Large Scale Central

NMRA/DCC Argument, Why?

General Discussion
#1

With 3 pages, I decided to put it back. :slight_smile: Kinda sounds like a certain congressman doesn’t it. I’m retiring, no I’m not, but I’m going to help pick my replacement.

Maybe just blowing off steam, but

I just got my latest issue of Garden Railways and have had the latest Model Railroader for a couple of days. What in the world is with the “Nothing Model Railroading Arrogance” and the “Doesn’t Control Crap” systems? Whether something is DCC ready or conforms to NMRA standards means nothing to me. I don’t care about it. I don’t want it. I don’t need it. If it doesn’t cost extra and I can work around it, okay. But if it continues to add to the price, then I will probably decide not to buy it because of these reasons. How much clearer does a person have to be? I don’t want DCC and I’m not joining the NMRA. Why are the editors and publishers trying so hard and taking up so much magazine space to sell this stuff? Are they really making an inroad in to our hobby? This latest crap with the choices you have to make with what you buy from Bachmann and then Aristo having everything setup for instant plug in (that you know will probably not work) is just causing me to not make purchases. Or at least think strongly about how much I want to tear apart the new equipment as soon as I get it home. Now, I really don’t care what other people belong to, but their arrogance will not make me join. And if I see I can only get certain versions of the new Bachmann equipment, if it is equipped with extra stuff that I don’t want, the decision has to be made is it worth the purchase. They must think I’m just part of the red box brigade and will buy it because they created it. If they really don’t think I won’t just tear all that crap out, they’ve not seen my hobby junk boxes. But if I have to continue pay more for stuff I won’t use, it just means I will buy less. If the magazines continue to be filled with articles that I have no desire to read, then I’ll eventually quit buying the magazines. LGB lost its market place and I guess the magazines are going that way, also. I know many of you have already made these decisions, but the latest magazines are really pushing it.

So what gives? Next thing you know they’ll be trying to convince me that it was hot in August because of global warming and now that it is September, I should buy some roller skate to replace my jeep. Yeah, like that is going to happen.

If the NMRA is so great, why are their numbers dropping? If DCC is the only way to go, why does it work so poorly at the train shows, clubs and everywhere it is used and why does everyone seem so frustrated and making excuses for why it isn’t working? I don’t want to be an electrical engineer to enjoy my hobby.

How many people in the large scale portion of the hobby are NMRA members? How many people in the large scale portion of the hobby use DCC? I sure must hang out in the wrong crowd. But then again?

Okay, thank you - I feel better.

#2
Ric Golding said:
Maybe just blowing off steam, but

I just got my latest issue of Garden Railways and have had the latest Model Railroader for a couple of days. What in the world is with the “Nothing Model Railroading Arrogance” and the “Doesn’t Control Crap” systems? Whether something is DCC ready or conforms to NMRA standards means nothing to me. I don’t care about it. I don’t want it. I don’t need it. If it doesn’t cost extra and I can work around it, okay. But if it continues to add to the price, then I will probably decide not to buy it because of these reasons. How much clearer does a person have to be? I don’t want DCC and I’m not joining the NMRA. Why are the editors and publishers trying so hard and taking up so much magazine space to sell this stuff? Are they really making an inroad in to our hobby? This latest crap with the choices you have to make with what you buy from Bachmann and then Aristo having everything setup for instant plug in (that you know will probably not work) is just causing me to not make purchases. Or at least think strongly about how much I want to tear apart the new equipment as soon as I get it home. Now, I really don’t care what other people belong to, but their arrogance will not make me join. And if I see I can only get certain versions of the new Bachmann equipment, if it is equipped with extra stuff that I don’t want, the decision has to be made is it worth the purchase. They must think I’m just part of the red box brigade and will buy it because they created it. If they really don’t think I won’t just tear all that crap out, they’ve not seen my hobby junk boxes. But if I have to continue pay more for stuff I won’t use, it just means I will buy less. If the magazines continue to be filled with articles that I have no desire to read, then I’ll eventually quit buying the magazines. LGB lost its market place and I guess the magazines are going that way, also. I know many of you have already made these decisions, but the latest magazines are really pushing it.

