DCC is the future

I imagine the circuitry involved in doing this would be very cheap on scale.

Does not one of the continental manufactures do the Dutch EE shunter? Sure I haveseen an HO one at one time.

Shows the version that made it to Australia.

G.Harman

consequences."

It is not practical to simply replace 00 wheel with P4 wheels. You need compensation or suspension for P4 to work, though having screws to attach bogies is my preference too. The RTR effort should be to get the finest scale wheels that will run on Peco Track. Bachman have gone some of the way on some models, with wheels around 2.6mm wide. However the flanges are still deeper than necessary, often still around 1mm deep. For years US models have been less than the NMRA maximum flange depth of 0.7mm. There is no sensible reason why the UK models don't have flanges as fine as this. On the subject of scales, if we want RTR we are captives of history. In my case Australian RTR is 3.5mm / ft, so that is the scale I use. If I modelled UK prototype I would model to 4mm / ft. Personally I find 4mm / ft is a better scale to work with, as scale detail is easier to do and see without much loss of space. Finally a comment on the subject DCC is the future. DCC is now established, but it costs more to include decoders in RTR locomotives. That's why DC RTR will continue to dominate the market into the future.

Using block detection does. DCC doesn't unless you use block detection.

Hmmm, there's a socket attached to the frame somehow with six wires soldered to it, and a plug with six soldered connections - while we can get Chinese labour to do the handwork at 50cents per day the cost may be minimal, but it's going to go up up up!

Regards, Greg.P. Takaka, NZ.

Wolf, please remember this is a UK newsgroup - the North American analogue, DCC and rolling stock market is six times the size of here - i.e. the greater 'economies of scale' rules apply enormously. We *do* want to hear what the 'rest of the world' is up to - especially when gauge doesn't matter! However, your 'fact' re. the cost of producing/tracking a locomotive is *not* applicable to the current UK situation.

Just *who* are Broadway and Atlas? Again, this is the UK and maybe if the Broadway and Atlas products are so good, they are missing an opportunity in not marketing their products here.

=>Wolf, please remember this is a UK newsgroup - the North American analogue, =>DCC and rolling stock market is six times the size of here - i.e. the =>greater 'economies of scale' rules apply enormously. We *do* want to hear =>what the 'rest of the world' is up to - especially when gauge doesn't =>matter! However, your 'fact' re. the cost of producing/tracking a =>locomotive is *not* applicable to the current UK situation.

I beg to differ. The point at which multiplicity of product variations begins to cost real money is with the very first one. In fact, tracking a varied inventory for a small market costs more per unit than doing the same for a large market. Given the low cost of solid state electronics, it would make more sense to build all future Class 47's, for example, with automatic switching DC/DCC gear built in. After all, tha gear is shared with the whole world, not just the UK. :-) -- BTW, even though the model train market here is much bigger than in the UK, it's still rather small potatoes, so that the cost of tracking inventory vs the cost of electronics will soon intersect at the point where all locos will come with with DC/DCC gear - and with sound, too. , =>>And as decoders drop in price, it will =>> be cheaper to offer a DC/DCC locomotive than two versions of the =>locomotive. =>> (Broadway Ltd and Atlas already offer DC/DCC locos that automatically =>switch =>> to the correct power.) =>

=>Just *who* are Broadway and Atlas? Again, this is the UK and maybe if the =>Broadway and Atlas products are so good, they are missing an opportunity in =>not marketing their products here.

Sorry, I forgot. Broadway is a recently formed marketer of medium to high quality locomotives. Atlas is an old-established manufacturer and marketer that began by producing cheap but well made sectional track, and ventured into locomotives in the 1960s by contracting with Roco to produce locomotives equal to or better than the hand-made brass imports of the time, and much better runners.

