I'm done with DCC, or nothing wrong with KISS

[craigolio1]

So Mom is out for visit from BC and she always likes to see what I've been building. I pull out a couple of the latest projects, finished and not, one of which includes my BC Rail CRS20 decorated for the Pacific Starlight Dinner train. This one is one of my favorites because I managed to festoon each end of the loco with 4 working ditch lights and a head lamp, and get all of those wires, 24 of them, connected and working inside the completed loco. I fire it up for Mom and the lights work (whew) but she won't budge.

I don't even have a working layout yet and already I have to trouble shoot a DCC problem?  Forget that. Focus right now is mostly in getting moving more in the layout direction and less in the building of the fleet direction and thanks to some replies I got on the electronics page, I feel good about wiring for blocks and including my DCC throttle as one of the cabs, but I'm losing the zest I once had for an all DCC fleet.

My time is limited. Once I have a layout, or even a track, I want to go go down stairs and watch a train go round. Not turn on its lights and swear at why it won't move.

Grrrrrr.

Craig

[glakedylan]

post removed
it was more than insignificant     

[central.vermont]

Craig,

If it's an Atlas chassis it sounds like you may have a loose connection at the motor tabs. This problem is quite common with Atlas engines unfortunately.   

Jon

[Chris333]

Honestly with all the DCC problems I see posted I wonder why anyone ever converted. 

I saw a post where a guy converted his layout back to DC, made me smile.

[peteski]

Each model train control method has its positives and negatives, and a share of demons.   While there are some (or even many) headaches with DCC, it is so much easier not to worry about blocks, polarity, and MU-ing locos.  Plus all the fancy lighting effects (and the constant lighting itself for locos and rolling stock) are huge advantages over DC.  Then there is the sound... But I also understand how someone would like to keep things simple. Just forget about all that fancy lighting you enjoyed installing in your model.

Once you cool off a bit you might rethink your choice. 

[Jesse6669]

Also.. DCC users deal with an average cost of a locomotive inflated by about 50%,  as well as the cost of the control system (simple power packs/throttle vs. Lenz/Digitrax etc).  Wiring for blocks isn't cheap, but is the cost of bus wiring roughly equivalent?  If you're a retailer I have to guess you prefer DCC since I assume gross margins go up.  (As Peteski says though, may pluses/minuses on each side).

[craigolio1]

Ahhhh I'm just venting. I chose DCC because of the fancy sound and lighting and have enough locos with some of either that I'm committed, or at least partially, to some form of DCC. After all I need to be able to use my GMD-1.

I did the instal my self and it did work when I put it back in the box. As a matter of fact it is an Atlas loco and to keep it "removable" (you should see all of the Kapton tape inside) I trimmed the Atlas board down and used it for track and motor connections. Perhaps I should have just soldered right to the motor tabs. I hate doing stuff twice!

I can't afford to put a decoder in every loco I'm working on right now so for now I'll be doing lead units with lighting connected and others with lighting installed but ready to be connected when conversion happens.

Baby steps. I need a circle of track.

Still frustrated with DCC but able to see the value,

Craig

[mmyers]

What DCC system are you using? If it's Digitrax , is track power is suspend mode? Suspend mode puts power on the rails so the lights may light. No DCC packets are sent in suspend mode so the train will just sit there.

Martin Myers

[craigolio1]

Interesting and thanks for the suggestion however I don't think that's the case here because I ran two other locos on the same track and I can turn the lights on and off on the problem loco.

Craig

[peteski]

Ahhhh I'm just venting. I chose DCC because of the fancy sound and lighting

    

I suspected as much.
Back to the dark brightly illuminated side 

[craigolio1]

de Snarkski indeed. Hehe.

[Loren Perry]

Being a somewhat "senior" model N-scaler, I've stayed "old school" with my DC layout and have not regretted it at all. I'm impressed with what DCC can do today when everything is working as advertised. The lights, sounds, MU'ing, and so forth are strong selling points for a lot of us.

But as I look back on what I've built in the past six to seven years, I can honestly say that if I were just now starting to build the same layout from scratch with DCC instead of DC, I would be able to complete only about 25% of what I have today due to the high cost of DCC when all my locomotives are accounted for. The accumulating costs of individual components such as base units, boosters, hand controllers, decoders, and on and on would have eaten up the budget in a flash. Trying to cut costs by equipping only a few of my locos with decoders would frustrate me because the rest of my fleet would likely be relegated to the "dead line". And the additional cost in time of disassembling each engine and installing decoders (over half my collection is not DCC-ready or friendly) makes the prospect - for me at least - a deal breaker.

Add to this the technical challenges, especially when things misbehave, which would use up my meager supply of patience that I would rather expend on modelmaking, scenery, and running.

My layout, which fills a fourteen foot by fourteen foot room, is now finished and fully scenicked. No bare plywood anywhere, no naked foam, and no half-built stand-ins for structures dotting the landscape. All the rolling stock is detailed and weathered, and the entire system works very well, every day, and whenever I have visitors. And I'm still alive to enjoy it!

If I had taken on a DCC version of this project, I wouldn't even be at the half-way point by now. Besides the aforementioned financial costs involved, I'd be tempted to play with each completed locomotive one-by-one to see it work, listen to the sounds, and trying to figure out how to program all the features. Working on the layout itself would of course be delayed each time I do this. And I have almost 100 engines on the roster, so you do the math.

My view of all this is that I personally feel that DCC appears aimed at the gadget-minded portion of our hobby whereas DC appears more for the modelmakers among us. Of course there are always exceptions. But whenever I see online photos of a DCC layout, especially a home layout rather than a club, more often than not, the layout is mostly unfinished with tracks tacked down on unpainted plywood, exposed structural framing, dangling wires, and so on. Mike Danneman's breathtaking Rio Grande layout is a great testament to what can be achieved with a DC approach to N-scale railroading. He's even developed interesting and successful methods of mixing and matching helper units in long trains without resorting to electronic trickery.

We are all allotted a specific amount of time on earth and we have to choose where to concentrate our priorities to make the best use of that time. Being someone playing in the fourth quarter of his life, I've decided to go with DC so I can at least say that I've completed a fully functioning and scenicked layout with a nice collection of trains that run whenever I want them to. My gadgetry is limited to a few animated items like oil well pumps, working neon signs, and fully illuminated cities, towns, and industries employing close to 500 LED's and a small number of incandescent bulbs. Sixty-nine Circuitron Tortoise switch machines are at my beck and call to handle routing of traffic. If anything goes south, I can almost always track down the offending culprit and repair it within minutes. And no batteries to change!

In the age of smart phones, tablets, and I-devices, I can see and understand the appeal of high-tech DCC in N-scale railroading. But for a newcomer to the hobby, just know that the siren call of digitally controlled locomotives and accessories comes with a considerable price tag in both money and time.

[djconway]

Honestly with all the DCC problems I see posted I wonder why anyone ever converted. 

I saw a post where a guy converted his layout back to DC, made me smile.

Most folks don't  post "hay every thing worked right, no problems " posts.

[peteski]

DCC is not only for gadget-whores.    Where it comes real handy is for the die-hard operators who don't even care about lighting effects or sounds, and who often have plywood-prairie layouts.  Why? Because DCC removes the cumbersome aspect of DC (block selection). You can make-up and break-up multiple-unit lashups on the same track or add or remove helpers all on the same track (no need to futz around with block selection or mismatched loco speeds).  Basically you can have an operating session without the hassle of DC. It is more realistic that way.

[delamaize]

I guess I am one of the only ones that thinks DCC isn't "that hard"