So what gives? Next thing you know they’ll be trying to convince me that it was hot in August because of global warming and now that it is September, I should buy some roller skate to replace my jeep. Yeah, like that is going to happen.

If the NMRA is so great, why are their numbers dropping? If DCC is the only way to go, why does it work so poorly at the train shows, clubs and everywhere it is used and why does everyone seem so frustrated and making excuses for why it isn’t working? I don’t want to be an electrical engineer to enjoy my hobby.

How many people in the large scale portion of the hobby are NMRA members? How many people in the large scale portion of the hobby use DCC? I sure must hang out in the wrong crowd. But then again?

Okay, thank you - I feel better.


Ric,

Sure glad you got that off your chest at the beginning of the week. :wink: :slight_smile:

NMRA/DCC = one of the few redeeming functions of the NMRA (at least in my book).

That said, I also wish they would get on with things i.e. implement RailCom ASAP so one knows where one is at. Every time a committee is designing a horse chances are we get a camel, precisely the reason the RailCom group is pushing ahead and the NMRA/DCC committee is lagging behind.
As for some of the NMRA LS track standards or the revisions thereof; more of the same “let’s re-invent the wheel” stuff! Every time I look at those standards I wonder if the committee is acquainted with the ISO standards system. Sure doesn’t look like it!

Mutter, mutter, grumble, grumble…

Oh before anyone tells me I shouldn’t bitch since I’m not a NMRA member, sheesh … I just had to get that off of my chest. :wink: :slight_smile: :wink:

PS BTW there are some very nifty features available with DCC, it’s all a matter of how to use what for which purpose and how to implement it. :slight_smile: :stuck_out_tongue: :slight_smile:

#3

It’s “the thing to do”.
It is “the standard”.
What drives them nutz is radio/battery, since we do not have to conform to any standard, don’t WANT anybody else controlling our trains.
We are stand-alone, and they cannot comprehend that.

Remember “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help”?
How about, “I’m from the NMRA and I’m here to help”?
Well, Stanley, here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into.

"Maybe just blowing off steam, but

I just got my latest issue of Garden Railways and have had the latest Model Railroader for a couple of days. What in the world is with the “Nothing Model Railroading Arrogance” and the “Doesn’t Control Crap” systems? Whether something is DCC ready or conforms to NMRA standards means nothing to me. I don’t care about it. I don’t want it. I don’t need it. If it doesn’t cost extra and I can work around it, okay. But if it continues to add to the price, then I will probably decide not to buy it because of these reasons. How much clearer does a person have to be? I don’t want DCC and I’m not joining the NMRA. Why are the editors and publishers trying so hard and taking up so much magazine space to sell this stuff? Are they really making an inroad in to our hobby? This latest crap with the choices you have to make with what you buy from Bachmann and then Aristo having everything setup for instant plug in (that you know will probably not work) is just causing me to not make purchases. Or at least think strongly about how much I want to tear apart the new equipment as soon as I get it home. Now, I really don’t care what other people belong to, but their arrogance will not make me join. And if I see I can only get certain versions of the new Bachmann equipment, if it is equipped with extra stuff that I don’t want, the decision has to be made is it worth the purchase. They must think I’m just part of the red box brigade and will buy it because they created it. If they really don’t think I won’t just tear all that crap out, they’ve not seen my hobby junk boxes. But if I have to continue pay more for stuff I won’t use, it just means I will buy less. If the magazines continue to be filled with articles that I have no desire to read, then I’ll eventually quit buying the magazines. LGB lost its market place and I guess the magazines are going that way, also. I know many of you have already made these decisions, but the latest magazines are really pushing it.

So what gives? Next thing you know they’ll be trying to convince me that it was hot in August because of global warming and now that it is September, I should buy some roller skate to replace my jeep. Yeah, like that is going to happen.

If the NMRA is so great, why are their numbers dropping? If DCC is the only way to go, why does it work so poorly at the train shows, clubs and everywhere it is used and why does everyone seem so frustrated and making excuses for why it isn’t working? I don’t want to be an electrical engineer to enjoy my hobby.

