When Will DCC become the standard?

[Espeefan]

Amen brother, for all of us small layout operators, this is the truth!

Is it? It may be your truth, or there could be some misconception

This is a matter of preference for all of us. Nobody has suggested that you must have DCC to enjoy the hobby. That would be silly. OTOH, skewed comparisons on cost or percieved advantages or disadvantages should be clarified for the benefit of anyone considering which way to go.

A crappy job on the conversion of a DC layout do DCC is not an indictment against DCC. It is a great reason to re-wire your layout properly instead of inflicting frustration on your guests. I had a little personal experience on such a layout some years ago. It was not the equipment's fault.

Cost is an even poorer argument. Base systems fine for small layouts are available below $150.00 these days. Basic 2 function decoders can be had for less than $15.00. I always chuckle when I read a post that complains about DCC's cost, then the next line is about converting 250 locos. If you've got the bucks for 250 locos, you've got the bucks for a Powercab or a Zephyr and a few decoders. Model railroaders aren't cheap, we are just selective about what we spend our hobby dollars on.

Is it a standard yet? Depends on your point of view. I'd say for manufacturers it certainly is. With 50% of modelers using it (allowing for errors in the poll), I'd say we're either there or on the cusp. Walthers has data that nearly 50% of modelers still use horn hook couplers (a reason they still supply them with their cars) but we would not say that the Kadee style coupler is not a standard would we?

As for advantages over DC applicable to smaller layouts, YMMV, but here are a few I consider:

1: I like to be able to turn my headlight on and off.

2: If my loco has a Mars or Gyra light, I like to be able to use them at my discretion. Ditto on ditch lights.

3: I like to be able to speed match different locos in a consist, say a GP-7 and an F unit, or a GP-9 and an F-7B by different manufacturers.

4: This one is a biggie: If I have a sound equipped model I want access to ALL of the features I paid for.

5: I like to be able to have other locos parked and not have to worry about throwing switches to route or disconnect power to sidings.

DCC gives you these. DC does not. Others may have more advantages than I listed.

If you're a technophobe, fine. If you don't want to do it, fine. If it isn't for you, fine. But many of the "zealots" as they have been called started out as guys who yelled the loudest that they wanted to stay with DC. Now they are some of it's strongest supporters. I've used both. I find DCC offers more enjoyment without very much cost difference and a bunch more convienence. You pays your money and you makes your choice.

 

[Espeefan]

I bought a brass 2-6-0 by Sunset Models year before last. It came with DCC and sound. A DC version was available for around $75-100.00 less. Older brass DCC ready is hard to find. You have to remember that many more of us who buy brass collect it instead of operating it. Importers are coming around to DCC, but I know several guys who prefer to do their own!

 

[zoegraf]

Is it? It may be your truth, or there could be some misconception

This is a matter of preference for all of us. Nobody has suggested that you must have DCC to enjoy the hobby. That would be silly. OTOH, skewed comparisons on cost or percieved advantages or disadvantages should be clarified for the benefit of anyone considering which way to go.

A crappy job on the conversion of a DC layout do DCC is not an indictment against DCC. It is a great reason to re-wire your layout properly instead of inflicting frustration on your guests. I had a little personal experience on such a layout some years ago. It was not the equipment's fault.

Cost is an even poorer argument. Base systems fine for small layouts are available below $150.00 these days. Basic 2 function decoders can be had for less than $15.00. I always chuckle when I read a post that complains about DCC's cost, then the next line is about converting 250 locos. If you've got the bucks for 250 locos, you've got the bucks for a Powercab or a Zephyr and a few decoders. Model railroaders aren't cheap, we are just selective about what we spend our hobby dollars on.

Is it a standard yet? Depends on your point of view. I'd say for manufacturers it certainly is. With 50% of modelers using it (allowing for errors in the poll), I'd say we're either there or on the cusp. Walthers has data that nearly 50% of modelers still use horn hook couplers (a reason they still supply them with their cars) but we would not say that the Kadee style coupler is not a standard would we?

As for advantages over DC applicable to smaller layouts, YMMV, but here are a few I consider:

1: I like to be able to turn my headlight on and off.

2: If my loco has a Mars or Gyra light, I like to be able to use them at my discretion. Ditto on ditch lights.

3: I like to be able to speed match different locos in a consist, say a GP-7 and an F unit, or a GP-9 and an F-7B by different manufacturers.

4: This one is a biggie: If I have a sound equipped model I want access to ALL of the features I paid for.

5: I like to be able to have other locos parked and not have to worry about throwing switches to route or disconnect power to sidings.

DCC gives you these. DC does not. Others may have more advantages than I listed.

If you're a technophobe, fine. If you don't want to do it, fine. If it isn't for you, fine. But many of the "zealots" as they have been called started out as guys who yelled the loudest that they wanted to stay with DC. Now they are some of it's strongest supporters. I've used both. I find DCC offers more enjoyment without very much cost difference and a bunch more convienence. You pays your money and you makes your choice.

Numbers 1,4, and 5 I like.

 

[zoegraf]

I bought a brass 2-6-0 by Sunset Models year before last. It came with DCC and sound. A DC version was available for around $75-100.00 less. Older brass DCC ready is hard to find. You have to remember that many more of us who buy brass collect it instead of operating it. Importers are coming around to DCC, but I know several guys who prefer to do their own!

I've heard of those who collect brass and don't run them.

I wonder how hard it is to put a decoder in a brass loco. Doesn't seem to be much room.

