To DCC or not?

[Izzy]

32 minutes ago, Art Dent said:

 

Both Baccy 08's.  One in BR Black with 'Cycling Lion' No. 103050 and one in BR Green with 'Lion & Dartboard' No. D3963.

 

103050 has a hard-wired Lenz Silver whilst D3963 has a TCS M1 micro.

 

Would like to put sound in them - but where as I want to keep the cabs free.

 

Art

 

I have a Zimo 26x20x8 'dumbo' 3D speaker behind the rad with a spare TTS decoder - a class 31 while I await the arrival of the proper 08 one ( due any time now), squeezed between that and the upright metal chassis bit meant for the PCB. I did have to cut a bit out of the chassis at the front to fit the speaker properly. But this thread is not the place to discuss such stuff. If interested I'll add a bit on it to my RTR conversion thread.

 

cheers,

 

Izzy

 

 

 

 

[Art Dent]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

Short, non-scale length formations are inevitable. That is not necessarily a killer for a home operational layout

 

What leaps out and hits me here is the concept of  4 suites of stock (1977 , 1992, 2007, 2016 ) each of which requires a separate fleet of HSTs, built up over many years. I have a mental vision of boxes and boxes of Mk3s piled high....

 

The older HST models with ringfields didn't have great tractive effort, or adequate pickup ,and they didn't have lights. I have been struggling to install DCC on an elderly 3 pole Hornby ringfield hardwired, so I have strong feelings on the point.

 

Upgrading a pair of such powercars is going to cost 2 decoders , possibly 4 function (one in each power car) Express Models lights at £20 a pop , a lot of work, to install. I reckon the bill will be at least £100 per HST set , without tackling the inadequete pickups and lack of grunt. 

 

Bit in black - agreed.  My loft layout, currently under construction, has a 'U'-shaped area at one end where the station is (hopefully) going  that measures some 2m wide x 3m long but in OO, scale length HST sets are out of the question.

 

The shortest 6+2 HST sets were (6 x 23m + 2 x 17.79m = 173.58m + inter-carriage 'gaps') and the longer 9+2 sets were  (9 x 23m + 2 x 17.79m = 242.58m + inter-carriage 'gaps') meaning that the OO-gauge scale length of these HST sets is at least 230cm for the 6+2 set and 319cm for the 9+2 set.

 

I'm struggling to see how my son is going to fit his Swallow-livered HST power cars and five Oxford Rail Mk3a's (2 x FO's, 2 x TSO's and RFM) in - and my layout isn't going to be small by any means with overall dimensions of 8.9m long x 2.3m wide (or 29.2 ft x 7.5 ft in old money).

 

Bit in blue - no, they didn't.  I have fitted one old R397 Hornby HST Power car with a Tenshodo Motor Bogie with a second Tenshodo fitted to the Dummy car and even then the model struggles for traction with a couple of Lima and Hornby coaches.  I really wanted Black Beetle motor bogies but they were unavailable at the time.  Even adding some additional lead ballast in each car above the motor bogies hasn't really helped.

 

Bit in red - a couple of Zimo MX600 decoders (iirc) and a home-made LED lighting rig (rather than the quite expensive Express Models items)  meant that cost for each car (excluding the £40 each for the Tenshodo's) came to around £25. 

 

So I converted the carp (anag) Hornby R397 power and dummy cars to DCC with new motor bogies to replace the awful Ringfields and put decoders and head and tail lights in for a total cost of around £130 - and I wasn't satisfied with the performance - then Hornby announce the TTS-equipped HSTs (first the VTEC - liveried / MTU-powered R3390TTS and then again - much later - the Swallow-liveried /  Valenta-powered R3602TTS) and that's another £280-300 gone!

 

To help Paul after this off-topic diversion, scale-length sets of coaches aren't really an option in OO (imho), so some form of 'compression' is necessary.

 

Art

Edited March 1, 2019 by Art Dent
Additional information and clarification

[Pete the Elaner]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

 

I was once in a position of coming up with a concept for a 16' x 12' space. I very rapidly concluded that a main line with full length InterCity sets in squadron service simply couldn't be done, even with 2+7 HSTs .

