Does anyone have a feel for the percentage of active UK modellers who run DCC layouts?

[Stentor]

A friend of mine has been selling stock from his late father’s layout, mainly Southern railway and much of it high quality kit built.

 

A dealer told him that the kit built locos will be worth less than RTR locos because they cannot be converted to DCC as easily.  Ok, you can say that’s a bargaining chip on the dealer’s part but he’d already agreed a price when he said it.

 

So what it made me wonder was does anybody know just how popular is DCC in the UK.

 

Does anyone have a feel for the percentage of active UK modellers who run DCC layouts?

 

Thanks,

//Simon

 

Dear Mods, I assume this belongs here, not in the DCC section but I leave that to you.

[AY Mod]

On 27/07/2019 at 13:45, Stentor said:

Dear Mods, I assume this belongs here, not in the DCC section but I leave that to you.

 

Happy for it to be in a general area as some analogue types may not see it in the DCC area.

 

My feel for it, photographing exhibition and home layouts which are levels above 'train set', is that it's about 60/40 in favour of DCC these days as a whole. Towards the scratch/kit built stock 'finsecale' end though I would say it's 75/25 in favour of DC.

[The Johnster]

My general impression is that Andy’s right, and he’s in a much better position to assess the situation than me.  Finding the exact numbers or coming up with a workable formula for guesstimating is not easy though; my suspicion is that many small layout (BLT, shunting problems etc) are more likely to use DC, but that those who operate bigger layouts will buy a lot more locos, so you can’t assess it from sales of DCC vs DC. 

 

Kits are by and large not designed with DCC in mind, and the dealer may have a point.  Kit built stock often does not hold value as well as RTR anyway, as the build quality is an unknown bound to generate sales resistance in a secondhand market unless the loco has provenance including a professional or well known name builder. 

 

It is significant that no technical advance has been forthcoming in the field of DC controllers or switching for several decades. 

[Oldddudders]

I am 70, most definitely not a techie, and I have been using DCC for more than 20 years. While many of us worry that not enough younger people are entering the hobby, what is quite certain is that an increasing percentage of those who do will be tech-savvy to a degree my generation didn’t dream of. Andy Y’s closeness to the overall scene convinces me his figures are likely to be correct, but I am in no doubt that DCC will increasingly be adopted as years go by. DC works as well as ever it did - but for many modellers, DCC adds extra value. 

[The Johnster]

I absolutely agree; DCC is definitely the future and has incredible potential whatever Luddites like me think.  I'm happy that DC RTR is still available; don't think I could afford the upgrade!  I'm not sure that DC ever reached a state when it could not have been improved by computer technology, though.  This would of course be a very niche market, and I'm very happy with my Gaugemaster HH and ancient Power Controller.

[tomparryharry]

Oh dear! I'm just a Luddite! However, I'm highly skilled in converting DCC stock into DC stock...I've never had the inclination to go DCC, although friends have allowed me plenty of opportunities to 'have a go' . I'm sorry, but it doesn't cut it for me.

 

That said, I've seen some exhibition layouts that are DCC, and will knock my socks off for quality of build. Just me, I guess.

 

Have a nice day, folks.

 

Ian.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On ‎27‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 13:45, Stentor said:

...A dealer told him that the kit built locos will be worth less than RTR locos because they cannot be converted to DCC as easily.  Ok, you can say that’s a bargaining chip on the dealer’s part but he’d already agreed a price when he said it...

Unless exceptionally well built and finished, or of a rare but extremely desireable subject, kit built locos are always at a large discount to the parts cost; never mind any buyer resistance due to perceived difficulty in DCC conversion. First up for buyer resistance in my opinion, the fact that a kit build in OO will typically not be RTR standard in respect of minimum radius capability. That immediately means 80% of RTR OO purchasers are not likely to be interested, simply because their layout is based on set track.

 

(The difficulty in DCC conversion will in any case vary from a simple hardwire (these typically a good etched frame based mechanism or a scratchbuilt equivalent) to 'some work required' for solid live chassis block with motor brush directly connected or in contact with the block. In every case considered solely as a mechanism a sight quicker and easier than the likes of Hornby tender drives, Replica, Mainline and Bachmann split chassis mechanism and Hornby Dublo Ringfield.}

 

 

[The Johnster]

The brutal truth is that very few kit built locos can come anywhere near the standard if fine detail or finish that is expected of current standard RTR products.  Well built kits may, possibly, offer better slow running with higher gear ratios, but current RTR is pretty good in this respect, compared to the 200 scale mph uncontrollable below 40 locos of the late 70s!

 

Add the difficulty in DCC conversion and the requirement of many modellers with RTR based layouts to run around setrack curves and turnouts, and you begin to see why kits tend not to hold value on ‘Bay in the same way as RTR.   Many kit subjects have now been produced as RTR models to a better standard of detail, making the RTR versions more desirable as second hand items.  

