Interesting thought...

I think your Freemo club needs to look more towards the setup of DCC and how to streamline it. I did cringe when I saw the wiring picture. Where do they all go? That would be my first question. 

Wifi is already possible with Digitrax.  http://enginedriver.rrclubs.org/ will work if you have JMRI and the computer connected to the layout. The HobbyKing device you showed looks interesting, but having worked in the RC hobby business before, HK's QA is spotty at best. Also, be aware that LiPo batteries are *very* quirky on charging and you should be very careful when using them. 

There is a narrow gauge modeler on the Yahoo Groups HOn3 list that is using battery power. I don't remember his name, but he's had good luck. 

Boosters, who needs them?

RailPro is everyday seeming more and more like it will be my control of choice. This article furthers that consideration.

Good Discussion

Looking at DCC, I do think it has let us down.  While I understand the manufacturers are small, they reallyl haven't advanced beyond basic analog control.  The Ring Engineering controller is miles beyond anything other DCC manufacturers have, and they are a small company.  They develop a lot of "under the hood" stuff, like Loconet, but the interfaces are still like DOS compared to Ring's iPad.  Its really too bad.

"Has DCC Failed Us?"

  I guess it depends who "us " is cause everyone I know has no problem getting DCC to run their trains. I don't think there is a product failure I think it's an operator failure? Kinda like driving cars, they make them better but still some people are gonna crash and burn.......DaveBranum

Great discussion topic

Your Freemo article was outstanding.  As a 95% solo operator, (a big fan of Trevors S CN prototype) I've been running a single bus conventional DC operation because I've felt with the advances in wi-fi and tablet/smart phone technology, there was going to be something better (cheaper) than DCC available by the time my layout is large enough to need more than 1 engine out on the line at a time.  Your comments have got me exploring the possibilities of using the Hobbyking or similar system.  Maybe it's time to start a Google Group for fellow experimenters.  Bernard Kepinsky is hosting a civil war ops session at this years NMRA convention using a battery operated engine.  Sounds like a good match.

Hey there Art, Thank you for

Hey there Art, Thank you for your thoughts.

Over the past 17 years with DCC, we have modified our setup procedures considerably. The few things that we found is setting up a DCC system doesn't always work as advertised. We have refined setting up the system so it remains robust without weird anomalies. It took a lot of experimenting to find a solution that is robust. It seems with DCC systems quick setup vs. robustness are pitted against each other. Streamlining it further would require removing architecture such as the throttle bus and eliminating boosters. Removal of the throttle bus isn't possible as the RC components are flakey requiring plugging the throttle in when signal is lost (which happens often). Removing boosters isn't practical yet as the layout changes and expands, thus modifying the power requirements.

Setting up the DCC system is complicated. Streamlining it into a distributed model makes the system act goofy thus needs to be rebooted multiple times. Setting up the system into a "booster farm" works much better but takes longer to setup. At what point is this falling under the law of diminishing returns. Perhaps being a modular railroad is too different then what has been engineered in the control system. Like the old analogy, "square peg - round hole"

Thanks for sharing that. I have been using JMRI ever since I bought my first LocoBuffer. The problem with all this complex components to do simple tasks...they take time to setup and make operational. In a modular system all that redundant and repeated setup takes away time of the weekend to enjoy running trains. At the end of setting all this up, I'm too tired to run a train. Most of the frustration happens within the DCC/Electronic/Computer aspect of it. A simple device that plugs into LocoNet and broadcasts on WiFi has a GREAT deal of appeal to us.

Thanks for the heads up on HobbyKing. Like I say this will be an experiment with my dad's locomotives. He just wants to run trains, not fuss with consists, a ton of functions, cryptic screen readouts. Throttle up/down, change direction, turn on/off headlights. With battery power he can enjoy the layout for the 6-8 hours of DCC distress going on where nothing is moving. Flashlights out, manuals open, change batteries in throttles, reconnect everything several times, etc. It's gotten old....very old. Meanwhile all these other hobbyists are having fun controlling their vehicles with their smartphone.

That's encouraging. I saw CVP is working on something too but it's for their proprietary throttle. I heard Joe Fugate on one of the podcast mention a system but forgot which one it was.

Chris Palomarez

I invite you to read the article.

I explain who "us" is and the problems we have experienced to setting up DCC that are definitely not user errors.

It's not just about getting the train to run. It's about having to supplement user manuals and cryptic screen readouts to go about it.

Chris Palomarez

wow...

I am still running DC, since my main line is 7 feet long, and only use one loco at a time (for now). Each time I think about DCC, I read things like this, and wonder if I really need it, or should I be happy with the same basic tech that has been used for 100 years?

"I read things like this, and wonder if I really need it"

   If you need it you'll know you need it and if you find you need it don't let these guys problems scare you away. Used correctly on the typical installation DCC runs thousands of layouts with little troubles and much pleasure. ....DaveBranum

It's important to remember

I remember DC. It was simple, I had a lot of fun with it. DCC is here now, it has some really advantageous things going on with it. It however lacks the simplicity of use that was with DC.

