New Locos Compromised on DC to Favour DCC?

[bike2steam]

Dunno, perhaps the blanking plug was the problem, but less wiring aids with replacing the loco body without too much getting in the way, I did all mine as a matter of course while adding tender pick-ups especially to Bachmann tender locos, and replacing the Hornby tender couplings with direct wiring.

[Chris M]

All the blanking plug does is take feed the track connections to motor & lights, so whipping the lot out & wiring the rest directly is the same as fitting the plug.

As I stated earlier the Dapol N gauge class 22 has some components on the pc board that holds the chip/blank. I know this because one of the components blew on Saturday and the loco stopped working. Don't know what these components do but the loco works fine now I have removed the board and wired it direct.

[Junctionmad]

as to why anyone would prefer DC over DCC , now thats beyond me , certainly for new layouts , why would anyone subject themselves to all the DC baseboard wiring and section switching and unprototypical running ?

[SHMD]

as to why anyone would prefer DC over DCC , now thats beyond me , certainly for new layouts , why would anyone subject themselves to all the DC baseboard wiring and section switching and unprototypical running ?

 

...because I like it and "I" have total control. See:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/87910-tenbione/page-2

 

 

Kev.

(Yes I know I'm mad!)

[davetheroad]

as to why anyone would prefer DC over DCC , now thats beyond me , certainly for new layouts , why would anyone subject themselves to all the DC baseboard wiring and section switching and unprototypical running ?

 

There is a third alternative. It eliminates the baseboard wiring, section switching and unprototypical running of DC and also eliminates the baseboard wiring and associated problems of DCC. It is called  BPRC - battery powered radio control.

 

See the DCC discussion topics forum - Bachmann Bluetooth  Radio Control and Special Interests forum  - Radio Control

[Satan's Goldfish]

...because I like it and "I" have total control. See:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/87910-tenbione/page-2

 

 

Kev.

(Yes I know I'm mad!)

You're not alone Kevin.

 

I go DC rather than DCC because designing and building all the control electronics is part of the hobby I really Enjoy! Plus, operating a DCC roundy layout with a fiddle track for each train meant selecting the track from point control, and then finding the relevant loco number on the hand set which isn't easy if you don't know what number you're looking for. With DC it's just set points, turn controller knob.

 

That just covers that example mind, I'm not anti DCC. In a depot layout environment where there's lots of locos on the same track then its really useful!

[Satan's Goldfish]

as to why anyone would prefer DC over DCC , now thats beyond me , certainly for new layouts , why would anyone subject themselves to all the DC baseboard wiring and section switching and unprototypical running ?

Unprototypical running? Which part?

 

One quirk I noticed quite often exhibiting a DCC layout was that sometimes a locomotive would appear to be stopped, but wasn't. As an operator you'd move on to drive another train and forget it. Over the course of a few minutes it would creep almost imperceptibly towards some points and short the layout out. This happened to all operators, not just me. DC though, stop the train and deselect the track and it's not creeping anywhere.

 

Pros and cons to both sides and we all know which we prefer. Just as you may not understand why some would stay with DC, some of those probably equally think you're nuts for making everything DCC and not trying other skills from time to time.

[bike2steam]

That just covers that example mind, I'm not anti DCC. In a depot layout environment where there's lots of locos on the same track then its really useful!

Along with double-heading, and banking operations, otherwise I tend to agree.

[Broadway Clive]

 In a depot layout environment where there's lots of locos on the same track then its really useful!

 

Unless the numbers are not known because they are inside a shed or they're stabled too close together and are identical to others.

[Satan's Goldfish]

Unless the numbers are not known because they are inside a shed or they're stabled too close together and are identical to others.

True.

 

The standard convention seems to be using the loco tops code for the decoder number, but this also involves being able to read some tiny numbers!

[Junctionmad]

...because I like it and "I" have total control. See:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/87910-tenbione/page-2

 

 

Kev.

(Yes I know I'm mad!)

 

Join MERG , build your own DCC and have total control also !!!!!

[Junctionmad]

Unprototypical running? Which part?

 

One quirk I noticed quite often exhibiting a DCC layout was that sometimes a locomotive would appear to be stopped, but wasn't. As an operator you'd move on to drive another train and forget it. Over the course of a few minutes it would creep almost imperceptibly towards some points and short the layout out. This happened to all operators, not just me. DC though, stop the train and deselect the track and it's not creeping anywhere.