How many people in the large scale portion of the hobby are NMRA members? How many people in the large scale portion of the hobby use DCC? I sure must hang out in the wrong crowd. But then again?

Okay, thank you - I feel better."

#4

I think the DCC part has something to do with the HOer’s. When I go down to our local hobby shop, a bunch of the HO’s are gathered at the DCC track, setting up commands and sounds, etc.

They think it’s the cat’s meow!

They prolly don’t realize that DCC and sound has been around in large scale for years. (My 1988 LGB Mogul has factory sound).

Anyway, the magazine thinks it the norm now for all scales, not realizing that it’s the HOer’s that are making a big deal out of it.

TOG

#5

Ric,
I am in full agreeance. I got tired of buying red box locomotives and finding that a decoder installation was mandatory. I will never use DCC/MTS and yet I am ‘forced’ to accept a controlling body/manufacturer’s choices as to the future of the hobby. I pay for a decoder I do not need and in the case of sound-equipped locomotives, I lose the sound storage capacitor, as on a MTS loco there is no need, as full track voltage is always available. I also lose the function of the analogue switches to control motor/lights/smoke, etc. I also lose the ability for smooth starts when used on an analogue railroad. All up, we are victims of ‘big brother’ looking after our perceived ‘needs’.

#6

Oh, Gawd, don’t tell Bob Grosh!

#7

Ric

Simply answer - it is an HO/N scale thing. It is the standard for those gauges. HO/N is two rail. So is Large Scale.

And that is all I have to say about that…

ENEMA - R - A.

#8
John Bouck said:
I think the DCC part has something to do with the HOer's. When I go down to our local hobby shop, a bunch of the HO's are gathered at the DCC track, setting up commands and sounds, etc.

They think it’s the cat’s meow!

They prolly don’t realize that DCC and sound has been around in large scale for years. (My 1988 LGB Mogul has factory sound).

Anyway, the magazine thinks it the norm now for all scales, not realizing that it’s the HOer’s that are making a big deal out of it.

TOG


JB,

It’s not just the HO guys, how many N-Trak layouts have you seen without DCC? DCC is very popular for club layouts (any scale!); gets rid of a lot of learning for those who have an aversion to learning i.e. those who know “how-to” set up the equipment and the operator just runs the train with a “minimal cab” config.

BTW funny that this should pop up at this time; coincides with the debate on a German forum where some people would rather die than buy a high-end decoder because they think it is mandatory that one tweak every last of the CVs on that decoder. Well, it isn’t unless you want to get every bit of performance out of that decoder and actually know what can be done. Otherwise you stick to the KISS config and be happy - and still get better performance.

And yes … All the LS equipment I bought second hand - that is the majority of engines! - I paid attention to

a) no redundant DCC garbage from the mfg - what would I do with all the “Man, That Sucks” stuff?

b) no sound boards to confuse the issues.

#9
Tim Brien said:
Ric, I am in full agreeance. I got tired of buying red box locomotives and finding that a decoder installation was mandatory. I will never use DCC/MTS and yet I am 'forced' to accept a controlling body/manufacturer's choices as to the future of the hobby. I pay for a decoder I do not need and in the case of sound-equipped locomotives, I lose the sound storage capacitor, as on a MTS loco there is no need, as full track voltage is always available. I also lose the function of the analogue switches to control motor/lights/smoke, etc. I also lose the ability for smooth starts when used on an analogue railroad. All up, we are victims of 'big brother' looking after our perceived 'needs'.
Tim,

There is no law that states “you shall buy Red Box Locomotives”, it’s a choice!

I have 7 Red Box engines without any “Man, That Sucks” stuff and one Tm tractor with “Man, That Sucks” stuff. If the latter doesn’t live up to what I expect, the decoder will end up as a function decoder and a proper decoder will take its place. No problem! :wink: :slight_smile: OTOH I don’t collect the RhB stuff, I carefully select what fits the layout and the era; that’s where the difference starts. :wink: :wink: :smiley:

I also have two Kiss engines on order; DC version thank you! I rather add what I like instead of what the mfg believes will be just dandy. But that’s just the way I like it, if it doesn’t work out there is just one butt to kick. No problem!

