need not equip ALL of one's locos with decoders at once, which appears to be the poster's confusion (as well as my own). The sane thing to do would be to start with, say, three or four, and then equip the rest as time and money allow. Thus, your upfront investment in DCC is not as great as would otherwise be. (Sure over time, your expense adds up, but it's made in smaller, easy-to-digest chunks that are gentler on the wallet.) However, if you're able to secure a quantity of decoders at a decent price (such as might be done through a club), you save even more money and can thus equip more locos sooner.

Dieter Zakas

Greg, as far as I can make out, you don't any experience of many of the topics under dicussion here, which leads you to arbitrarily declare them to be wrong, or to dismiss them entirely.

Again, as far as I can see many of your conclusions are based on no more than your desire to imagine things are done in certain way, because you can't imagine them being done the way they actually are. A lot of them don't appear to be based on fact.

I rubbish them because they are often flat-out wrong. And "effectively" is just a cop-out - weasel words. You can't support your assertion, because I never wrote what you have attributed to me.

F*ck me drunk. I'm quite wrong, am I? So in thirty years I have learned nothing at all, eh? Read what I wrote: "the ultimate responsibility for the safe operation of TRAIN is that of the driver". Not the RAILWAY, the TRAIN. Can you not understand the distinction? I can. Do you know what ultimate means in this context? I do.

Of course the responsibility for operating the whole railway goes further than the driver. You keep trotting out these comments, which not one person has disputed, and present them as if they are some example of profound wisdom. Believe me, they aren't.

A railway. But no doubt you'll dispute that as well.

They don't, by any stretch of the imagination, at least not on my railway.

On the strength of these latest exchanges, I'd say he was correct.

You may well be correct, Paul. However, he won't be getting any more from me on this thread.

Yes, buy them a few at a time, in presumably the same way as you bought the 60+ locos.

I have to say, Dieter, I always get a laugh when people claim the expense of decodering a large number of locos is beyond their means. How then did they afford the locos?

Finally got those kill files working, eh!? *8->

We're still even in our assessment of each other - that only leaves your claim that you have worked on Australian railways in question.

Well yes!

It certainly appears that way.

Yes, I understand your point - however it is a railway that is being operated.

In my Dunedin - Invercargill example, the Invercargill - Dunedin driver was safely operating the train he was in charge of, up until just before he ultimately collided with the Dunedin - Invercargill train. That was most definitely an unsafe act. Now you're going to tell me he also was responsible for the crash.

Ohh goodie, you're not totally clueless when you've been told sufficienty often.

The first time I trotted it out you disagreed and you've been disagreeing ever since.

Why would I dispute it? OK, moving on - there is a "mechanisim" that gives the driver access to a particular route. It gives him "right of way" to a specific point.

I did indicate humour with the comment.

I buy myself a loco a year, although sometimes others just follow me home. :-)

Well f*ck me drunk ! (Mark Newton) ROFLMAO We've had a disagreement in the past, but this time I think we both concur on Procters lack of knowledge and his troll factor. He simply isn't worth fooling with. He neither wants to learn nor teach, merely troll.

Procter, your assessment of me is about as meaningful as the rest of the abysmally silly pap you puke out on your keyboard. I couldn't care less what you think, so blow off. Post what you will, you'll not get a reply.

Mark, I must say I am impressed with your knowledge of the workings of North American systems. I spent a good part of my life out there on the line and working in the yards. While you are not always 100% spot on, you are so close as to not merit further comment or nit picking. I should know as much about Australian workings.

CH.

I was trying to teach an alternative means of control to DCC or rotary switches. Obviously you are incapable of learning.

As I said, my assessment of you is about the same as your's is of me.

Mark was talking about Australian workings.

Regards, Greg.P.

analogue mode.

tracks in reverse

several longer

of control system

receive it. As

vacated ahead.

into the visible

So! You need DC to model the /unprototypical/ portions of the layout.

Ahhh....

No.

You said he thought he knew where he was, but he was wrong. His failure to /know/ where he was constitutes unsafe operation, as evidenced by the tragic result.

There there doesn't seem to be much differnce between Norht American practice and Austrailian practice. And bar Mr. Flynn's contribution, I'd expect NZ to operate in asimilar fashion. It seems the only odd duck is ancient German railways...

in article snipped-for-privacy@optusnet.com.au, mark_newton at mark snipped-for-privacy@optusnet.com.au wrote on 1/12/05 17:52:

Actually, they were bought one or two at a time, except for some P2K SD60s I bought. Two pairs, plus a trio, all undecorated. Those were the exceptions, however.

When I cited my resistance to DCC, it was on purely economic grounds. Until this past March, I was about US$29,000 in debt. With that kind of financial status, you could see from whence my resistance came. (BTW: virtually none of my model train purchases was done on credit; almost all were paid for with cash.)

A friend of mine, who's a DCC fan, suggested that I do maybe one or two engines at a time once I've invested in a DCC system. Even then, I was reluctant, because of certain other matters I must address. Thus, my activity in the hobby is limited to newsgroups and magazines. However, he was right, in that by going the couple-at-a-time route, that one's investment in DCC is spread out -- effectively amortized -- over a period of time, and thus a lot less painful. The need to buy decoders is eliminated when one buys locos equipped for DCC out of the box, such as Atlas's, meaning one will have to equip only the older ones.

Dieter Zakas

This is and always has been a red herring in regards as to a person wanting DCC or not.

DC analogue mode.

tracks in reverse

several longer

stage of control system

to receive it. As

vacated ahead.

into the visible

You could look at it that way :-) It works better on the prototypical block system main line too.

The lost driver was the Dunedin - Invercargill driver. The Invercargill - Dunedin driver was also involved in the collision.

New Zealand has a variety of different systems dependant on traffic density. Around Wellington, (the capital) the lines handle suburban commuter traffic, export goods to the port and inter-island ferry traffic as well as numerous heavy industries. From the

The "odd duck" is most of Europe, Japan, India, Britain ... at the very least.