 

Pros and cons to both sides and we all know which we prefer. Just as you may not understand why some would stay with DC, some of those probably equally think you're nuts for making everything DCC and not trying other skills from time to time.

well Im a professional electronics engineer, the last thing I need is more " wiring " switches , thanks   

 

I only ask this because DCC simplifies layout wiring in any sort of medium to larger layouts or ones that have complex shunting , provides better slow speed control and overall costs less then a good DC system 

[Junctionmad]

 

 

Unprototypical running? Which part?

in real life engines , stop  in any section of track , and the engines move independently of the engines,  to do that in DC requires considerable wiring and still certain maneuverers cant be easily performed , i.e. banking , double heading, even station pilot activity requires a considerable investment in DC got create isolating sections. in DCC none of this is necessary 

 

 

Unless the numbers are not known because they are inside a shed or they're stabled too close together and are identical to others.

 

many controllers allow bitmaps of the loco to be loaded into the controller , or textual descriptions, etc , recall stacks etc . in reality none of the issues you mention are actually an issue 

[Junctionmad]

 

 

One quirk I noticed quite often exhibiting a DCC layout was that sometimes a locomotive would appear to be stopped, but wasn't.

simply because , the operator hasn't selected speed zero. thats all 

[Satan's Goldfish]

well Im a professional electronics engineer, the last thing I need is more " wiring " switches , thanks   

 

I only ask this because DCC simplifies layout wiring in any sort of medium to larger layouts or ones that have complex shunting , provides better slow speed control and overall costs less then a good DC system

 

 

 

First part, DITTO! But it kinda has the opposite effect for me, I enjoy designing and building bespoke from scratch. The actual modelling part of this hobby is the bit I try and avoid!

 

The second part I don't fully agree with. Having taken over a large DCC layout, reversing it to DC and extending it, the amount of track wiring involved isn't quite as intensive as the 'droppers from everything' needed in DCC. Yes there's more track feeds over board joints for the individual lines but the bus requirements aren't the same for reliable running.

 

Reference slow speed control and cost, this really depends on the control systems used. As well as OO, I also have a lot of Swiss RhB G 'scale'. A video to demonstrate would probably be better than a description, but the DC control for a train that's going to draw over 2 amps isn't cheap (it's been at least 10 years since I bought controllers, I believe they came in around £250) but crawls from a stand still amazingly well. The basic DCC equivalent is in to 4 figure sums. At OO scale, I find it much more cost effective to build my own than to buy a DCC system.

 

Again though I'd like to reiterate, I'm not anti DCC and computer control, I can see the Merits! Especially when it comes to light and sound. I just like the challenge of finding the solutions to not using them.

 

 

in real life engines , stop  in any section of track , and the engines move independently of the engines,  to do that in DC requires considerable wiring and still certain maneuverers cant be easily performed , i.e. banking , double heading, even station pilot activity requires a considerable investment in DC got create isolating sections. in DCC none of this is necessary 

 

 

many controllers allow bitmaps of the loco to be loaded into the controller , or textual descriptions, etc , recall stacks etc . in reality none of the issues you mention are actually an issue

 

 

 

First part, couldn't agree more. Apart from the isolating bit, a length of wire and an spst switch is cheaper than a chip, even several isolating sections.

 

Second part, depends on the system. If assisting with a friends a layout that uses controls that just displays numbers, then there's some learning to do before things run smooth. There are some very good PC control systems out there that give you all the information you could ever want I'll agree, but that still depends on how much money someone wants to spend on their control system.

 

 

simply because , the operator hasn't selected speed zero. thats all

 

Yes. But the fact that it happens to multiple operators is a flaw and is a little embarrassing at an exhibition. It also suggests that it's easy for an operator to think they have selected zero when they haven't. From memory, the times this error has occurred is with controllers with speed knobs rather than up/down speed buttons. Complete electrical isolation removes that issue.

 

 

 

To summarise; DCC = good, but it's not the answer for everyone.

[kevinlms]

 

 

Yes. But the fact that it happens to multiple operators is a flaw and is a little embarrassing at an exhibition. It also suggests that it's easy for an operator to think they have selected zero when they haven't. From memory, the times this error has occurred is with controllers with speed knobs rather than up/down speed buttons. Complete electrical isolation removes that issue.

