Re: Number of electrical blocks?

Terry Flynn wrote:


Beep! Beep! Irony alert!

Sounds more like DCC was too hard for you to master. And the cost comparison is a furphy, as has already been pointed out.

Both statements concerning the NSWGR are true, which is something of a first where Terry is concerned. But neither is particularly relevant. The NSWGR was a colonial railway until 1901, and with the best will in the world, was not among the great innovators. As for cultural cringe, I suspect that's a phrase he read somewhere, and has been dying to use. There isn't a railway anywhere I don't find interesting, including the NSWGR.

Now here is a classic example of why Terry should limit his pronouncements to subjects he may actually know something about, or at least those where he can bluff convincingly.
Unfortunately, this isn't one of them.
The NSW tramway system commenced operations in 1879, a time when I suspect there were precious few street traffic lights to control them. There was, however, staff and ticket working for single lines, and this was brought into use quite early on. A good example of this was the line from Taronga Zoological Park to Athol Wharf, which was partly on reserved track, as were many sections of the tramway.
Facing points at busy junctions were interlocked and protected by signals - the functioning of which largely conformed to existing railway practice - which were operated from signal boxes. In the Sydney metropolitan area, a maximum of 31 signal boxes were in use in 1938. Signalling and staff safeworking were also used on isolated lines away from the main system, in particular where they crossed or interchanged with adjacent railway lines.
Another display of ignorance from Terry Flynn.

Beep! Beep! Beep! Irony alert! Irony alert!
Mind you, with the current generation of "plug and play" on the market, I don't even need to solder a few wires! I love it!

Mate, how many posts to this, and other NGs, would you like me to quote? You know, all those posts where you unequivocally state that your method of operation is the only prototypical way to run a NSWGR layout? Don't you remember your own bullshit? Do you need some help?

Well, I'll cry myself to sleep tonight, knowing that.
Mark Newton.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

What's the complete price for you to provide me a system just like yours?
That's the opnly way to compare the prices of various control systems.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@charter.net wrote:

A big advantage of DC is that you can build the system yourself as you need it. The initial outlay is quite small compared to DCC where apparently you need to buy the entire system in one go.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 07:50:23 +1200, Gregory Procter

How do you run trains with half a control system?
How do you expand as your kids move out and you gain layout space?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@charter.net wrote:

One analogue controller, two analogue controllers ... Each piece is a control system in itself.

You add more tracks, trains, blocks, signals, ....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

point
many
I made the controllers myself, so I had an extra cost saving, however the cost of a quality DC walk around controller is about the same price of a DCC walk around controller. Power supplies for each type are similar in price. The cost for switching for 5 cabs on each block is $10.70 AUS. I have 9 blocks. Assuming 60c US= $1AUS we get a total of about $58 US for block switching. Now I have about 15 locomotives on my layout, so in order that my DC system is dearer than DCC the cost of the extra wiring for the DC layout has to exceed the initial cost of the DCC command station and the cost of 15 DCC decoders (with back EMF) less the $58US. I can get 30m of 10A 2 core cable for about $60AUS, $36US. DCC still looks allot dearer.
--
Terry Flynn

For HO scale track standards go to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<Froggy> wrote in message wrote:

railway.
technology.
made in the

judgements
information.
the dust

thing is

Froggy, I still get to operate DCC layouts, and might even install a decoder in 1 or 2 of my diesel locomotives so I can run them at my friends using DCC one day. The doing of the 'DCC thing' still requires me to press select loco, press 4 buttons then press enter before I can run a train. On my simple low tech cab control system I select the cab of the block my locomotive is in. That's all, I now am ready to run as long as the signals and points are set.

the fact that

capability.
light-years
so do for

The improvement in computer technology and electronics generally means both DC and DCC will continue to progress. For example it takes less components now to make a DC controller than 20 years ago.

complex than

are
I have indicated one example were DC can be easier to use compared to DCC. Most DC layouts I have experience with over the years were poorly designed when it comes to ease of operations. This does not need to be the case. Using the low tech solution I have used is limited to particular designs of layout from an operations view, but if you have a layout of this style, DC is still the way to go.
--
Terry Flynn

For HO scale track standards go to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Get a real DCC cab. You only enter the loco number once unless you are running a lot of trains at once. Just use the recall to bring back a previous loco #. If it's too many button pushes then get a second cab. If it's still to many button pushes get a computer with a touch capability. Touch a loco, touch a destination.
This button push counting is ridiculous nonsense.
Paul
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Keith Norgrove wrote:

Gee, I haven't even begun to bring the mouse into the program yet - I'm playing with a wireless mouse as a hand-held controller, but that's another issue. I'm using prototypical numbering for my tracks and turnouts, but a specific route switched turnout by turnout can be long winded so I've leapt into the future (from the past as it were) and am adding the route selection. Screens are directly under the baseboard and keyboards are hinged on the baseboard facia - where would I put a mousepad?? Eventually I hope to get flat screens and bring them up to a better height but I don't want to push the operators away from the layout with a desk/PC/monitor/keyboard/mousepad setup.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 07:41:34 +1200, Gregory Procter