 

Actually it can, but with with limitations which many would consider unacceptable.

 

My home layout is a short section of WCML, recreated as accurately as possible. The scenic area is an urban cutting sandwiched between a tunnel & a bridge which are a scale 150 metres apart, which scales down to 6'6" in 1/76. There is no pointwork in the area but I was prepared to accept this to re-create a real location. I have run an 8+2 HST on there: It appears then takes up the whole of the scenic section before disappearing. This is entirely prototypical & I get more satisfaction from this than by having a layout with lots of pointwork & sidings. I accept that this would not appeal to many.

[Tallpaul69]

40 minutes ago, Art Dent said:

 

Bit in black - agreed.  My loft layout, currently under construction, has a 'U'-shaped area at one end where the station is (hopefully) going  that measures some 2m wide x 3m long but in OO, scale length HST sets are out of the question.

 

The shortest 6+2 HST sets were (6 x 23m + 2 x 17.79m = 173.58m + inter-carriage 'gaps') and the longer 9+2 sets were  (9 x 23m + 2 x 17.79m = 242.58m + inter-carriage 'gaps') meaning that the OO-gauge scale length of these HST sets is at least 230cm for the 6+2 set and 319cm for the 9+2 set.

 

I'm struggling to see how my son is going to fit his Swallow-livered HST power cars and five Oxford Rail Mk3a's (2 x FO's, 2 x TSO's and RFM) in - and my layout isn't going to be small by any means with overall dimensions of 8.9m long x 2.3m wide (or 29.2 ft x 7.5 ft in old money).

 

Bit in blue - no, they didn't.  I have fitted one old R397 Hornby HST Power car with a Tenshodo Motor Bogie with a second Tenshodo fitted to the Dummy car and even then the model struggles for traction with a couple of Lima and Hornby coaches.  I really wanted Black Beetle motor bogies but they were unavailable at the time.  Even adding some additional lead ballast in each car above the motor bogies hasn't really helped.

 

Bit in red - a couple of Zimo MX600 decoders (iirc) and a home-made LED lighting rig (rather than the quite expensive Express Models items)  meant that cost for each car (excluding the £40 each for the Tenshodo's) came to around £25. 

 

So I converted the carp (anag) Hornby R397 power and dummy cars to DCC with new motor bogies to replace the awful Ringfields and put decoders and head and tail lights in for a total cost of around £130 - and I wasn't satisfied with the performance - then Hornby announce the TTS-equipped HSTs (first the VTEC - liveried / MTU-powered R3390TTS and then again - much later - the Swallow-liveried /  Valenta-powered R3602TTS) and that's another £280-300 gone!

 

To help Paul after this off-topic diversion, scale-length sets of coaches aren't really an option in OO (imho), so some form of 'compression' is necessary.

 

Art

Please read what I have posted.

So, can I make the following CLEAR:-

NOWHERE did I say I wanted to run scale length trains.

The expectation is Loco plus 5 coaches or equivalent train length in wagons as a maximum.

YES HST sets will be power cars plus 4 coaches.

There is NO station. 

Curves are to be a minimum of 2ft 6ins radius.

A number of short sidings are included in the fiddle yard areas to accommodate locos to add to the end of trains to reverse them.

I DID NOT ask 12 companies to quote:- I asked 12 companies if they were interested in quoting!

Several of them said they had 2 years work, that is too long to wait, I can manage a years wait. 

I am ignoring all the assumptions folks have made, and the above relates to the last day or so of posts.

 

I could go on, but the above is enough to be ignored, misquoted, or misunderstood.

 

Please also, if you want to discuss the details of your application of a particular piece of DCC kit, go off and start your own thread, don't try to hijack mine!!

 

Thank you

[Ravenser]

12 minutes ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Please read what I have posted.

So, can I make the following CLEAR:-

NOWHERE did I say I wanted to run scale length trains.

The expectation is Loco plus 5 coaches or equivalent train length in wagons as a maximum.

YES HST sets will be power cars plus 4 coaches.

There is NO station. 