 

 

 

But that happens with DC too, if people leave block sections on.

[Junctionmad]

First part, DITTO! But it kinda has the opposite effect for me, I enjoy designing and building bespoke from scratch. The actual modelling part of this hobby is the bit I try and avoid!

 

The second part I don't fully agree with. Having taken over a large DCC layout, reversing it to DC and extending it, the amount of track wiring involved isn't quite as intensive as the 'droppers from everything' needed in DCC. Yes there's more track feeds over board joints for the individual lines but the bus requirements aren't the same for reliable running.

 

Reference slow speed control and cost, this really depends on the control systems used. As well as OO, I also have a lot of Swiss RhB G 'scale'. A video to demonstrate would probably be better than a description, but the DC control for a train that's going to draw over 2 amps isn't cheap (it's been at least 10 years since I bought controllers, I believe they came in around £250) but crawls from a stand still amazingly well. The basic DCC equivalent is in to 4 figure sums. At OO scale, I find it much more cost effective to build my own than to buy a DCC system.

 

Again though I'd like to reiterate, I'm not anti DCC and computer control, I can see the Merits! Especially when it comes to light and sound. I just like the challenge of finding the solutions to not using them.

There is no need for any additional droppers in DCC then DC, most DCC layouts are entirely " over wired ". based on poor information. My friends large DC layout was converted to DCC , by merely flipping on all the section switches . DCC generates far less writing on a larger layout , as in DC section switch wiring has too be carried over baseboard connections and long runs back to " control panels ".

 

The "droppers for everything" is a terrible indictment on certain advice given in the early years of DCC and has stuck around, modern DCC with modern decoders can handle far greater voltage drop then DC without visible effects on performance. Droppers benefit both DC and DCC , as they remove the reliance on " dodgy" fishplates etc. A layout running well on DC will run well on DCC without additional droppers

First part, couldn't agree more. Apart from the isolating bit, a length of wire and an spst switch is cheaper than a chip, even several isolating sections.

sure , but the 10 miles of wiring to get that SPST switch back to a central panel is a pain and costly and requires interbaseboard connectors etc etc , My layout has 6 wires going between each board ( DCC, 12vDC pwr and a layout bus ( CANL/H) ) thats it ( and this includes extensive track circuiting , signals , points etc )

 

Yes. But the fact that it happens to multiple operators is a flaw and is a little embarrassing at an exhibition. It also suggests that it's easy for an operator to think they have selected zero when they haven't. From memory, the times this error has occurred is with controllers with speed knobs rather than up/down speed buttons. Complete electrical isolation removes that issue.

watching DC layouts at Warley , a similar set of errors were continually made by DC operators , getting their section switches wrong and watching locos stop dead, ( or inadvertently move ) we all have " learner driver " issues.I would suggest , that after extensive playing of trains!!, DCC is better with speed buttons ( or custom controllers with few speed positions ) then rotary controls, this is especially true when you add momentum effects

 

 

To summarise; DCC = good, but it's not the answer for everyone.

sure, if you have a Triang Hornby Oval complete with " ducking " giraffe then DC is great

for everyone else DCC is actually simpler

 

I simply cant understand the " I dont like DCC" , then followed by a series of reasons that usually demonstrate that the speaker knows very little about DCC at all.

 

The only place where DC tends to remain , are layouts where there is a large quantity of locos , or very simple ones, but modern cheap decoders has brought conversion to very low costs these days. ( yet I know non fitted locos require more work )

 

but for new layouts , again I cant understand why anyone would go DC today . more wiring , more opportunities for error, more wires crossing baseboards , section switching to be run to control panel ( and operators to remember how it works ) , poor slow speed running , inability to tailor controller to individual motor , etc etc

 

This is before you consider either layout busses, or DCC control of accessories which further reduces wiring compared to DC

[Chris M]

A few observations

1. The DCC types keep banging on about how great it is and telling us we should all use it.  DC types are happy with what they have and know that DCC is available if they want it. I find it rather insulting to my intelligence that DCC people keep trying to tell me DCC is better.

2. If DCC is simpler than DC then why are there pages and pages of threads on how to make DCC work properly but virtual none for DC?

[28XX]

Feeling a bit guilty I have reignited the DC vs DCC conflict, it was not my intention.