Oh, yeah. ~That~ sounds cheaper than DCC...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 18:23:50 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@charter.net wrote:

You think so? I'm not so sure I bought a keyboard three weeks ago for US$35. While I was there I looked at a fairly nice 21 inch flat screen LCD. It was not nearly "Top Shelf", but it was nice. It cost more than I paid for a Digitrax DCS100 CPU/control unit and a DT100 Throttle. I could have thrown in a couple of UT1s, three or four decoders and a couple of remote panel jacks for the price of the thing.
Come to think of it, it was about the same price as Digitrax' new Radio Super Chief with the DT400 radio throttle.
Oh well, I suppose the savings are in volume, Huh?
.........................F>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@charter.net wrote:

I need them either way. What do you do, memorise the address of every turnout and it's current setting???
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

decoder
DCC
Button pushing is the real world of DCC hand controllers. The style of DCC layout I operate on means the above function is of little use, because after running one train, I get a new train with a different locomotive.
--
Terry Flynn

For HO scale track standards go to
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And!?
Are you simultaneously operating more trains than your DCC handheld can stack? How long do you typically operate that one train before switching to the next?
Rejecting DCC because you have to push a few buttons is nonsense.
Paul
--
Working the Rockie Road of the G&PX

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

Had you noticed that you have to learn to program decoders? Had you noticed that you have to learn a whole new wiring/programming system to operate.

Do you not have turnouts, routes and signals?

It seems you may need to limit your "Buy DCC" advice to US modellers of US railways only, in future!
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

About the same as programing the new DVD/VCR:-)

system to operate. What new wiring? Just add DCC to one of the old cab control...turn all the cabs selections to DCC...

of the

thought to the

equipment as

Turnouts, Yes, I do. I still switch them from the old controls. Stop the train and then switch the turnot just like one prototype does on its' mainline and the other does on its' branch lines:-)

So be it. Now everyone in NZ should ask Greg.P. on how to wire their layouts as I guess DCC is not the proper way of operating railroads down there:-)
Donald He was funny first, so I can too:-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Donald Kinney wrote:

Here in NZ there are very few "over the counter" NZ models. The majority of model train enthusiasts model one of: British/US/European/freelance with perhaps 10% modelling NZR through building kits or scratch building.
I gain a fair proportion of my hobby budget from model repairs, model electronics and DCC fitting and advice. I try to figure what modellers actually need before advising them on control systems.
Regards, Greg.P.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. you don't. I do not typically program decoders. I merely change the default address and change the value of CV61. I have programmed decoders. It is not something that you can do at home. It requires a dedicated programming machine which has the capability to write code into the microprocessor. It cannot be done through the track pickups. Only a few user variables can be manipulated through the track connections. Most of these are left at the factory default settings. If you do not use special lighting, e.g., Mars, ditchlights, etc., there is nothing to do but change the default address. Hardly within the realm of programming. My VCR is more complex than a decoder

No, I didn't. See the above I only had to forget all the complexity of a DC wiring system

Yes, what of it? That aspect remains about the same regardless of the OS chosen. I have never seen a signal system that was controlled by the train driver as was described in another message. That sounds like a model railway system of signalling, not one used by an actual 1:1 railway. Oh, it works, but there's more to it than that.

DCC also happens to be very popular in Oz and Europe where they do not operate in the same manner as North America. Never the less, Lenz, Digitrax, Uhlenbrock and others seem to be enjoying a good market there. I believe DCC is also very popular in Japan and growing.
DC works for those who want to muck about with it. For all the rest there are other ways.
.................F>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 21:47:25 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@pimin.rockhead.com (Paul Newhouse) wrote:

He doesn't. He was calling me out on the statement that I made that I was not interested in learning how to program a PC such that it could run a DC railroad. Changing the address of a decoder and modifying a CV or two is several years worth of classroom time away from writing an OS program for a PC. Especially when you don't want to do it in the first place. I don't know how and I do not want to know how. It is excruciatingly boring to me. I would as soon do my own dental work.
..................F>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Froggy wrote:

OK, so you load program values - values relating to data the decoder needs. You can't load real world values like "45Km/hr" top speed or "1m/sec" acceleration - you have to load values that the decoder can translate into real world actions. That is a form of programming.

Of course it can be done in the home - with the right equipment.

Check how many VCRs in the world flash "12:00". (actually, mine is since Sunday's power cut)

You needed to learn the purposes of many of the CVs.

Huh? I use DCC to link all my turnouts, signals and block relays - cuts down an awful lot of wiring! The 8 data wires from the computer can operate 64thousand odd accessories. (OK, DCC based)

Other DCC proponents here describe the driver operating points etc while running their trains.

You seem to have a very narrow view of signalling systems! The US has signalling systems that operate semi-automatically, certainly to the point of resetting block signals behind a train to danger.

Sure, European modellers are even more prone to coming against the limitations of DCC - DCC is toy train stuff there.

Toy trains are very popular. Realistic layout operation is a minority hobby.

Well, I haven't found any other ways.
Regards, Greg.P.
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.