 

Another point is that an RTR loco that needs attention is generally easier to deal with; more components are easily removed and hence replaced. 

 

 

[PatB]

Whilst I don't disagree with any of the above, I wish someone would tell the Ebay sellers (and bidders).

[Stentor]

27 minutes ago, PatB said:

Whilst I don't disagree with any of the above, I wish someone would tell the Ebay sellers (and bidders).

 

I agree with you on that but I think it is because I’ve been looking at E4s, F5/6s, round topped boiler N7s and J67/69s which all fall, currently, into 34’s “of a rare but extremely desirable subject” category. 

 

//Simon

[john new]

On the cusp, have bought DCC control gear and fitted some (not all by any means) my locos with chips. Layout also being sectioned to allow DC running with the unconverted items. It will be either/or obviously.

 

Is DCC even the biggest current issue we face? I’m finding coupling choice a far harder task. Several systems out there, even the ubiquitous tension locks are not 100% reliable between makes/ages. I thought Kadees would be the answer, but read recently you can’t auto couple/uncouple with them on curves. 

Edited July 30, 2019 by john new

[Oldddudders]

12 minutes ago, john new said:

On the cusp, have bought DCC control gear and fitted some (not all by any means) my locos with chips. Layout also being sectioned to allow DC running with the unconverted items. It will be either/or obviously.

 

Is DCC even the biggest current issue we face? I’m finding coupling choice a far harder task. Several systems out there, even the ubiquitous tension locks are not 100% reliable between makes/ages. I thought Kadees would be the answer, but read recently you can’t auto couple/uncouple with them on curves. 

Kadees faithfully ape the prototype knuckle-coupler, in that curves are a pain, it’s true. I recall at Purley, where buckeye-coupled trains were split and joined twice every hour, so the staff were ‘on it’, there would occasionally be delays when the kit just refused to play.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

15 minutes ago, Stentor said:

... I’ve been looking at E4s ...

That's the best thing to restrict yourself to, if the kitbuild is based on the old Stephen Poole kit! Has there been or is there an etched brass kit? That's what is required for a superior running model to result.

 

19 minutes ago, john new said:

...I’m finding coupling choice a far harder task. Several systems out there, even the ubiquitous tension locks are not 100% reliable between makes/ages. I thought Kadees would be the answer, but read recently you can’t auto couple/uncouple with them on curves. 

It is an aspect where the individual has to make their own choice, establish a standard for the operation and then stick at it. Having 'discovered' that the miniature tension lock was not a standard item at all, my decision was to adopt one manufacturer's product and replace all others.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, john new said:

On the cusp, have bought DCC control gear and fitted some (not all by any means) my locos with chips. Layout also being sectioned to allow DC running with the unconverted items. It will be either/or obviously.

 

Is DCC even the biggest current issue we face? I’m finding coupling choice a far harder task. Several systems out there, even the ubiquitous tension locks are not 100% reliable between makes/ages. I thought Kadees would be the answer, but read recently you can’t auto couple/uncouple with them on curves. 

I don't think there's any model coupling that will auto uncouple on curves, though Sprat & Winkles might if set up with enough slack (i.e. bigger gaps between vehicles). Established Kadee users design their layouts so they don't need to do it.

 

TBH, coupling up and uncoupling on curves is generally avoided on the real thing whenever possible as it moves the hooks further apart, making the process a bit more difficult/awkward and (by extension) potentially more hazardous for those doing it.

 

John

Edited July 30, 2019 by Dunsignalling
o

[Stentor]

1 hour ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

That's the best thing to restrict yourself to, if the kitbuild is based on the old Stephen Poole kit! Has there been or is there an etched brass kit? That's what is required for a superior running model to result.

 

 

There was/is an Alan Gibson E4 kit which is out of stock but at priority 2 (whatever that means) 

 

http://www.alangibsonworkshop.com/Kits.html

 

The rumours of a RTR E4 have probably dampened kit makers enthusiasm but I’m starting to wonder if the only sure way to flush out a RTR E4 is to announce that I myself am about to invest a king’s ransoms and release a kit myself.

 

Did that work?

 

//Simon

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

I don't think there's any model coupling that will auto uncouple on curves...

The Brian Kirby mod to the Bachmann miniature tension lock enables this. Either Kadee or other maker's electromagnet, or a permanent magnet uncoupler. Works down to any radius on which a full couple - both hooks dropped - can be achieved.

 

Technically no reason it shouldn't also be possible mechanically. Requires construction of a tailored lifting ramp to fit within the curve. This would also work with the HO 'hook and loop' type coupler too.

[ejstubbs]

On 27/07/2019 at 13:52, AY Mod said:

My feel for it, photographing exhibition and home layouts which are levels above 'train set', is that it's about 60/40 in favour of DCC these days as a whole.

