DC or DCC and Other Queries

  My 2 rail world all DCS(feature rich) @   beginning  east bound CSX BNSF 4 engine multi unit
    @  .55  west bound Guilford Pan Am  5 engine multi unit
    @ 1.54  east bound Guilford 2 unit switching track

Most 2-rail model railroaders that get very far in the hoby in whatever scale, go to DCC.    By that I mean permanent operating layout, not just a display loop.   The reasons have been presented many times.

I think there are also quite a few model builders, who prefer building to operating, and the older ones may well still be in straight DC.

willygee,

 

PUT OUT THAT FIRE!!!

 

That's a lot of smoke.

 

 

Pistons kits and liners ordered from MTH

Yes, I run DC and no sound.

I think DC or DCC is a decision that depends on the individual case.   I have a relatively large locomotive fleet, many of which predate can motors, relative to the size of the layout which was wired for conventional block cab control.  I see no advantage to change.

I personally think sound is overrated, but I'm open to hearing why others think it an advantage.  To me, "sound" has a number of shortcomings:

 - first, I don't think the sound sets are especially realistic:  It would take an exceedingly sophisticated program to truly replicate the correct sound for a locomotive under load at any given time, even if one had onboard sensors to detect the trailing load [ I assume throttle position and speed are known.]  Do these exist ?  The rolling resistance for models is quite different from the prototype too -- and how do you do dynamic braking ?

 - second, "where" are the ears of the listener -- in the cab, or standing off the right of way, or ? ?   The sound suite for just those two positions are quite different.

I can see sound if you have a small switching pike and like the burble of an Alco with a couple of cars;  beyond that, realistic sound becomes difficult.

The simplification of wiring for DCC is I think, overstated;  you still "have" to drop a feeder for each [ well, more or less ] rail section, aren't you ?  And you are going to subdivide the layout electrically for trouble shooting, aren't you ? 

I think more modellers that use DCC than DC are on this forum because those are modellers more likely to be building their layouts, and / or are more likely to be internet/'forum' friendly.

Again, the above is my viewpoint.  I think each individual needs to make that decision themselves.

Jim, why did you change from DC to DCC ?

Best regards no matter what your operating system, SZ

I rn 3 rail O, HO and N scale and i use digital control for all and most of my HO and N have sound. I like running trains and the command control is the best way for me to do it

first, I don't think the sound sets are especially realistic

I agree.  I have mostly engines with PS2 and a couple of diesels with TMCC/Legacy.  The sounds may be correct at a given single speed, but when you vary the speed up/down I don't think the sound matches what the engines are doing.  They're close for the most part, but I've found I can live without most sounds (I do like the horn/whistle though, not so much a bell ringing).

These heavy O scale engines pulling heavy O scale trains seem to make plenty of sound on their own.  I suppose if you have a super large layout the sounds from 2-3 trains isn't so noticeable as when you have a small (12x12) layout room like I do.  I can't imagine what it sounds like when people say they can run 6 trains around 6 loops of track at the same time.

I guess I've come to the fact that I like the idea of no wires going to the layout, I hope battery-operated RC is what I'm looking for.  I MAY run 2 wires to a piece of track to charge the batteries but I'm hoping I can pull an engine up to a "refueling" station and simply plug it in a small charging jack.

The one thing that has puzzled me in 3-rail is why are they still using AC when all the modern engines have DC motors in them?  Seems like unnecessary electronics when simplification should be the norm.  I know one answer is because of all the old equipment still being run, but that's like using blocks of ice to keep your food cold instead of refrigerant.

DC, DCS here.  Keep it simple, too much else in life to go wrong.

 Actually AC is simple, and you may use the cycle changes alone as a control.  DC track wiring can be more complicated, and trouble prone for reverse loops need of polarity changes in HO or N, I don't see it being easier here in 2r Og

   Its AC at the wall, and its easiest to step down first then rectify.

  Cheap, and easy in an on board set, to match the units draw.

  And a cost problem? Rectification on each unit might cost them $2 on a bad day. These boards costs don't equal anywhere near the asking prices on a production level item. 

   Vibrating motors on all the past accessories use ac cycles too. Which has little to do with 2rs, but is a factor in PW 3 rail use, remaining AC despite AC/DC locos being the norm.

 With the elimination of the Pulmore "official", eliminating the third rail too, would fall into planned obsolescence well. Think of all the center rail metal they will save as the need for isolated rails drives new sales   

  2r O, in DC alone may be "the future". Stranger things have happened

 I heard bells on the Detroit steel factory switchers shuttling hot metal, more than the horns. Its electronic counterpart is much easier to handle hearing than the "bicycle bell" switchers, or the prototypes. My volume is much lower, but its the one thing I do really love about new sound

Vibrating motors on all the past accessories use ac cycles too.

Isn't it time the "O" gauge/scale industry got away from out-dated technology?  To me the "modern" (even though it's been around since at least WWII) way would be to go battery-powered RC, and LEDs for lights.  When I was flying RC planes it was common to have a .75 cu.in. motor and a 16 oz. fuel tank fuel of a castor oil mix, these days the same size planes are flying on brushless DC motors powered by batteries.

It's not so much a question of what use to be, but what we can do now that I'm looking for.  I'm looking to get away fro a proprietary system(s) and try something that's at least open source technology and available at a reasonable cost.  DCC might be open but it's been difficult to understand.  DCS may have a 200+ page book(s) but DCC has volumes!

The problem with RC, there's so much out there a person doesn't know what to get unless you have a good understanding of RC, batteries, chargers, etc.  The system that's on its way to me is a testbed for me, if it works great if it doesn't, that's $200+ worth of electronics I'll have to find a use for (maybe my G scale 4-6-0!!!).

CVP (makers of Easy DCC) offers a battery powered RC system specifically for model trains.   At least they used to.   I think it was aimed at Large Scale, but might be worth looking into.    I think they called it "Airwire"

If my budget ever catches up with my want list (unlikely I know, but there is always hope) I plan to try a DCC loop in 3 rail with a PS3 engine or two. From what I have read, DCC sounds interesting and while probably a big PITA, I think it would be fun to fiddle with all those settings DCC has available. I like the NCE DCC system. However, this is all definitely down the road a bit as layout, trains and budget are not playing well together at the moment.

I have read a few articles on R/C and battery power lately, but I am not sold on that one just yet. Sounds like there are more 'cons' than 'pros' to me. I still prefer the wired systems, which I have had very little trouble with so far. I suppose that could all change if I ever make to the loop of DCC. OTOH, I just re-entered the hobby a few years ago, so most of you folks are way ahead of me in that department. My thinking could easily change with more time spent in the hobby?

 AC vs DC is an argument as old as Tesla & Edison. They both have their own strong suits, weaknesses, and a big overlap where they both work grandly. 

 Batteries and RC is already fairly common in G. They have a bit more room for the batteries, but I cant think of a reason other than volts/amps drawn for a basic system not to be easily worked out. In fact you are going to have extra functions left to use as you see fit on the left over toggle on a simple unit.

 So your not exactly treading on unproven ground in doing this, especially if you already have some RC battery knowledge going for you.

 But the fact many folks are only into trains a month, or two a year is also a concern for battery life/costs.  A power cord, and rails will be the predominant choice for quite sometime into the future.

 Hey, you don't really even need those batteries in the train unless its your "clean rails" workaround. A charging unit in a car, and you could in theory use both systems, with the intent being a more constant top off of battery power to get you through troubled areas, and travel to some unpowered sections. I know its not ideal (or wasn't) for most rechargeable batteries "memories", but should work well short term for some applications. 

 I think some system differences are a good thing too; competition works in our favor. And proprietary info lockdown, and system choices alone, is not really very competitive after the initial choice is made. DCC costs vs other command systems is a great example.

 One more thing, admittedly 3 rail AC biased, as I've owned my "ancient artifacts" since before I was born and they are "my best friends". And much like the Model T owners that once grew up with, and cared well for their cars, I cant fully get behind ideas (highways) that leave their muses not only useless, "but against the law" by exclusion. Ie once a reasonably priced higher amp option becomes available Id consider upgrading. I'm not lost in the "new tech", I was an electronics tech. I'm just not that impressed by the new "miracles". The slow and prototypical application of speed, or sounds, is not really any kind of important to me. I just need them to move. 

  I'd much rather see the money go into better scale details than "forced" gadgetry I wont really use. Gadgetry can be added by those in need of it, why should my dollars be used to pave their way to cheaper "extras". I think me & Henry Ford would have gotten along well in that aspect. 

Me caveman, me push button, train go! MMmm... train good!

(Yes, its great to be so easily amused on a cool & sunny Saturday am)

Once again the misconception that DC only works on 2-rail appears.  There is no reason that DC cannot work on 3-rail; the reason the 3-rail crowd uses AC is the same as the reaso they keep the center rail - nostalgia.

Motors are now all DC - you have your choice - one switch and one rectifier at the power pack, or a rectifier and complicated sequencing reverser in each locomotive.  Choosing the latter makes no sense from a cost or complexity standpoint.

I run straight DC, but have tried DCS and like it.  I have one locomotive with steam sound, and need to get Diesel sound for one more, some day.  I am looking forward to viable, inexpensive battery/ RC.

Some one asked why I changed from straight DC to DCC.     

I am in a round robin model railroad operating group.   We operate every thursday night on layouts in the group.    MOst of the group is HO, one is N, and one is O 2-rail and I am O 2-rail.    We operate using car cards, switchlists, or car counts, depending on owner style and design.    But it is not just running trains, it is moving them for switching, through meets, exchanging power and in some cases adding helpers.   Over the years the group migrated from straight DC to DCC until it got to the point that I was the only one left with Straight DC and cab control.   It got to the point where the guys had forgotten about blockl boundaries and were overrunning into the next block a lot.   That became annoying.    So I finally decided to convert to DCC after fighting it for years.   It has worked out Great!  The railroad operates much better and the locos run much better.    The control options are very good.    And sound and all that crapola can be added too.    But at least you don't get the silly talking locos like some of the 3 rail systems.    And the sound can easily be turned off, just hit F9.   

Also I was contemplating a move and planned to convert to DCC then.   It didn't happen but I got a really could deal on a DCC system out of an estate that was basically new.   

Once you get past startup in DCC, it is not anymore complicated than the other systems I am sure.   And on a large railroad like a friend I know in Ohio who has TMCC, that is very complicated.   He has had to put antennas in his tunnels and also modify the antennas in many locos to get them to run well on his layout.  He has also had to string power drops on nearly every track.   that is just the norm for whatever system if you get to a decent sized model RR.

 And neutral on conventional DC Bob? I'm guessing you run diesel, and never parked a smoking steamer in ac conventional have you?

DCC doesn't do reversing on a complicated board?

   There's no misconception I can see. I've ran enough of all of the above to know a few pros, and cons of all of the above, and car batteries when there is no other power.

 Neither power type is consistently superior right across the board. Expecting everyone to immediately toss their old things, and jump on a 2 or 3 rail dc bandwagon is as highly unrealistic as wanting to convert a scale only mind to a toy only mind, or visa versa. Time has already proven that; DC isn't new to three rail, and AC wouldn't be new to 2 rail.

  I won't even argue about the third rail nostalgia? Why should it be be denied? The wiring, and isolated rail triggers, common in three rail, now need "complicated" boards/ relays, and sensors to achieve a hidden electrical trip in two rail (a micro switch is not a hidden advancement). AC two rail in Europe did take advantage of the AC waves too, just so there is no misconception that DC is the only way to run 2 rail either.

  AC is there at the wall. Where we happen step down voltage, and rectify is really a trivial reason to throw out ac out asap, before it hits the track, rail numbers aside. It is still useful as a non digital base control among other yet to be applied cycling ideas, so why the intensity to avoid AC, unless your just interested in new sales by planned obsolescence, or leaving a 120v outlet far behind you for running? Cost?

  We are talking about four diodes, and a cap extra per new dc unit to keep the old somewhat relevant. I think I pay 25¢ retail for 1. What do you suppose the direct wholesale cost is on those cost by the 100,000s. How about one of those "complicated" reversing boards? Still should be way cheaper, than a dcc command reverse board. As simple as they are, it should really be a common sub-board usable by all). Worth the extra $15 extra we should all be paying for such a simple (semi-)mass produced item to remain both backwards compatible as well as forward. Some of us pay more than that in sales taxes to own an engine.

 I'm less opposed to paying for Kaydee, or the cost of isolated wheel sets MTH "dual use locos" have, than some electronics. I feel extensive electronics should be optional, because of the claimed costs of doing it, being ten times that $15 base. You have to come up with something better than the cost of a few diodes to convince me its "wrong" to stay ac compatible.

"Exceeding your authority";  that's interesting, because I've always looked at block control as providing, by means of dead blocks, a way to limit movement and prevent collision -- the other side of the coin.  However, that suits my layout because I have quite a bit of staging / off stage trackage, probably more than is "on stage", and short blocks between each "train block" provides the ability to just run a train slowly into a staging location till it stops.

Further, most of my turnouts [ 'on stage'] are grouped into three interlockings [ one stub end terminal, both ends of a through ] so control is concentrated at each of those [ there are some ancilliary 'local panels' for some switching ], so it just seems logical to have track power control assignment there as well, even though much of the switching is via hand held throttles.

I can see how DCC can be of benefit where one has multiple operators at different points [ "towns"] along the line of road, especially where a lot of hand-held turnous are used -- they just still need to not exceed their track authorities !  Another example of why a control scheme is not a 'one size fits all' but rather needs to be chosen to suit the individual's railroad and tastes.

With best regards, SZ

Somebody ought to write a book...From what I've read so far there's no one system that has everything everybody wants, but each system has some good things about it.

What I really would like to see: O scale engines with a DC can motor, directional lighting, and a plug so ANY control system could be plugged in, and that's all.

++++ 1.   I agree.  I believe the expression in HO is "DCC Ready", and even MTH offers [ or offered ] their HO locos that way.  I am tired of paying for "stuff" [ I am being kind here ] that I neither need nor want.   I can think of a politico-insurance analogy.......

SZ

Wireless Battery DCC is the future.  Bachmann is even working on Bluetooth control DCC.  Dead Rail Society, that is the direction I am going. The main reason I finally quit HO and have never built a O layout is I'm not gonna deal with cleaning track or flickering lights reversing loops or diagnosing wiring faux pax.

Even signalling needs to be wireless control with battery power.

That's why I'm powering my Weaver 2-rail RS3 with a system from RCS in Australia.  If successful, I hope I can figure a way to convert the other 13 3-rail engines I have without spending a boxcar load of $$$.

RCS owner Tony Walsham said it would be 2-3 weeks before I see my order, he must not be aware that O scale guys live on "instant gratification"

I've been lurking on the Dead Rail Society forum and posting on the FreeRails forum.

Been 2 rail since 1976, having converted rom 3 rail. I was running DC until 2013.  I was reluctant to jump to DCC because of all of the horror tales and concerns about rewiring.  I found most of the horror were not true or maybe technology addresses them, and found conversion pretty easy once you get the first one down.  I have just installed my 24th decoder ( not counting times when I switched one decoder for another).  I did not have to rewire with 12 or 14 gauge.  In some places, I only have 18 gauge around my 24' square basement and have never had trouble.  I ruined 3 decoders early on but QSI replaced all three at no charge.  All of my engines have sound.  I think guys that have been running trains without sound for decades don't miss it or even prefer not having it.  But guys whose first contact with model trains included sound see it as part of the package. To them ahving an engoine without sound is like having an engine that only runs forward.   I  had been running my steam engines with a rather simple "chuff: circuit"for most of my DC years.  Somebody asked me how I liked having DCC and I said "it was like getting rid of the 3rd rail".  I still feel that way and I generally hate  computers.  I wish my tv remotes worked as well as my DCC.

What amperage are the DCC decoders being used for O scale?

When did Atlas stop offering 2-rail engines without TMCC, were they DCC ready?

Converting 1 engine to battery-powered RC (BPRC) cost me $279 (transmitter, receive/ESC, battery, charger, on/off/charging switch, module to add sound, no sound at present).  Upgrading additional engines (no extra transmitters) will be around $130 for the same setup.

Not sure about DCC, but:

DCS would cost $545 to start from ground zero ( DCS system $300, PS2 upgrade kit $170, AC power supply such as a Lionel Powerhouse $75), with sound.  Upgrading additional engines will be around $170 for the same setup.

Legacy would cost $580 to start from ground zero (Legacy system $300, ERR Cruise Commander $120, Railsounds $85, AC power supply such as a Lionel Powerhouse $75), with sound.  Upgrading additional engines will be around $205 for the same setup.

NOTE: all these prices were taken from Model Train Stuff when found, otherwise from manufacturer.

Sound for a BPRC engine is a big question for me.  The 2 systems I've looked at cost from $100-140, so to be fair I would have to add that in to the initial cost of $279 for a total of $419 for a system that is as complete as DCS or Legacy.  Additional engines would cost $270.  Good thing is at this point I'm not in favor of adding sound (getting tired of most of it to tell the truth).

So in the end it comes down to "taste and politics".  I don't like being force-fed something, but no matter which system I choose once it's chosen I'm committed to using certain products.

Could someone "guesstimate" the initial outlay cost of taking an engine with only a DC motor and adding a power supply and DCC system?

Bob,

when I purchased DCC it was about $420 for a complete 10 amp NCE system. add $65 for the Powerhouse brick. I crafted a DC/DCC/run/program switch box for a few bucks.

so I was all in at just under $500, not including decoders in engines.

Thanks Chris!

It seems all the "systems" cost near the same.

I'm still under the impression that it can be done for less, Ed Reutling and a few others have proven that with their "off-the-shelf" RC systems, using components out of RC vehicles found at places like Walmart.  It's a matter of can the system handle the current required and I'm thinking they can for the most part, with careful research.

I think the main obstacles with most people are:

1) $$$ already invested in a proven system

2) Lack of knowledge/understanding about a given system or electronics

I like to tinker and experiment, plus I'm not a brand loyalist.  DCC sounds like a good way to go and if this BPRC experiment doesn't work I may have to look into DCC as well.

The good thing about BPRCing my 3-rail 2-8-0, I can run it on my 3-rail layout (and maybe a 2-rail layout if the flanges don't interfere) along with the other systems.  The transmitter can "talk" to more engines than I'll ever have (I think it's dependent on the 2.4Ghz freq range) once you "bind" them together.

DCC, but I run trolley and interurban. DCC vastly simplifies wiring and operation issues, particularly if you, as I do, run multiple cars(trains for you) in opposing directions on what is a single track line with passing sidings.....

After several years of running DC on my main line and DCC on the branch, when I moved and built a new railroad I went all DCC.  I started small and added additional boosters ones as the railroad grew.  I find DCC wiring slightly less work than DC as I no longer needed cab selectors for each block.  Available DCC auto reverser boards  neatly handle 2 rail polarity  issues formerly associated with reverse loops, wyes, and turntables. I like having sound in my locomotives as it encourages operators to run at more prototype speeds.  Command Control does cost money but I look at it as a lifetime investment - around the price of a quality locomotive.

Ed Rappe

Ed I know how great your layout looks and sounds

Bob - if you would like to do some hands on testing of DCC just give me a call.  

Ed

Will do Ed, but only if I can take you to lunch as repayment

I didn't know they had auto reversing on the boards now.  That's pretty neat. 

Adriatic - DCC auto reversing  devices are separate boards wired to the rails of an isolated section of track in the reversing loop - 2 wires in, 2 wires out.  The ones I use are DCC Specialties' PSX-AR's. 

Bob - you're on - we have a great neighborhood pizza parlor close by - $3.95 for two slices and a coke.

Ed Rappe

Ed, email sent.

Man-o-man, I was ready to install the BPRC in my 2-8-0 (once the paint and gloss coat dried) but when I sprayed the tender the gloss coat "alligatored" the paint (boiler came out fine).  So now I have to remove and try again

Unfortunately that may as well be a relay as far as I'm concerned, but I do appreciate the knowledge, as well as acknowledge its likely an improvement as the turnout can be operated remotely now(I assume anyhow, otherwise you'll have to clue me what the real advantage is)

Anyhow, thanks Ed.

Does everybody except me have a reversing loop?  I kinda wish I had the room.  Balloon tracks were a rarity on real railroads.

Ed:

How does the PSX-AR treat your DCC signal? Any issues?

Matt

As a metal wheel tread crosses the insulated gap between an approach track and a reverse loop if the two tracks are out of phase (DCC uses a square pulse AC wave form which the on board decoder converts to DC) a momentary sort occurs.  The PSX-AR senses the short was caused by an out of phase condition and rapidly flips the phase of the reverse loop to match that of the incoming track.  This all happens in a split second - the locomotive never misses a beat..  The PSX-AR similarly responds as needed when the locomotive exits the reverse loop.  There is  no effect on the DCC signal itself which is super imposed on the AC wave form.  The PSX-AR also can automatically throw the reverse loop turnout.

Bob2 - my hidden reverse loops (balloon tracks) serve as staging tracks at each end of of a long multi track east west run.  During operating sessions trains enter and leave staging in sequence per a timetable - typically they are seen only once.  For open house operations or equipment test/break-in we can loop run with the PSX-AR's automatically handling reverse loop power.

Ed Rappe

Bob, if you use "incompatible" paints, the top coat must be done in slow "layers". It must be "dusted on" and let to dry and repeated till the whole area is coated. Try a search with lacquer, hot, enamel, and acrylic I think that will pull up a useful thread as to figure out exactly which type of gator skin you've grown, "cracking", or "pulling".

And thanks again for the edjumacation Ed. I can see the advantage is switch time-vs hesitation now.   

I use one of the PSX-Ars for my turntable and it works great. Just like Ed said locomotives go from the table to the tracks without missing a beat. I am very happy with the product.

One thing I disagree on is "the DCC signal itself which is super imposed on the AC wave form". This is not exactly true. Nothing is "super imposed". "Built in" would be better term. In DCC the signal and the track power are one and the same. The signal or instructions is sent by the Command Station by lengthening the tops and bottoms of the square wave. The decoders translates this into 1s and 0s. This is (IMHO) what makes DCC so great. A locomotive cannot get track power without getting the DCC signal or instructions. When you give a command to a locomotive and that locomotive is receiving power the locomotive responds. There are no flickering lights or Check Track messages.