BTW, the Broadway Limited (both words, please - it's the name of a train, after all) locomotives come with built in sound, and in either DC or DCC. My mistake. But automatic DC/DCC switching locomotives are on offer, and will IMO take over the market very, very quickly. Electronics is changing much faster than mold-making technology. :-)

Wolf Kirchmeir ................................. If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on this train? (Garrison Keillor)

=>Hmmm, there's a socket attached to the frame somehow with six wires soldered to =>it, and a plug with six soldered connections - while we can get Chinese labour =>to do the handwork at 50cents per day the cost may be minimal, but it's going to =>go up up up!

Nah, a DCC decoder is mostly made with automatic machinery, like almost all electronics is nowadays. Only the final mounting into the locomotives is "by hand" - but it's machine-assisted handwork.

Wolf Kirchmeir ................................. If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on this train? (Garrison Keillor)

John,

What about Scale7? :-)

And, of course, whatever gauge you choose for F/S - starting at 31mm

-)

Jim.

years ago, 45 years ago?

ago no longer cut the

I would have to

Can I assume then that you presently upgrade your DC controllers every 5 years in order to take advantage of improvements in electronics and extra features (inertia control and the like) then? If not, then why would you plan to upgrade your chips every 5 years if they are presently doing the job?

Analogue will be here to stay - people don't like to see all those hours of wiring effort go to waste! However, I would predict that digital will become more popular as people construct new layouts and realise the benefits of DCC and as they do their research realise a lot of the so called disadvantages are just people trying to justify their own positions (eg by suggesting the need for regular upgrading of decoders using an argument which can also be used against analogue purists) without being entirely fair in their appraisals of the options.

And for the record I have gone DCC because I'm lazy when it comes to wiring and can see the benefits and am starting from scratch. I can also see why people wouldn't go DCC without the need to give them a hard time about it and lots of unreasonable justifications.

"g.harman" wrote

Yes, Roco do or at least did.

John.

"g.harman" wrote

Ah yes, I seem to recall Hornby or was it Tri-ang making an attempt at that and the NSW version.

John.

"Michael Walker" wrote

There's no need, DC contollers have been *state of the art* for at least ten years now, whereas decoder technology & functionability seems to be changing rapidly still.

John.

Phil: Several points to add...

1/ DCC equipped locomtives ARE DC compatible (but not for pulse-width or similar 'feedback' controllers) - they use the linear change in dc level to act as the control signal to drive the loco motor (once an initial voltage has been reached - which can be as low as 3.5V with some decoders

- which is probably a lower voltage than some motors would start anyway! (eg they work well on Gaugemaster Controllers, and 'train set' controllers)

(Pulse-drive form the 'dc' controller won't work because it would turning the power on and off to the decoder all the time) The benefits of feeback and high-frequency pulse drive (silent drive or whisper drive or similar trademarked names) would be available to such locos under either form of power.

This was the failing of Zero-1: it wasn't DC compatible (they were pushing

4bit microprocessor technology at the time!)

2/ I stated with Zero-1, and this is my first change in loco modules since then - about 25 years ??? The latest 9.95 price on a loco module comparable to the original Zero-1 module (but smaller) even brings the price below that of the original from 25 years ago. (Alright, there were several versions of the Zero-1 module - Triac then

2xThyristors on Rev D)

3/ DCC can be ADDED to an existing sectionally-powered DC layout simply by adding the new controller as a DCC controller: sections to which it is switched using DCC equipped locos, or a SINGLE dc loco (Oh, thay's jsut like an 'old traditional' controller being switched to sections containing a single locomotive.

3b/ As DCC equipping progresses, the sections don't need to be switched off - just loco selection made by code: (My last DC wiring system, prior to the launch of Zero-1 used 'interlocked push-buttons' (like used for radio-band selection): so that any section could be selected to any of 4 controllers (or off) - with the mechanical action ensuring that any other controller was deselected fromm that section when the new button was pushed in. - I still have the 30+ switch sets I bought in store somewhere.

4/ Constant Power on the track makes adding working coach lighting easy. How many railways only ran in daylight?