What I feel is a true advancement is when you can take all the features of what was good in DC and add them to DCC. Until then it feels like 6 steps forward half a dozen back.

"I explain who "us" is and the problems we have experienced "

   It would be more accurate to define who "us" is in the heading so folks don't think "us" is the model railroading community in general?   DCC will be a failure eventually like vinyl records were a failure because they were not CDs but compared to DC it's been a great success........DaveBranum 

Has it?

In DC I can just plug in throttles and go! I place locomotives in the same block and they are consisted automagically! WOW! The time spent with massaging and playing jump-rope with a system's complexities are minimized. More time just running trains. Yes DCC has given some ability over DC but at a price in time and complexity to the end user.

"Us" was addressed in the first line referring to my article on Free-mo.org. I think it's pretty clear that it's a free-mo related article from the get go.

Chris

Streamlining Cabling / Layout Power Up

I agree with Art that we likely have to streamline our DCC setups at layout power up time, instead of feeling that DCC has failed us.

I have to admit that I do not have hands on DCC experience yet, but I do have extensive experience powering up large modular DC powered layouts, have been educating myself on DCC programming, and how to implement DCC for a Free-mo layout. The NorCal Free-Mo DCC standard is a great document that should help streamline layout power up time of any DCC modular layout.

My Dutch modular club would be able to validate all 12V DC rail power busses and 220V A/C installation consistently in under 1 hour pretty much regardless of layout size: each module owner could have their internal sections connected from module end to end, but would wait for a single person, plus an "apprentice", to exclusively make the interconnections between modules. Since we had double track, we would go from one end of the layout to the other end with a test loco, and then back on the second track doing the same connectivity checks on the second track bus.

I would assume that setting up and configuring the Digitrax/DCC command station and the various boosters would take no more than 30-60 minutes extra: all power settings on these devices should be know beforehand and any power districts should be planned as well ahead of time.

Programming locomotives: with proper address range assignments ahead of time as part of a dispatcher's role, many of the locomotive force could be programmed ahead of time at home; only needing to build consists with the command station. So you could start operating the layout with single locomotive powered trains first while you build your two or more loco powered consist configurations etc.

Overall, key is that someone that has the right knowledge and who can plan the DCC elements ahead of time oversees (or actually does) the power up of a layout. Making sure that this person always has an apprentice working alongside of them ensures less errors during power up and continuity across event attendance.

Going wireless is not going to solve much of the cabling issue either, just like DCC didn't. We can likely do away with the track bus and rail feeders (frog juicers and reverser circuits), but any accessory bus or other items needing power (street lights, crossing lights, animation elements) would still be there. With battery powered motive power you will start spending time checking and swapping battery packs (if they are not recharged by rail) and deal with trouble shooting wireless network (interference) issues (issues you can't physically touch). Example: my home Wi-Fi completely stops working once or twice a day for 2-3 seconds at a time, same with my bluetooth headset: unexplained interference that I can't get rid of and makes communicating with my cable modem impossible. I design complex corporate computer systems and networks for a living and know my way around Wi-Fi networks, still can't get rid of it. So I'm taking my chances and rather stay wired with DCC (or DC) so I can physically trace and isolate any potential issues.

If I'm out of touch with reality in the DCC world and todays modular rail roading, then please let me know and send me back to my armchair

Not another DC vs DCC thread

Instead, I have always viewed DCC as an interim system. More versatile than DC, certainly with more bells and whistles (literally!), but with higher working complexity and cost, with a much steeper learning curve. Not nearly friendly enough to the low-budget dolts like me who get queasy when having to deal with electronics. There just had to be something better.

Perhaps today is similar to times past, when CD's usurped records as the preferred method for listening to music. But King CD's reign lasted less than a couple of decades before being supplanted by digital media. Will DCC ultimately become the compact disc of model railroading?

Seems the only real logical next step is wireless control with on-board battery power. All that really stands in the way of that is a bit of advancement in battery technology (and from what I read, researchers are doing some crazy stuff in that arena these days), and somebody with the gumption to pull all the pieces together into a workable standardized system targeted to our hobby. I could envision a truly simple-to-use and ever more realistic operating system, without a stitch of wire under the layout. Fun to dream of such things.

Jim

DC: plug and go

Chris,

You responded while I was writing my long reply. I have to agree with you that during the DC times there was no need for any of the programming, making it inherently easier to run your trains: plug and play but with limitations. With 'progress' we got DCC but with a lousy interface. Who was the engineer who thought that implementing all of these programming features in the walk around control was a good idea? Insane!

It is almost like computers: my first IBM PC with DOS and Wordperfect 4.2 does just as a good of a job creating text documents as my newest ultra thin laptop and MS Word. All the extra bling just makes this newfound super computer power in small form factor go to waste due to lazy coding, more complex and fancy user interfaces with tons of unnecessary features rather than making things easier, faster, better.

