DCC questions from a dedicated DC'er

That fact that it didn't interoperate with other systems is not relevant then?

The problem is that it doesn't meet the quite reasonable expectations of existing DCC users. If Hornby want to partition themselves with their own brand "Hornby Digital" then why did they even bother basing it on DCC in the first place? Things have moved on in the last 10-15 years and they could have come up with an excellent system without all the old baggage that DCC has to carry. The fact is that it IS INTENDED to be DCC compatible but they just botched it. Why else have they revised the budget decoder to fix the lack of CV readback, if not to make it DCC?

MBQ

Will refer you to the excellent interview with SK that appeared in one of the magazines recently.

Cheers, Simon

Nope, am totally faithful to this group. Have no axe, am neutral as far as manufacturers/distributers are concerned.

Cheers, Simon

Talking to a TCS dealer a Select unit was sent to TCS in the US and they were unable to make it drive TCS decoders, that is fact. They did this because of complaints that their decoders would not work with the Hornby Select unit.

Chris

But if Hornby never claimed it would what's the problem?

Richard

The problem is that Hornby market these as DCC which means that they must conform to certain specifications which allows a particular level of interoperability between all DCC components whoever makes them. These basic specifications have been available for at least 10 years so there is no excuse for Hornby not to know about them. If they want to produce a proprietory system then they should use a diffeent name eg "Xero One mark2" until such time as their system does conform.

Alan

To be fair, they do call it "Hornby Digital" but, as I have already posted, the clear intent was that it would be DCC. They just didn't execute very well with the first products and took some flack for the failings.

MBQ

DCC is just a name, not a standard. The NAMRA standard is not *the* DDC, but *a* DCC, there's nothing to say there cannot be other DCC's. Admittedly doing so can cause confusion, but that's a marketing descision for Hornby to make - equally the NAMRA could have chosen to call their standard SDCC (Standard DCC), or even Eric, as is done in other fields to avoid confusion [1].

Richard

As others have said why put a DCC badge on it if does not work with other DCC manufacturers equipment to most people DCC means interoperabilty between different manufacturers. It just confuses people and maybe puts people off getting Hornby Digital equipment.

Chris

But to most purchasers DCC is a standard and all other manufacturers who have chosen to market as DCC have implemented the NMRA standards. Much like standard gauge became the standard for mainline railways in the UK as opposed to broad gauge. Both had steel wheels on steel rail but weren't interoperable.

Chris

Dont agree (realise thats a suprise but there it is). Most purchasers of the Select have no idea what DCC is and no interest in finding out. Its a budget system that was never intended to conform to NMRA standards. The fact that it works with some other DCC equipment is a bonus. What do you expect for £50 when other systems charge £50 for a transformer.

Hornby could produce a fully functional system to NMRA standards for around £100 or a budget system that did most things for a modest setup for £50.

In fact thats what they did - well done Hornby. The average modeller and trainset player is quite happy with that, its the whingers from cloud cuckoo land that moan. Plus I may let Elite users have my routesetter software for free. Lenz users obviously have lots of money to throw around.

I'll just modify that snappy remark with - yes its a ;-)

Cheers, Simon

There have been other digital control systems, such as Zero-1, but which was ever known as "Digital Command Control"? Which of those do people talk about today?

To all intents and purposes, DCC *is* NMRA DCC. to try and argue otherwise is taking pedantry to a new level.

MBQ

And how do you know that I think you credit Hornby purchasers with little intellegence with that statement children and adults have access to the internet and can see that Hornby and makes with the DCC logo on them? Either of our statements are unsubstantiated with evidence. Budget does not equal non-compliant the NMRA standard only lays down how decoders talk to the command station not how you implement it. You could just have a decoder that just drives the motor without funtions or BEMF that would still price in as a budget system. So why not make a DCC compliant system?

Should have re-introduced Zero 1 with no development cost at all and would be really cheap to make.