 

Personally, I embrace the digital / IT age at work or in other hobbies, but it seemes an anathema to operate trains depicting a pre electronics era with the look and feel of 21st century gadgets.

 

Meanwhile, I also firmly believe that DCC is just a step along the road, and BPRC will be the next big thing. I considered being an early adopter, but decided to leave it to those with greater knowledge and inventiveness to mature the technology, get on with building Stourhampton, my layout, and jump ship at some point in the future.

[Memphis32]

And the DC people keep banging on about DCC people banging on, in a DC vs DCC thread, no less...

[davetheroad]

Feeling a bit guilty I have reignited the DC vs DCC conflict, it was not my intention.

 

Personally, I embrace the digital / IT age at work or in other hobbies, but it seemes an anathema to operate trains depicting a pre electronics era with the look and feel of 21st century gadgets.

 

Meanwhile, I also firmly believe that DCC is just a step along the road, and BPRC will be the next big thing. I considered being an early adopter, but decided to leave it to those with greater knowledge and inventiveness to mature the technology, get on with building Stourhampton, my layout, and jump ship at some point in the future.

I agree with you there! I have a 00 scale 16' x 8' roundy roundy with lots of track and points  and no wiring at all. Over 30 steam locos converted and this year I will be adding a dozen or so BR Green and Blue period diesels. The key to the future is new battery technology and when that comes, as it will eventually, people will no longer moan that their loco will only run for 4 hours before you need to change the battery. At this point savvy manufacturers will realise it can make sense to offer a no track power option.

[SHMD]

I don't think either side (dc or dcc) can keep "banging out" the same old stereotype prejudices. My layout has one Base station that can give out two power districts which can free swap between dc-pwm and dcc in any combination because I designed it and wrote the firmware.

 

To do this I need isolation sections, true, but none of this wiring is over a foot in length and the control panel can be anywhere in the world.

 

 

Kev.

[Satan's Goldfish]

I simply cant understand the " I dont like DCC" , then followed by a series of reasons that usually demonstrate that the speaker knows very little about DCC at all.

 

I'm just going to re-add I'm not anti DCC, I do appreciate what it's capable of and I have used it in the past. I just don't feel it's the answer for me for what I'm currently working on* (layout 26' x 8'). Not everyone is the same as you and will feel that DCC is the only answer but that's their choice, and that choice isn't always just down to uneducation, it's a personal preference as with many things in life. For example, I'm a Holden/GM fan and can't understand why anyone would buy a Ford. But that's my next door neighbours choice and I don't feel the urge to outline to him all the advantages/disadvantages of it.

 

 

*technically there is still some DCC on the layout, the cranes use it!

[kevinlms]

A few observations

1. The DCC types keep banging on about how great it is and telling us we should all use it.  DC types are happy with what they have and know that DCC is available if they want it. I find it rather insulting to my intelligence that DCC people keep trying to tell me DCC is better.

2. If DCC is simpler than DC then why are there pages and pages of threads on how to make DCC work properly but virtual none for DC?

2. Is not true, there are lots of questions on RMweb, on the line of 'How do I wire a simple layout for DC'? If DC was easier, this question wouldn't need to be asked.

 

I'm actually assisting a friend to wire a large layout for DC. He won't have a bar of DCC because of the usual story of 'I have too many locos, to buy decoders for'. He does indeed have a LOT and they still keep getting delivered!

 

He has no clue about wiring at all, whether its for DCC or DC, so complexity of either one, isn't the issue. I've tried to show him how to solder droppers, to at least speed up the process, but to no avail. The projects just going to take longer...

 

For his layout, undoubtedly DCC would be MUCH easier, to wire up for train control only and for the return loop. The latter is something he's panicking over, despite my assurances that it won't be a major issue (we have yet to start wiring that portion of the layout and indeed the track plan, still isn't finalised).

 

I can see why some people enjoy wiring a layout for DC and certainly they need to properly understand the principles and know what a relay does.

 

For me, I'm over wiring for DC & any future layout of mine will be DCC.

[Crosland]

2. If DCC is simpler than DC then why are there pages and pages of threads on how to make DCC work properly but virtual none for DC?

 

I think DCC users tend to be comfortable with the internet and turn to that medium.

 

There are plenty of physical pages (e.g. the old Peco "shows you how" booklets) on how to wire and run a DC layout.

 

DC can easily get over-complex for the average user, just try designing and wiring a progressive cab control system.