You would think just 1 hour setups, but...

Newer = Better? Not Always

Proof that the latest and greatest is not always better. Excepting reel to reel, each advancement in audio media improved the sound quality until we got to digital (no physical media). Having been an amateur audiophile all my life I cannot stand to listen to MP3. The sound quality is so poor. MP3 is the JPEG of audio. Looks like the real thing until you look closely. But, just like the love affair with cell phones, the public at large seems all to willing to trade quality for portability and convenience. Nothing wrong with that, it just isn't for everybody.

BTW you forgot 8 track and cassette between records and CDs 

Easier faster better

"BTW you forgot 8 track and cassette between records and CDs "

     along with 4 track I think most folks view them as between reel to reel and ipods? That old audio stuff just won't go away, I still listen to Dynaco's and JBL 100's in my house and Bose 901's driven by a 1968 era Allied receiver  in my workshop. Also have an Ampex reel to reel that I'm too lazy to thread up :> ) I'd rather view Macklemore on Youtube these days. ....DaveB

I Like Bulletproof

Hence why I am leaning towards RailPro. It appears to offer just what you said. Clean DC on the rails, no messing with CVs, automatic MU balancing, truly plug-n-play. Not a RailPro fanboy, just that it feels like the most intelligent solution currently available. Unless I am missing something it also seems ideal for modules - no boosters, no communications bus, power supplies that can be added at will without interconnecting wiring. Imagine if no one had any investment in DCC equipment already. Digitrax, NCE, and the others would look primitive by comparison.

What are "CD's"???

That is a bit of a goof comment, but not by much. I am pretty sure most folks skip the CD and just play music directly from a memory device these days. I certainly do with my 2,000+ album music collection. I actually have an SSD on my main PC specifically for my music collection so that the search and startup -etc. of my gigantic music collection  is lightning fast.

I am building a new layout, the last one I had being 35 years ago. When I started, I considered getting a cheapo DCC setup, just to "be current", but with the size of my layout (1 mile mainline HO) and the advances I am seeing in Wireless control I am glad I did not. I would love to go wireless and be part of the "Dead Rail Society"- sort of anyways. To me it seems like the best solution is to still have power in the rails which charges onboard batteries, and control is through wireless (R/C) means. This eliminates the requirement of really heavy duty batteries for decent run time, but still ameliorates issues with dead frogs and such.

...

As a programming language, as a functional control module, DCC has not failed us.  What has failed us are those people between the chip and the finger.  They made a good system for then, and then they upgraded it in ways that seem like inches when they should have been adding feet.  now they're miles behind.

Take a good look at Roco/Fleishmann's Z-21 system.  That's what a MODERN DCC system looks like.  These systems sold by our main producers here are all rooted in physical modules that have not changes since they were designed in the 90s or perhaps even late 80s.

DC has very good One function capability with all other functions slaved to that primary function.  In otherwords, it's GREAT for powering locomotives, as attested by my test track where I can run anything without even touching the wheels or the track before doing so.  DCC, I'd get about a foot before it'd stall and then have to start all over again.  It's not the power's fault, it's simply doing what the decoder says, and the decoder is programmed so that if it experiences signal loss, it reverts back to the default setting [idle].

I have no strong appreciation for batteries.  For what we'd use, they would be about $20-$30 a pop for something we can get for pennies on the dollar out of the wall.  Power buses and track feeders are about the easiest part of the whole system, it just comes down to good Wire Discipline.  Keep it clean, keep the colors straight, and all goes well.

There is an assumption that in order to do simple things, the object must be simple in your hand.  The truth is, it is easier than ever to do things on my smart phone but only because someone has gone ahead and managed the complexity behind the blinds for me.  Underneath everything, there is a layer that is as complex as the old Nokia or RAZR-3 were, BUT that GUI covering everything in a language I intuitively understand makes this object easier to use than any computer I've ever owned.  Yes, Computer.

To run on the rails like we wish to ride requires engineering on the level of the Golden Gate Bridge.  It may seem like that bridge should do more, but in the end all it does is let people drive in two directions across the water...a very simple task indeed!!

"no strong appreciation for batteries"

 Me neither, My plug in drills are decades old and going strong while my cordless drills wear out their batteries  every couple of years and it costs more to replace them than the drills cost.  Since a layout has nice nickel silver rails running everywhere it makes no sense to carry all the power around in the loco in a battery. If anyone comes up with a system that can run off the rails most of the time and has limited storage for getting across turnouts and other more complex trackage and if it is as small as a DCC decoder and costs the same or less  then I'd be interested otherwise I see no reason to change something that is working fine for me..........DaveBranum 

Is DCC

A standard or a solution?

As a standard it has succeeded in it's most primitive of forms.

As a solution it has failed in it's applied end user form.

Can DCC be a bulletproof system like DC? Absolutely! Can it offer a user experience that will instantly bring someone into the hobby. Definitely yes! Has it made inroads to either of these in 20 years?

Remember...technology should be transparent...magic

Chris