Moving on from the Railmaster debate to DCC generally.

I don't understand how you come to that conclusion. There are some very good decoders for under =A315. As in any field there are osme expensive brands such as Zimo.

If you buy a toy train brand you get toy train features and performance. If you mean sectional track put together on the floor and ripped up again then that is not the best environment for DCC.

MBQ

I reckon that on the whole it is a better system than DC. It is rather fastidious in it's demands on the electrical integrity of the track which rather negates the "toy train" approach. Equally , as it is basically an entire and unbroken circuit the location of short circuits can be tedious and lengthy! DC is more robust and forgiving but DCC can be more fun.

wrote

ripped up again then that is not the best environment for DCC.

Not the best environment for any operation, let alone DCC.

John.

I suppose that I really mean that the "rail joiner" method of electrical connection is not really satisfactory. Whereas DC operation might produce a spark and carry on the same spark on DCC can trip the system or reset CVs in the loco or locos and generally be a pain! Over the last 18 months I have been obliged to devote sessions to debugging odd corners of my system which produce problems - not always evident even after a close inspection. The two big offenders have been long diamond crossings and lift up entry points. The crossings have work in hand to electrically isolate and then selectively feed via a relay commoned to the point levers. One of my two is easy but he second will test my patience. Several of my hinged sections appear to change shape ( the old place is over 300 y.o.) regularely so that rail on the fixed part manage to touch those on the lifting part -- this despite several visits with the dremel to reopen the gaps. I write as someone who was sceptical initially but has been forced to accept the need for electrofrog, multipoint feeds and more effort at track laying. Some of the latter has been overcome by fitting multiple pickups on older locos. I am also guilty of keeping old (30 years +) locos in use on DCC so the system does have to suit both old & wide (like me) and young and slim (as in my mind) !

Regards

Peter

So are you Peter or Paul?

MBQ

If they can touch anything other than the same polarity then something is seriously wrong. Sorry but you cannot blame DCC for that one.

MBQ

But surely =A315 per loco plus moduals to work points and so on really mounts up even for a small layout.

Yup, maybe I didn't express myself to well there! How reliable is it on a permant layout? I can see that having a constant voltage on the track has got to be good but how clean does the track have to be?

Paul

Cost is relative to your aims. Besides, we more or less unconsciously=20 distort our perception of what our hobby actually costs us. ;-)

A small branchline style, single-station layout with a fiddle yard and a =

relaxed timetable (albeit far busier than the prototype's would have=20 been ;-)), with one or at most two engines in steam, doesn't require=20 DCC, and the cost of control gear will be less than a DCC system.

On medium-size layouts, with multiple trains running at the same time,=20 DCC begins to cost about the same as the rather large number of section=20 control switches, signalling relays, turnout-motor push-buttons,=20 controllers, and of course wiring (you'll need five times or more as=20 much wire as for a DCC setup.)

On larger layouts, the kind that we all dream of, but few us invest the=20 time and money to build, DCC is actually cheaper. If you want to run=20 more than two trains, some form of cab control is needed, and while the=20 individual parts of such a system cost less than individual DCC=20 components, there are more of them. Many more.

In general, we are very conscious of the price of locomotives,=20 carriages, wagons, and track, and tend to figure our costs in terms of=20 those items. We expect to pay much less for buildings than for rolling=20 stock, even though from a manufacturing POV a plastic building kit may=20 actually cost more to produce than a wagon kit. (That's why there is=20 still a niche for card models.) We think of controllers and wiring and=20 such as a necessary evil, and grudge every penny we spend on it. And we=20 "forget" the considerable cost of the train table, room preparation if=20 the layout is permanent or semi-permanent, and so on. Not to mention the =

price of the hatchback or van we buy "because it's such a practical=20 family car (and I can transport my layout in it, too!)" (BTW, if you=20 exhibit a layout more than three or four times, you will be spending=20 more on that than on building it. Do the arithmetic. ;-()

Reality hits when someone tries to sell a finished layout, adds up his=20 costs and offers it at about 50% what he paid. There are no buyers at=20 that price: even a simple 4ft x 8ft layout will have cost several=20 hundred dollars.

Besides, we all accumulate far more rolling stock than we really need,=20 and then there's the shelf or cupboard full of kits we will build=20 "someday." So what does your hobby really cost you? And why have you,=20 like me, avoided doing the sums? ;-)

All things considered, DCC seems to me no more expensive than any other=20 aspect of the hobby, it's merely a different kind of expense. If I were=20 starting from scratch, I would go DCC. It's only because I have an=20 investment in DC that I hesitate to change, as do many others on this for= um.

HTH Wolf K.

Cost is relative to your aims. Besides, we more or less unconsciously distort our perception of what our hobby actually costs us. ;-)

SNIP .....

All things considered, DCC seems to me no more expensive than any other aspect of the hobby, it's merely a different kind of expense. If I were starting from scratch, I would go DCC. It's only because I have an investment in DC that I hesitate to change, as do many others on this forum.

HTH Wolf K. ==============================================

Agree with most of what Wolf says (even when goes off a bit :-)). However think the first consideration should be where your interest lies. First are you interested in running trains. If you only occasionally operate trains but are more interested in building layouts, locos (like me) or wagons etc then operating is of secondary interest so gets lower priority in the budget. If you only want to run one loco at a time on a roundy roundy with occasional shunting (yep me) then again DCC is of less importance. However if you want more than one loco on the same track circuit as in say shunting then DCC becomes more important. One compromise it to have seperate DC and DCC circuits, where the roundy roundy locos use DC and shunters DCC. Ignoring the finer points of motor control theres less benefit from DCC with an express engine flying past or a slow frieght trundling along. Of course beware accidental connection between DCC and DC circuits, preferably by never running the two at once. This is also useful in transition from DC to DCC, start with those locos used in situations that benefit most and finish with the others so spreading the outlay over long period. May wish to keep those arkward conversion or less run locos to DC with the intention of one day ....

Cheers, Simon

Of course it does.

I was responding directly to your statement that decoders are "expensive for what they are" which cannot be said, considering the development that goes into sophisticated motor control algorithms.

MBQ