Curves are to be a minimum of 2ft 6ins radius.

A number of short sidings are included in the fiddle yard areas to accommodate locos to add to the end of trains to reverse them.

I DID NOT ask 12 companies to quote:- I asked 12 companies if they were interested in quoting!

Several of them said they had 2 years work, that is too long to wait, I can manage a years wait. 

I am ignoring all the assumptions folks have made, and the above relates to the last day or so of posts.

 

I could go on, but the above is enough to be ignored, misquoted, or misunderstood.

 

Please also, if you want to discuss the details of your application of a particular piece of DCC kit, go off and start your own thread, don't try to hijack mine!!

 

Thank you

 

Fine, but all the cost implications of converting older HST power cars remain. The cost  for a professional hardwire install of decoders in each power car, with Express Models lighting kits, is going to be over £100 per set . The hardware alone will be at least £50 per set

 

Similar comments apply to any Turbo sets. All this is adding substantially to the cost of going DCC 

 

There is a real difference between doing your own install on a DCC-ready loco for £15 a time, and a professional installation on these kind of sets at somewhere over £100 a time. If this represents the bulk of the fleet, we're talking about a 7-fold increase in cost

 

Quote

NOWHERE did I say I wanted to run scale length trains.

The expectation is Loco plus 5 coaches or equivalent train length in wagons as a maximum.

YES HST sets will be power cars plus 4 coaches.

 

With respect, you previously left it completely open as to what trains you would be running, and left us to guess

[Art Dent]

1 hour ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Please read what I have posted.

So, can I make the following CLEAR:-

NOWHERE did I say I wanted to run scale length trains.

The expectation is Loco plus 5 coaches or equivalent train length in wagons as a maximum.

YES HST sets will be power cars plus 4 coaches.

 

I am ignoring all the assumptions folks have made, and the above relates to the last day or so of posts.

 

I could go on, but the above is enough to be ignored, misquoted, or misunderstood.

 

Please also, if you want to discuss the details of your application of a particular piece of DCC kit, go off and start your own thread, don't try to hijack mine!!

 

Thank you

 

Sorry Paul,

 

I thought that the info about both scale-length HST sets and conversion of older stock would be interesting given the era(s) that you are looking at and the space you have available.

 

Even loco + 5 coaches take a considerable amount of space but not having a station helps enormously.

 

I didn't mean to annoy you nor to hijack the thread.

 

Art

[Tallpaul69]

1 hour ago, Ravenser said:

 

Fine, but all the cost implications of converting older HST power cars remain. The cost  for a professional hardwire install of decoders in each power car, with Express Models lighting kits, is going to be over £100 per set . The hardware alone will be at least £50 per set

 

Similar comments apply to any Turbo sets. All this is adding substantially to the cost of going DCC 

 

There is a real difference between doing your own install on a DCC-ready loco for £15 a time, and a professional installation on these kind of sets at somewhere over £100 a time. If this represents the bulk of the fleet, we're talking about a 7-fold increase in cost

 

 

With respect, you previously left it completely open as to what trains you would be running, and left us to guess

Ok, Ravenser, let me clarify (I hope you can follow this detail?):-

Length of trains as above.

The model is a representation (two track rather than 4) of the WR mainline just to the west of Maidenhead, so it includes the High Wycombe (later cut back to Marlow) branch junction but not the station.

It is intended to run in several eras probably 1962, 1992, and 2016 (latter to be just pre electrification changes). I also have stock/locos to run 1977 and 2007, but financing the DCC chipping (with some sound) means that some items are going to have to be sold! 

Some sidings have been moved to fit the space but retain the operational capability of the 1962 era.

Groups of sidings will have removable covers for 1992 and 2016 running. points to sidings will be hidden by strategic placements of lineside furniture. (which will change for different eras.

Points will be less obvious because the layout is to be at 5ft from floor. This is to allow me easier access without the complication of lifting flaps. I also hate the helicopter view of layouts as it is totally unrealistic!

So in 1962 there are :-Reading suburban services, steam and diesel,

parcels services,

branch passenger services,

4 branch freights each WAY

4 freights each way per day which drop and pick up wagons from the loops at Maidenhead.

Semifast passenger trains to various destinations including Oxford and Newbury 

Through Expresses

Through express freights

 

In later eras there are more multiple units and HSTs and only the freights are loco hauled.

 

In all eras all except for a few specific trains, all trains will run round the layout several times at different times in the timetable to portray different trains.

 

Except when I set two trains (one passenger, one freight running continuously so I can just watch them go by!

 

The above is just a summary!

 

Cheers

Paul

 

 

[Tallpaul69]

21 minutes ago, Art Dent said:

 

Sorry Paul,

 

I thought that the info about both scale-length HST sets and conversion of older stock would be interesting given the era(s) that you are looking at and the space you have available.

 

Even loco + 5 coaches take a considerable amount of space but not having a station helps enormously.

 

I didn't mean to annoy you nor to hijack the thread.

 

Art

That's OK Art, and the comment about hijacking was really aimed at the guys who go into minute detail about their trials and tribulations with one specific bit of kit and then others answer them with minute detail about another bit of kit!

 

From my point of view, all they need say here is that I had trouble with x, and because I am not an expert it took a lot of sorting out. That sort of info is useful, I do not need the blow by blow story!!

Re the HSTs I think I will be trying to get away with about 4 each for 1992, and 2016, so will not need to convert the older ones I have, so they will be sold.

 

Slight aside:- while I want some sound, I think my first priority will be sound in locos that are going to be slowing or stopping in my scenic area and leave the others whistling through unsounded. Yes, I know that I could slow those for variation, but you have to compromise somewhere and I have to concentrate my money on the essentials otherwise there will be no layout at all!

 

Its unfortunate I cannot do much for myself, but once I have a functioning layout and the minimum of trains to run on it I can then experiment with doing chipping etc. myself knowing that if something does not work, or fails, I can still operate the layout.

 

Best regards

Paul

[Tallpaul69]

16 hours ago, peach james said:

So, the originator of this intends on a layout with a loco density factor of about 0.75 locos/sq ft.  (that's based on getting 68 sq ft of table into a 96 sq ft room...)

 

DCC seems to make more sense than DC at those kinds of densities.  It also implies given the "60 turnouts" that the layout will be approaching 1 turnout/sq ft.  Which definitely approaches Spaghetti Junction levels.   

 

I think you are trying to cram too much into too little space.  DCC would help quite a bit in this case- it does mean that you can get locos stored nose to tail.  But this sounds...excessive.  If you had a MPD as the focus then I can see managing 24' of storage track(s), perhaps as high as 36', which would give you enough space to store 30-40 locos, and have 2 running.  Given that you want a station, that will substantially reduce the amount of on line storage that I can see being possible.  I could be wrong, but hey...

 

I would use DCC for traction power.

I would think about using DCC for stationary decoders.  If you want interlocking, then it is an easy approach to use for making said interlocking.  I would not use DCC for stationary decoders if you are not planning on automation or interlocking, it doesn't advance as much as the costs.  Although, if someone else is building the panel, it may be cheaper to fork out the 400-500 pounds for the gear and let them do it "their way"

 

I would seriously look at trimming the # of loco's & units you are planning on using.  40 seems excessive to me, based on what I need for my own layout.  (I have less than 16 locos on a layout that runs through 720 sq ft.  I own about 30 locos that are DCC equipped total).  

 

Again, some of this is very subjective.  The way you have phrased this has not been easy for us to suss out what you are trying exactly to do.

 

James

 

 

Hi James,

Sorry it has taken me a while to get to answering your post, but real life has a nasty habit of getting in the way of writing posts (as well as all the other things I need to do in preparation for having this layout built!

 

I cannot argue with your statistics, but there are factors such as :-

Not all 40 locos will necessarily be on the layout at once.

The 12 fiddle yard loops (4 up mainline, 4 down main line and 4 branch) will hold 2/3 trains each).

There will be room to hold 8 tender locos, so more tanks, in sidings off the fiddle yard.

So that accommodates a minimum of 32 locos on layout? - 4 less if you keep two tracks clear for continuous running

 

This will be an urban mainline scene, with suburban as well as express, pick up as well as through freights, and so needs a number of locos to be realistic.

 

I assume your layout is something like 40ft x18ft with a rural scene such as the Settle and Carlisle through which a train occasionally runs, mainly passenger expresses and the occasional freight but no locals? So your locos get a real good run? That suits you, so that's fine, I wouldn't dream of saying anything against it. Lucky you if you can run full length (13-15) coach trains?

 

When I get a minute I will clean up my latest layout sketch which is currently being estimated by a couple of builders and post it on the forum.

 

Best regards

Paul

[Pete the Elaner]

19 minutes ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Lucky you if you can run full length (13-15) coach trains?

 

Full length would probably have been more like 9, but still a lot to fit on all but the biggest OO layouts.

I have seen longer figures hinted at elsewhere but platforms longer than 12 coaches are not that common other than those for special services like the Caledonian Sleeper.

 

[Tallpaul69]

In Steam days, 9 coach trains would have been considered short, although I agree in the 1980s-1990s 9 was typical.

Today Pendalinos regularly run as 11 coaches.

The East coast mainline and the West coast mainline ran quite a few trains c12 coaches.

When I get a minute I will look up some details on these trains.

 

Cheers

Paul 

[pauliebanger]

On 01/03/2019 at 09:53, Art Dent said:

 

Both Baccy 08's.  One in BR Black with 'Cycling Lion' No. 103050 and one in BR Green with 'Lion & Dartboard' No. D3963.

 

103050 has a hard-wired Lenz Silver whilst D3963 has a TCS M1 micro.

 

Would like to put sound in them - but where as I want to keep the cabs free.

 

Art

 

Art,

 

Compared to some, the 08 (Hornby or Bachmann) has a reasonable amount of  usable space.

 

Zimo MX648, sugar cube speaker and Stay Alive capacitor all in the engine room between radiator and motor. Other methods are possible.

 

Best regards,

 

Paul

 

 

 

[newbryford]

On 01/03/2019 at 18:27, Tallpaul69 said:

In Steam days, 9 coach trains would have been considered short, although I agree in the 1980s-1990s 9 was typical.

Today Pendalinos regularly run as 11 coaches.

The East coast mainline and the West coast mainline ran quite a few trains c12 coaches.

When I get a minute I will look up some details on these trains.

 

Cheers

Paul 

 

Number of coaches isn't totally relevant.

Bear in mind that many of the older coaches are shorter than today's offerings.

Even with relatively modern designs - the Mk3 is 9 feet longer than a Mk2.

 

Cheers,

Mick

Edited March 3, 2019 by newbryford

[Ravenser]

12 hours ago, newbryford said:

 

Number of coaches isn't totally relevant.

Bear in mind that many of the older coaches are shorter than today's offerings.

Even with relatively modern designs - the Mk3 is 9 feet longer than a Mk2.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

As a rule of thumb:

 

48-50' coaches (Ratio MR/LNWR kits, Stanier/Maunsell full brake) = 9"

57' coaches (standard for GW/LMS)  = 10"

64' coaches (BR Mk1 + Mk2 ) = 11"

C3 restriction BR stock  (Mk 3, Mk4, 23m multiple units) = 12" 

 

[Tallpaul69]

Hi All

Getting back to the original theme of this thread, I thought I would update everyone that I have made the decision to go for DCC.

 

While I am now fairly comfortable with DCC in locos and controlling them, although the controller has to be finalised.

 

Points, signals , and couplings are still under investigation! I think finances may dictate that I go for basic control of signals and points via DCC but have things so that at a later date I can go for electronic Mimic diagrams. I may start a new thread on this particular area.

 

I think Couplings will go Kaydee for the ends of rakes, and individually or in 2s for wagons that need to be shunted, but I am not too sure about fitting Kaydees to Locos. So again, I may start a new thread on that topic!

 

Cheers

Paul

[Pete the Elaner]

1 hour ago, Tallpaul69 said:

 

While I am now fairly comfortable with DCC in locos and controlling them, although the controller has to be finalised.

 

Control system is a very personal choice.

Compatibility with friends may be a factor, but if it is not, then you do not really want to be locked in to something you are not really comfortable with.

Many operators at shows will be more than happy to give you some hands on time on their layouts, so don't be afraid to ask.

 

What I would advise is to design the layout in small sections. They are much easier to troubleshoot. You cannot easily add a section break but you can join sections together.

[Nigelcliffe]

1 hour ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Hi All

Getting back to the original theme of this thread, I thought I would update everyone that I have made the decision to go for DCC.

 

While I am now fairly comfortable with DCC in locos and controlling them, although the controller has to be finalised.

 

Points, signals , and couplings are still under investigation! I think finances may dictate that I go for basic control of signals and points via DCC but have things so that at a later date I can go for electronic Mimic diagrams. I may start a new thread on this particular area.

 

 

It is fine to buy incrementally, but decisions you take now on control system for the locos WILL impact the design of a mimic panel later if your intention is to have DCC control of signals and points.   The addition of a mimic panel (real buttons or software) to some maker's systems is a lot easier than for some other maker's systems.   Or, you need to have a clear view that you'll sell the initial system if it proves difficult/expensive to add the mimic panel later. 

 

In addition, whilst I find the control of turnouts and signals through a DCC handset to be sub-optimal, some types of handset make it easier than others.  Another thing to factor into your buying choices. 

 

 

- Nigel

 

 

 

[Pete the Elaner]

On 03/03/2019 at 21:19, newbryford said:

 

Number of coaches isn't totally relevant.

Bear in mind that many of the older coaches are shorter than today's offerings.

Even with relatively modern designs - the Mk3 is 9 feet longer than a Mk2.

 

Cheers,

Mick

I agree.

 

As far as commuter trains are concerned, these have lengthened recently. Some stations on the WCML were lengthened c2005 to accept 12 coach trains. The extra-long Calendonian Sleepers only fit in 3 platforms at Euston. Birmingham New St cannot be extended.

The Coronation Scot was 9 coaches. I know there may have been some which were longer but were they really typical?

 

Slightly short trains usually look acceptable on a model railway. Most layouts are compressed & running scale length trains can emphasize this.

I sometimes run a full length HST on my layout, which is a scale model of what is probably the smallest urban WCML station. Although it is as accurate as you are likely to see on a OO model, it looks way too long.

[Oldddudders]

All DCC systems are not created the same! Knobs, sliders, Starship Enterprise control desks - take your pick. Do try to see a DCC-specialist dealer, who can show you a number of systems and explain how the basics work. 

 

The system you buy now will last for a very long time. Best to know you’ll be comfy with it before splashing the cash. 

[Tallpaul69]

22 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Control system is a very personal choice.

Compatibility with friends may be a factor, but if it is not, then you do not really want to be locked in to something you are not really comfortable with.

Many operators at shows will be more than happy to give you some hands on time on their layouts, so don't be afraid to ask.

 

What I would advise is to design the layout in small sections. They are much easier to troubleshoot. You cannot easily add a section break but you can join sections together.

Because I am having my layout built as I just don't have the skills to do it myself, I have to trade off cost of wiring against benefit of extra sections. My current feeling is that a professionally built system should be less prone to requiring troubleshooting than an amateur build, so a reasonable compromise is to have only up, down, and branch sections.

 

Reference control systems I do not have modelling friends that I want to be compatible with, but I agree you need to be comfortable with  how your chosen system switches and knobs work.

 

Cheers

Paul

[jpendle]

31 minutes ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Because I am having my layout built as I just don't have the skills to do it myself, I have to trade off cost of wiring against benefit of extra sections. My current feeling is that a professionally built system should be less prone to requiring troubleshooting than an amateur build, so a reasonable compromise is to have only up, down, and branch sections.

 

Reference control systems I do not have modelling friends that I want to be compatible with, but I agree you need to be comfortable with  how your chosen system switches and knobs work.

 

Cheers

Paul

And please bear in mind that some systems (Zimo, ESU) have neither switches nor knobs.