 

Useful data, Andy - but I would suggest that even that information is based on a subset of "active UK modellers" i.e the ones who 'exhibit' their layouts either at exhibitions or in print.  That said, it's probably difficult verging on impossible to get any idea of the size of the "dark modellers" population i.e those who don't exhibit their layouts in that way.  A time-consuming manual trawl through RMWeb might give another number, but again it would be analysing a self-selecting subset of the overall population of modellers.

 

Also worth noting, perhaps, that a fair proportion of train sets these days come with DCC "out of the box" - though I'd suggest that it's debatable whether they should be included in the number of "active UK modellers".

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

8 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

...the size of the "dark modellers" population...

I think this is more nuanced, half-light, crepuscular, stygian, etc.. I am definitely on the  half-light/crepuscular margin, only surfacing online and at occasional exhibitions...

 

16 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

..."active UK modellers".

What does it take to be in the active category? How about a man with a BCK which he has modified to include the baby grand piano he and his new wife transported by this means? No track , no power supply. (His usual modelling is fitting the right tyres to his road truck models.) It's all rather blurry when you look out toward the margins...

[Chris M]

It may well be that the proportion varies with scale. Purely anecdotally pretty much all the 7mm lads I know under 70 are DCC. The majority, but not all, of 4mm guys seem to be DCC . A significant majority of N gaugers I know are DC . One is ambidextrous and has one DC and one DCC layout.

[The Johnster]

I'm not quite 70, but closing rapidly; less the 3 years to go!  I'd have DCC like a shot if I could afford it, but am on a fixed and low income (cue tragic violins).  I don't really 'understand' DCC, but a guy in the local Antics does, so I'd manage but would have to spend my way out of any problems.

[Dunsignalling]

4 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

The Brian Kirby mod to the Bachmann miniature tension lock enables this. Either Kadee or other maker's electromagnet, or a permanent magnet uncoupler. Works down to any radius on which a full couple - both hooks dropped - can be achieved.

 

Technically no reason it shouldn't also be possible mechanically. Requires construction of a tailored lifting ramp to fit within the curve. This would also work with the HO 'hook and loop' type coupler too.

Thanks, but I gave up on tension locks twenty-five years ago and I've yet to see anything that would tempt me back to using them.

 

I think the only reason anybody would want to couple/uncouple on curves is lack of space, i.e. the train is longer than the straight bit of the layout.

 

Kadees let you propel a wagon to anywhere you want after uncoupling which is as much as I need.

 

However, if you really need to do so, Kadees will couple-up on curves by the simple expedient of pushing the heads towards the inside of the curve with a coffee stirrer. That's a rather lower level of faffing about than I "enjoy" on layouts that use so-called "compatible" tension-lock couplers from different makers!

 

John

 

Back to Topic. Overall amongst my acquaintances I'd say that committed DCC take up (i.e. those who have changed over completely from analogue control) isn't more than 25%, with maybe another 10-15% dipping toes into varying depths of digital water.

 

 

Edited July 30, 2019 by Dunsignalling

[Philou]

The Johnster is right regarding the outlay for DCC. You can buy 'cheap as chips' chips, but they do not give you sound, that 'extra' dimension which is what persuaded me to go DCC.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[john new]

4 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Thanks, but I gave up on tension locks twenty-five years ago and I've yet to see anything that would tempt me back to using them.

 

I think the only reason anybody would want to couple/uncouple on curves is lack of space, i.e. the train is longer than the straight bit of the layout.

 

Kadees let you propel a wagon to anywhere you want after uncoupling which is as much as I need.

 

However, if you really need to do so, Kadees will couple-up on curves by the simple expedient of pushing the heads towards the inside of the curve with a coffee stirrer. That's a rather lower level of faffing about than I "enjoy" on layouts that use so-called "compatible" tension-lock couplers from different makers!

 

John

 

 

That option of propelling back the uncoupled cut is one to try.  May need to put an extra set of magnets into the straight part of the point for siding three. Buying the Kadees for a trial is a future project but the magnets can be fitted now, pre ballasting. 

[Dunsignalling]

6 minutes ago, Philou said:

The Johnster is right regarding the outlay for DCC. You can buy 'cheap as chips' chips, but they do not give you sound, that 'extra' dimension which is what persuaded me to go DCC.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

I agree, I can't see any real advantage in DCC without sound and TBH, with a few honourable exceptions, I've found that even that only really holds my attention for the ten or fifteen minutes I spend looking at most exhibition layouts. As with any other aspect of modelling it has to be done well if it is to truly enhance the whole. 

 

Given that I suspect that, in the long term, I'll be ambivalent to sound, and I have neither the time or resources to equip more than 5% of my fleet with it, I've decided to stick with analogue for the foreseeable future.

 

If it gets easier and cheaper, and steam loco sounds get (much) better than most are at present, I'll reconsider.

 

John

[Philou]

I've managed to chip about 30% of my stock. The rest will be done on an 'as needs' basis and only when finances allow - once the the layout is is started and completed. Getting ready to start in November.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip