Thinking about why I run only conventional

Well I ran conventional until about the end of July. Then I found DCS. I don't have the full system yet just the RTR one and still run the other loops with Z1000 and a ZW but when I get the DCs I will just run conventional off the TIU. ts very nice to have speed control and not have to worry about accidents instead you can have the train constantly running at low or high speeds. I dont like other speed controls just MTH's Proto speed control. Like Eric from Eric's trains said "when you buy an MTH train theres no guessing what your going to get. You know your getting a high quality train that will last for years to come" He also stated "they provide the most train for the money" I totally agree with that statement. For 300 to 350 dollars you can get a nice train set with top quality cars and locomotive, after selling the transformer and track if you don't need it it's such a bargain. That's why I'm truly just MTH now.  With proper voltage protection such as a TVS, even track work, and fast blow fuses you will have a nice train for a pretty long time

I love passenger trains, and mine all have detailed interiors with many people figures (hand-painted MTH ones). With conventional operation, you slow the train and the interior lights dim...stop, and the lights go out. This is the main reason I run TMCC...the lighting is constant. Other than that, I'd run conventional.

Since only postwar trains are allowed to run under my 2 Christmas trees, conventional is used for these.

Did Lionel do a study in which most people used CONV., even when they hadd TMCC locos?

Even when I ran conventional back in the day, I made it more complicated with relay logic and automation. When TMCC came along I jumped all over it. Now my goal is to run trains with a computer. No more conventional for me. My layout doesn't even support it.

Not that I am aware of, but I think it's safe to say that a significant majority of O gauge layouts today still operate on conventional rather than command control.

I'm seeing that a lot of people love the feel of a ZW or similar handle throttle. Just a thought, my son plays racing video games. This is done by a simple joystick. He purchased seperately a set up that has a stealing wheel, shifter, gas pedal and brakes.

Since there are ports on DCS and Legacy devices, does anyone make a train control that plugs in.  I love my remotes but often I sit in one spot to run layout. I would love a stationary set up with a throttle, bell and whistle control,accessory control...the list goes on and on. 

Its easy to navigate through currents remotes but often you have to push several buttons to get to control you want. A master panel that has it all right there in front of you like you were sitting in a real life engine cab would be awesome. 

The greatest advantage to remotes, be they conventional or command, is that even on a small something as humble as a 4 X 8, you can change your perspective of your layout and still maintain control.

Rusty

Hi Folks,  I think that conventional control is great for people who want to run a train on loops without without switching and multiple train operation.  I was at a persons home last week who has a wonderful 1950s era layout that is all conventional control.  He had two trains running on separate loops and it was fun to watch them as they went around the loops.  After about 15 minutes of running there wasn't much more to see.  I find it hard to keep interested as trains run on a loop for long periods.  

Command control shines if you want to run several trains at different speeds on the same loop, cross from one loop to another, run engines in a "lash-up", do switching anywhere on the layout, etc.  To me, the operational possibilities of command control are what makes running the layout fun.  

For example, I can make up a train in the yard.  As the road engine backs down to couple onto the train, a different engine can get a caboose from the caboose track, and couple it to rear of the train.  Both engines are on the same track.  One engine can be a MTH and the other Lionel.  

Then I can run the train out onto the main.  I can run it into a siding as a different train runs past it in the opposite direction on the main.  I don't have to worry about separate electrical blocks because of command control.

I also find that being able to walk beside the trains as they run is a huge advantage of command control.  I like to see the train up close as it runs through the various scenes or switches cars.

I find that most command control engines are very reliable.  I have had my share of failures but most engines do work well.  The biggest problem with command engines is that they are almost impossible to fix by the owner if the electronics fail and getting them fixed is expensive and time consuming if you have to mail them to Lionel or MTH.  I wish that O scale trains had drop in electronics like HO have.

All of us have different approaches to the hobby.  I run conventional around the Christmas tree.  I find that command control is what keeps me interested in the hobby when I am running my layout.

Joe

Well, as is often said about computers, "Technology is great......when it works."  What is seen on here are a T R E M E N D O U S number of posts whining about burnt boards and other electronic reasons it often does not.  I do not wish to become a computer geek to run my trains.  All of these aids, like in switching, etc., are great, when they work. Like other products, I feel like I am being asked to

pay for stuff I don't want.  As long as others get what they want, with lots of

electronics to fix, and..it sounds like, fix it, you will...I want the thing offered conventional and mechanical (reparable), also, for me.  That is not happening.  And..

where is your VCR?  OBE'd is where..... so how long is today's expensive gadget

gonna work with trains yet to come?  Warranties do not include free upgrades.