 

Regards,

 

John P

[Alan Kettlewell]

On 06/03/2019 at 14:20, Tallpaul69 said:

Hi All

Getting back to the original theme of this thread, I thought I would update everyone that I have made the decision to go for DCC.

 

While I am now fairly comfortable with DCC in locos and controlling them, although the controller has to be finalised.

 

Points, signals , and couplings are still under investigation! I think finances may dictate that I go for basic control of signals and points via DCC but have things so that at a later date I can go for electronic Mimic diagrams. I may start a new thread on this particular area.

 

I think Couplings will go Kaydee for the ends of rakes, and individually or in 2s for wagons that need to be shunted, but I am not too sure about fitting Kaydees to Locos. So again, I may start a new thread on that topic!

 

Cheers

Paul

 

Hi Paul,

 

I'm glad to see you've decided to run your new layout on DCC, I'm sure you won't be disappointed.  It looks like you still have decisions to make regarding control of turnouts - DC or DCC - and whether to have a mimic type control panel ie switches and buttons versus an on screen electronic, or glass control panel.

 

I, and many others I'm sure, have had similar considerations to make as we've progressed though our modelling experiences.  Personally I switched to DCC about 15 years ago and at that time chose to sack my old mimic panel in favour of computer control.

 

More recently I switched DCC control to the Roco Z21 system which is wireless and uses a glass screen as the control panel via a very user friendly app,  so I can operate my entire layout from a mini iPad or my smart phone.  The ability to walk around the room with my throttle(s) and control panel containing every turnout, signal, lamp or switch in my hand is a revelation.  The other enormous benefit is the vastly reduced wiring due to there being no physical mimic panel to run every wire back to.  

 

The reason for my post is not to attempt to sway you particularly towards the Z21, but rather to give you food for thought about the physical control panel versus electronic.  Needles to say, in my book, electronic panels win hands down, but some folk like the tactile feel of a physical panel.  However some of your decision processes involve saving on the cost of wiring labour.  

 

In case you haven't been able to get around to see many DCC systems yet,  I've taken the liberty of posting a few screen shots of the Z21 control panel for your interest (these are not my actual layout but made up by way of example).  Whatever you do I wish you luck with it hope you get enjoyment out of it.

 

Here - two locos under control:

 

One loco under control and the track layout on the right side:

 

 

The track layout expanded to fill the screen:

 

 

I hope this helps a bit.

 

Cheers ... Alan

 

[melmerby]

Another option if you buy a Z21 is the Wireless MultiMaus which gives you a hand controller with a rotary knob giving total speed control in both directions, without having to switch forward or reverse.

I find it is more controllable than the touch screen slider of the Roco app. (I have that on a Galaxy Tablet)

My layout is also controlled by a computer program (TrainController Gold) but a hand control is IMHO better for shunting etc.

Edited March 7, 2019 by melmerby

[WIMorrison]

Another vote for the Z21 with a wireless Multimaus, excellent combination though I pair them with iTrain

 

I tried a few others and haven't found anything as stable and fully functioned as the Z21.

 

[Pete the Elaner]

6 hours ago, Tallpaul69 said:

Because I am having my layout built as I just don't have the skills to do it myself, I have to trade off cost of wiring against benefit of extra sections. My current feeling is that a professionally built system should be less prone to requiring troubleshooting than an amateur build.

That reminds me of an old scenario at work. We were looking to upgrade from Windows 95 / 3.1 to NT4 which makes it about 20 years ago.

 

One site chose to hire in contractors to do the work at a cost of about £250,000. My manager approached our director & suggested that if she spent £20,000 on training the 4 of us, we could do the upgrade ourselves & would have the knowledge to troubleshoot anything ourself.

I think with OT, the final bill was more like £300,000 v £40,000, so we spent at fraction of the other site & our network was the most reliable by a huge margin.

 

So it may be worth spending some time learning before diving in & getting someone else to do all the work for you. MK have a DCC-only club (Silver Fox DCC) as well as a large general club. I remember you saying you were in Leighton Buzzard, so only 2 stops away. I got a huge amount of my knowledge from getting 'stuck in' at a club. It really is a great way to learn.