5/Sectioning can /still/ be provided: 'locally' for train ontrack detection - but the detecting module is most suitably placed bear the track rather than at the control panel, to make for easier wiring: sending the result back to whatever display is chosen. Optical detection of the front of a train can be used to trigger local modules automatically (Like the new Lenz LS150 accessory module) to return a signal to danger, or change a junction (appproach control??)

6/ Initial Installation from new, and Alteration to a layout is MUCH easier with a DCC style layout because it does not require a major rewire as well! It is therefor eideally suited to inclusion in a starte set which is then expanded to a larger railway: Soon children will asking 'why' some old style layouts don't have the operational flexibility of 'their' dcc layout. We've already changed from ac to dc, now its dc to dcc.

7/ As soon as the 'difficulty/hassle' of opening up a new, delicate loco to fit a module is avoided by supplying them pre-installed, then it will quickly become accepted as the norm. (Zero-1 needed further access, if loco codes were to be changed - this is avoided on dcc by prgramming in situ.

8/ Combining 4/ anf 7/ means we can expect UK coaches to have lighting as standard - just like others overseas.

9/ And finally re HO/OO: The Bachmann Harry Potter Set is branded as HO in the USA: but it is the OO Hall loco in glossy finish, and 2 of the original Mainline Mk1 coaches without interiors - they look cheap and nasty like that! It comes with a 110V controller and Easi-track (ready ballasted)

In message , Michael Walker writes

I'm not sure I agree with that sentence.

My garden layout is divided into 32 sections. I can run a maximum of 4 trains independently if I have a couple of signalmen to flick the control-panel switches to ensure the same controller controls the same train around its track. I can run 2 trains independently without the aforementioned signalmen.

When I eventually go DCC, and I will be able to control far more than 4 trains independently, I will still have those 32 sections. Normally they will all be switched "on", to whichever booster is supplying power to that section. However, they will also serve the purpose of isolating sections for discovering problems with wiring, or for figuring out where the short circuit is that may just have occurred.

So those hours of wiring effort will not have gone to waste.

[snip]

And for the record I have not gone DCC yet because I'm waiting for someone to bring out a radio-control hand-held throttle that's legal in the UK, to replace the radio-control hand-held throttles I use for my analogue control at present. Note that that's radio and not infra-red. I have no intention of using old redundant telephone handsets. I understand that ZTC are currently working on it, but why Digitrax can't issue their radio throttles with UK-legal frequencies I do not know.

That can't have been a GM-EMD JT42CWR because the real thing hasn't been around that long.

No one has made an HO model of the Class 66 except me and my associates in The British 1:87 Scale Society. The brass ones shown by DJH at the Nuremberg show several years ago were ours. They comprised a brass body shell, cast metal detail parts, and a slimmed chassis from a Kato SD40-2.

At trade shows and on visits to their factories, I have spoken to Roco, Heljan and Mehano about their intentions to produce an HO Class 66. They remain intentions, and I have adopted the policy of believing it when I see it.

Can I once more suggest a visit to the British HO web site at

where you can see pictures of our HO Class 66, the Roco "08" (due for re-release next Summer) and everything else in British HO that we know about.

We know we are very much in the minority in the UK, but we generally keep ourselves to ourselves and try not to upset others, especially owners of vast collections of OO who are sensitive about the matter.

Martin Wykes

I have just remembered that the Hungarian company Deak showed a brass Class 66 at the most recent Nuremberg show, and it was not ours.

Martin Wykes

Phil: The LGB Wireless Controller module IS legal in the UK* (and remainder of Europe) - we use 3 of them at the moment - it makes walking around the garden controlling and watching the trains much easier 8-) (Especially when cooking at the BBQ..

and related pages)

Otherwise it would be like a maypole with tangled wires!

• Alternate model is available for US frequencies

"Martin Wykes" wrote

Yes, I've seen pictures of it on their website, and bloody awful it is too!

John.