Everyone else can use the open source software from JMRI to do their route setting. Which Lenz users are you talking about? I don't have their system for the record but use some of their decoders.

And to say again most people buying a DVD expect it play in their DVD player not have to buy DVDs from the manufacturer of the DVD player. They buy digital system and will expect it to work with other digital systems.

Chris

Like your example, I look at a DVD recorder/players and I see there DVD+R, DVD-R, DVD+RW, DVD-RW, Blueray, 16*speed, 8*Speed. Guess what, the expensive systems can handle all these formats, the budget ones cant. Seems fair enough and they are still all DVD players and people seem to cope. I suppose if I read the specialist magazines then would find many complaints but not my interest.

At no stage did I make any reference to anyones intelligence. Mentioned their interests. Some people may find DCC too complicated and others have different priorities. Many just want to play trains - an attitude I find to be quite an excellent one.

However as you have raised the subject, have noticed the superior attitude of some of the Hornby DCC detractors. Have yet to see any justification for it.

Cheers, Simon

I disagree with both those statements. If the first one was correct then there would be no need for NMRA DCC. Im not sure if the second one should be identified as a attempt to silence discussion on the first or if its just b*ll*x.

Cheers, Simon

There are non-NMRA compliant systems, to be sure. Such systems may have advantages such as price, but they won't play with each other any better than they play with NMRA compliant systems. Why lock yourself into a proprietary system?

NMRA DCC standards and RPs were set up to prevent the kind of mess that occurred in the early days of the hobby, when each manufacturer went its own way. The NMRA emphasis has always been on interoperability. For DCC that means that any decoder should work with any controller. NMRA DCC is now well over 10 years old, and has been proven in practice. From the beginning, it was designed for extensibility. The current crop of sound decoders, the extension of some DCC functions to DC control, etc, show that the NMRA design was and is sound: it is a performance and plug'n'play standard.

The standards/RPs have two parts: a) the data format, which includes the package format and the CVs. This enables any decoder to work with any DCC controller. b) the wiring standard, which enables any decoder to be plugged (or soldered) into any DCC controlled device.

If Hornby is marketing an non-NMRA DCC system, too bad for Hornby. They may well find a market in the UK, where they still have a good reputation, but beyond that they will fail.

The fact is that NMRA standards and RPs rule. For example, Rivarossi at one time was the only source for well-detailed, low-cost N. American outline plastic steam locomotives, and enjoyed a small but steady market. But they eventually lost that market because they wouldn't use NMRA standard wheels, let alone the RP-25 profile. By the time they did so, other manufacturers had caught up with them in producing low-cost, highly detailed plastic steam locomotives. Even their partnership with Walthers (the main distributor of model trains here) didn't help. The product was upgraded and is much better than before, but the bad reputation has lingered.

Again you get complicated the analogy I was making was to buy a DVD to watch not to do any kind of recording. I'll leave that to the specalists and the format wars that have happended around these.

Exactly they do not want to have to worry that one digital system won't work with another especially if they buy a digital train will not work with their system.

You seem to exhibiting those attributes by the nature of your reply. From what I have read the thread was why Hornby could not make a compatiable system.

Have fun with your model railway and don't take all this so seriously.

Chris

exactly my point, these people will buy Hornby and bachmann locos with those decoders, change the address and carry on playing.

You are quite correct there, we all must - thanks, nearly forgot.

Cheers, Simon

I agrre completely and you have reminded me of the most important point on the budget Hornby Select. It is not a non-NMRA DCC system its just that it only supports a subset of the functions. Must admit not sure if its sufficient to obtain NMRA certification or not.

The problem between it and TCS decoders is that of the 4 methods of programming decoders the Select does not have the one that is required for TCS - one of the earlier methods.

Their fully function system - Elite - is almost certainly NMRA compliant/compatible and may well be about to receive its certification from that body.

So hornby are not ignoring the standards but as they say delivering products to the customer.

Cheers, Simon