#10

On the DCC front, I got back into N scale (I had tons of it years ago) precisely because DCC became viable for N. I hated block wiring and all that crap, but DCC gets rid of all that. I have had zero problems with it on my layout so far.

my 2c

#11
Bob McCown said:
On the DCC front, I got back into N scale (I had tons of it years ago) precisely because DCC became viable for N. I *hated* block wiring and all that crap, but DCC gets rid of all that. I have had zero problems with it on my layout so far.

my 2c


Bob, spot on! DCC is the cat’s meow in many situations. I’ve wired enough layouts for multi-cab controls and watched enough operators still select the wrong cab, that DCC is a true relief.
Of course the operators should still be smart enough to know what’s ahead - those cornfield meets are not so hot in any scale. :wink: :slight_smile: But very entertaining on layouts where they run coal traffic with live loads. Those things have a life all their own. :wink: :slight_smile: :wink:

#12

The difference to me between LS and HO/N is that in HO/N there is a much higher degree of standardized installation and unit operation among the different providers. Is there any such thing in LS? Seams to me its still a big crapshoot. Till I can run an LGB engine on Bachmanns DCC system and visa-versa, whats the point? Its far better to provide the models with a standardized plug in so Brand A, B or C’s decoders will plug into any model and work with whichever particular provider you decide to go with. Its Stupid with a capital S to force a proprietary decoder that likely to be incompatable with other DCC systems on the buyer who will have to pull that out, and replace it with the right decoder, likely voiding the warrenty in the process…

#13

I don’t mind getting a locomotive that’s DCC ready or ready for whatever…as long as they leave the DCC and whatever out and I have a basic locomotive that I can do it my way. If they want to make locomotives plug and play for batteries and R/C that’s fine with me…as long as it’s not proprietary and anybody’s batteries and R/C units will plug in.

#14
Victor Smith said:
The difference to me between LS and HO/N is that in HO/N there is a much higher degree of standardized installation and unit operation among the different providers. Is there any such thing in LS? Seams to me its still a big crapshoot. Till I can run an LGB engine on Bachmanns DCC system and visa-versa, whats the point? Its far better to provide the models with a standardized plug in so Brand A, B or C's decoders will plug into any model and work with whichever particular provider you decide to go with. Its Stupid with a capital S to force a proprietary decoder that likely to be incompatable with other DCC systems on the buyer who will have to pull that out, and replace it with the right decoder, likely voiding the warrenty in the process..
Well, the NMRA is working on a new standardized DCC interface for LS. Will be interesting to see what the capabilities are i.e. how many standardized connecting pins other than track and motor. Next will be how long will it take to get the mfgs to pick up the ball and run. Mfgs in this case referring to both rolling stock and decoder producers. One or the other not getting "with it" and things will fizzle. Errrr .... there is always the possibility to provide connecting harnesses. ;) :) :D

We shall see, in the meantime I happily wire as required and desired; bets are there won’t be enough of whatever to account for the RhB peculiarities in any case. :confused:

Oh BTW I forgot, Märklin has a nice PnP scheme for their Gauge 1 stuff, no muss, no fuss.

#15

Did you notice on another forum that Ollie’s buddy refused to answer the question on plugs?
They have a socket, but where would one get a plug?
I have looked at the 27 photos on the Bachmann Forum closely.
As much trouble as the LS/nmra switch is in the loco, putting it in the tender is moronic.
You feed driver pickup back, polarized output forward.
That’s 4.
2 for head light, 2 for chuff, that’s 8.
If we have fixed power for markers and cab, that’s 10.
Bob Grosh wants flicker A and flicker B sepataely controlled.
Using a common, that’s 2 more.
That’s 12 freaking wires.
If they put the flicker driver in the loco, I can minimize the wiring big time.
And, from what I can see, the entire circuit board in the tender (one report says three layers of circuit board, and you can see it’s bolted together in photos) goes in the trash.
All that effort, all the plugs, circuitry, switches, all to make it easy for some clueless individuals to plug Stanley’s decoder in.
Crap.
But, rest assured, I will do a pictorial tutorial on cleaning it up.

#16

Gee guys, tell us how you really feel.