Well said Joe B-   Command control works great.  I love it and am having a blast with regular TMCC.  I still have more to explore with what I have.  I think the key is, ironically enough, is don't get too complicated or too big.  Build something that works, something that is practical and manageable.  Then it is awesome fun.  The way you can run a layout, the switches, routes, LASHUPS, operating & uncoupling tracks- the whole thing works if it's done right.  Much easier than operating in conventional really.  Keep it simple- even in TMCC!   

I have scale equipment but its currently all run with conventional.  There is something about running with a big old transformer that I really enjoy.

I will be reconstructing my layout over the Winter/Spring.  As four of my engine have TMCC, I am thinking about adding command to the layout as it would be cool to have the ability to remotely uncouple anywhere on the layout. 

Jim

It's fun to read all the different perspectives. I too run conventional for the simplicity of its set-up (wire to the track), the relative simplicity of the engines, and the cost (high for me) of converting what I like to run to command control. I enjoy being able to plunk my grandfather's 248 on the track and it just goes. I don't have any trouble switching...

Not knockng the conventional guys, but if it weren't for TMCC and DCS, I wouldn't be in the hobby today at all.   I LOVE multiple train operation, the sounds, operating with a remote, slow speed operation, etc., etc.  Once I tried command control, I was hooked and never looked back.

A lot of people really want to "operate" trains seem to be totally committed to only TMCC or DCS and I can understand that for driver drivers it makes a lot of sense.  I like to run, but not operate trains - the difference in my view being that I don't want to vary speeds, do switching of cars (I have never even activated an electro-coupler on any of my locos or whatever . . . ) - I just like to set them running and watch.  I have four loops and run six trains at a time which is quite a lot to watch.

Your initial reason mentioned for liking conventional makes total sense, too.  I'd never thought of the issue as a train age related thing.

I still sit in one spot to run trains much like in my pw ZW throttle days. I operate from a hand held Cab 1 remote via TPCs and PoHo power without regard to whether I am running Conventional or Command. At times I conventionally still run my many old MTH Ps-1s[some are deceased] and some conventional Lionel, K-Line, Williams and 3rd rail [and of course the Grand Kids Thomas & Friends covey of engines].

However I mostly favor Command[TMCC] simply because it enables easily running multiple engines in the same power district or "block". Today I have simplified my hobby by downsizing to a much smaller less complicated 9x16 attic, round-the-wall "senior citizen's" layout that is easier to operate and maintain[hopefully I will get it nearer to completion with structures and o-scale folks]. 

Simplification: I quit running smoke in the mid '90s and very often even operate without sound. I reduced to a single control system by selling my DCS to a VA Doctor and today I use TMCC only. I have a new Legacy system in its box under the layout which I will probably never use[yep I hear that it runs old TMCC better also].

I also dispensed with the 7 ASCs [VAC powered with 22 wires each plus diodes] that controlled 32 Tortoise operated turnouts via much Cab 1 button pushing on my former layout. Today the fewer turnouts[17] are directly powered by a surplus VDC "wall wart" transformer and operated on two wires each by simple on/on toggles mounted on a track schematic. The position of the toggle lever itself indicates the position of the hidden or distant turnouts at a glance.

I expect all of this makes no sense to a majority of O-gaugers but at 80+ years it sure reduces my maintenance workload and frustration. [and the rebuilt pw ZWs are resting from their long labors in the "museum" ready for action if old tech hi-tech fails].

The other reason why I don't care too much for command control, see topic; "She's dead, Jim."

Lee F.

It just doesn't matter how we operate our trains.  As long as we enjoy the hobby as we do, no one needs to justify their methods.  

I thought Bones said, "he's dead, Jim!"

Conventional vs DCS comes down to the following for some of us that have 50s conventional trains and accessories and layouts.

1 Practical and realistic

To convert is out of the question if you convert 40 plus locos, 27 switches and 5 train operation on a layout, and lots of operating accessories.  Cost, time, effort required is out of site plus the layout does what is necessary now because I built it that way

2 Cost goes un -said when most of the stuff was bought years ago, used at train shows and at inexpensive prices.  I have one loco that was bought new, a Kline GG-1.  Cost to upgrade to DCS or buy new engines is way too high for budget.

3 Ease of operation, fixability and repair.  Parts are easily found for 50 year old Lionel, etc, easy to problem solve and repair.  Parts for even 5 year old electronics often can not be found and they change models and features often.

4 Batteries - Can you imagine keeping 40 engine batteries charged!  I have trouble keeping the the only batteries I have on my X 10 Tv camera car charged when I want to run it.

If I was new to the hobby and had lots of money to spend I might consider a DCS system vs conventional but to switch over is not even a serious consideration.  Having the latest technology and the fanciest system is not my bag and have my layout is for my satisfaction not to impress others or for bragging rights.  Most others do not even care.

Charlie

 I can't agree more. Well said thanks!