Well, the QSI plug and play for Aristo is just that, and many LS people who are not “electronics experts” are very happy.

The idea of standardization is good, you get the ability to pick the controllers, the decoders, the sound units you want, not locked into only one manufacturer’s products.

And smooth operation on analog is right there. Try the QSI unit on DC, I have one and have used it. Starts nice and slow, smoothly, with a well picked momentum setting.

Don’t like the volume of the horn vs the prime mover sounds? Change it with a couple of keypresses, while the loco is running!

DCC is taking over Z scale, besides N and HO.

The bottom line is that it is popular because many people want what it offers, and you do not have to use all the features. Try consisting several different locos on DC. Try putting a helper at the end of a train that is from a different manufacturer (different gear ratio). Easy on DCC, impossible on DC.

So, I appreciate that some people want the simplicity of DC. No problem. But MORE people want all the bells and whistles. Even the systems Dave sells will soon interface to a DCC sound decoder. WHY? Because there is a standard that the manufacturers can build to. All the “tweaks” that people want (since they are buying them) need some form of control. Having to have this radically different on different manufacture’s equipment is NOT what the general hobby wants.

I can appreciate that people want to not pay for stuff they don’t use. But, the complexity of sound decoders, consisting/MU and helper operation is driving the extra functions and features.

I need the features for the stuff I want to do. If I only ran one loco per train, and did not mind putting batteries in 20 different locos and buying a bunch of chargers, then maybe DCC would not be for me. But the RC stuff is going the DCC route also.

I just don’t see the need to lambaste the “other” group. Track power and DCC work the best for what I do. For others, battery power, and simplified electronics are better.

With the rapid decrease in the cost of LS decoders, I do not see that the additional cost is a large part of the locomotive purchase.

The bottom line is people are buying what the manufacturers are building.

#17

So, where do you get the plug?

#18

Accu’s K-37 has a 12-wire plug running from the loco to the tender. I can’t find the wiring diagram off the top of my head, but it looks like power from the loco, power to the motor, power to the non-directional lights (cab, marker lights), power to the headlight, and 4 unused wires. (chuff, smoke? I don’t remember if it specified.)

Personally, I’m not so concerned with the number of wires, but a nice robust, accessible plug whose wires don’t pull out before the plug does would be very nice. Like TOC, I typically gut all the factory electronics anyway, but I still use their connectors between engine and tender. For me, it’s motor, headlight, and chuff contact, so only 6 wires needed. Conveniently, that’s what B’mann’s locos have had thus far.

Later,

K

#19

Dave, you probably already know this and are pulling my leg, but there are 2 sockets on the Aristo locomotives, the QSI has 2 rows of pins that plug directly into them. For diesels you are done. For steam, the speaker is in the tender, so you need to extend the wire to the tender. I “stole” one of the 2 sets of wires that run between the loco and the tender:

http://www.elmassian.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=120&Itemid=128

Scroll down a bit to see the Aristo board before and after being “plugged”.

It actually took longer to take the boiler and cab off than to effect the conversion.

The big problem I see is that just like the “quasinami” setup, you have to raise the track voltage to 8v DC to power up the board, so your range of control is compressed by “losing” that first 8 volts. This means can’t run a train with a “pure” DC loco AND with a DCC loco in DC mode.

To me, this is the biggest disadvantage to people running pure DC and wanting to “mix” locomotives in the same train.

Regards, Greg

#20

Obviously, the cat was out of the bag before I deleted my post. I had it up for about an hour and nobody replied, so I thought well my thoughts are improper/unfair/silly and I’ll just pull it.

Of course, this doesn’t change the way I feel and I know that 87% of the hobby is HO and they have embraced all the stuff that has fallout over into the LS community. If I read their magazine, MR, I should be expected to see their view points. The ads and decisions that Bachmann has decided to come out with in LS where only certain choices of equipment are available with certain options is just frustrating.

And to clarify, I was an NMRA member for a short while and felt they only wanted new members for the money as old members locked in their costs with “Life Memberships” and then expect the newer members to support them. I feel the DCC thing is the same way, some like it, so now they want all of us have to support it.