 

[sd24b]

I agree with NYW& B. I have around 150 engines, 6 are DCC equipped. I would be tied to the rails if I changed to DCC. If I were just starting in the hobby then I would reconsider, maybe. My concern is in 20 years will the hobby still exist? Phil

 

[Espeefan]

I've heard of those who collect brass and don't run them.

I wonder how hard it is to put a decoder in a brass loco. Doesn't seem to be much room.

Depends where. I've done many non sound and can typically get them into the boiler with no wires between the loco & tender. Sound can be different. I have usually put those in the tender

 

[Espeefan]

I agree with NYW& B. I have around 150 engines, 6 are DCC equipped. I would be tied to the rails if I changed to DCC. If I were just starting in the hobby then I would reconsider, maybe. My concern is in 20 years will the hobby still exist? Phil

I see plenty of young people at train shows. I'm not worried.

 

[diburning]

I think DCC is already the standard as the number of DCC users far outweigh the ones that do not.

But, I think that DCC is a bit outdated in this day and age. It needs a better GUI, better controls, and more options. I think DCC's replacement will be coming soon, but would be based on DCC, and backwards compatible with DCC.

 

[bennyboots]

I think DCC is already the standard as the number of DCC users far outweigh the ones that do not.

But, I think that DCC is a bit outdated in this day and age. It needs a better GUI, better controls, and more options. I think DCC's replacement will be coming soon, but would be based on DCC, and backwards compatible with DCC.

I agree with you. In fact, I think that RC locos equipped with batteries and it's own decoder will win out eventually. No need to wire anything under the layout except switch machines. Insulfrog turnouts? Frog juicers? Short circuit protection? All eliminated.
Individual traction motors for each axle to elimate the gearing and add more realism to the trucks are on the way too.
I think that this is what we will see in 9+ years, not DCC dominance.

 

[diburning]

Railflyer is already pioneering about half of what you've described.

 

[bennyboots]

Railflyer is already pioneering about half of what you've described.

Yeah thats where I saw it.

 

[otiscnj]

If you're old enough, you've seen things go from DC, towards 'command control' of the GE Astrac system, towards Dynatrol, then CTC-16, CTC16e, then DCC, all within the last 40 years. I don't think battery technology is where it needs to be, to go the way bennyboots mentions, but give it, and wireless technology a few years, and who knows. What about the whole 'computer simulation' end of the hobby, like MS Train Simulator, or Trainz, etc? Doesn't require much space.

To me, another relavent question is what about the general state of the US and other economies? If China becomes a consumer economy, they will be the market that determines what 'the hardware under the shell' looks like, for the top end models. Will a 25 year old model railroader be able to afford a fleet of $1000 locomotives in 10-15 years? Or will the 'the model train hobby' become more segmented similar to say earlier times here in the US when there were choices like Lionel(China) or Marx(US) of years past? Shells/detail levels could be similar, but 'the innards' would be different, based on the market.

When will all off the shelf models be DCC only? If it doesn't happen in the next 5-10 years, then it probably won't.

 

[Charles Smiley]

It is 1990 thinking with more layers of patches and band-aids that King Tut. It just sort of grew over the decades. If it could be done again with a clean slate - and no attempt at backward compatibility - it would be far better. When it began, microcontrollers were not very impressive and costs were high for memory. Now, microcontrolllers and ARM processors have more power than the computers that got us to the moon. And they cost less that a Starbucks tall fancy drink in large quantities.

The consisting should be a "drag and drop" GUI on a small touch screen that requires no explanation or manuals. The hand held controllers are all pretty primitive. This is a small market divided up with too many players. That is part of the overall problem.

My Lenz LH-100 requires you to cycle around through a stack of 8 addresses to select a loco. If you overshoot, you have to cycle around again. That is stone age stuff out of the disco era! It doesn't even have a 5-cent LED to backlight the LCD display. Night ops are difficult with that throttle. Other that that, I love DCC and won't go back to DC now.

The problem with all the DCC manuals are generally that they are terrible -- so don't design stuff that needs them as much in the next generation.

 

[NYW&B]

As for advantages [of DCC] over DC applicable to smaller layouts, YMMV, but here are a few I consider:

1: I like to be able to turn my headlight on and off.

2: If my loco has a Mars or Gyra light, I like to be able to use them at my discretion. Ditto on ditch lights.

3: I like to be able to speed match different locos in a consist, say a GP-7 and an F unit, or a GP-9 and an F-7B by different manufacturers.

4: This one is a biggie: If I have a sound equipped model I want access to ALL of the features I paid for.

5: I like to be able to have other locos parked and not have to worry about throwing switches to route or disconnect power to sidings.

DCC gives you these. DC does not. Others may have more advantages than I listed.

Alan, while these may be major considerations specifically for you, and I think we can all appreciated them as such, I honestly believe most of them would be considered very minor features, or advantages, of DCC by most other hobbyists with small to modest-sized advanced layouts. A couple of those items cited are even largely just "advantages" to those operating modern diesels anyway...a group still quite a small minority in the hobby today (see the survey stats on the most popular modeling eras by percentage).

As I mentioned previously, I monthly operate on a large DCC layout with a group that includes several fellows that I regard as true DCC zealots and OPS guys. Yet even among them consideration of various of DCC's unique features beyond simple sound never seems to come into play during an OP session.

Regarding point #4, when a DC operator buys the DC/DCC-ready version of the model he can often save 30% or more over the full-blown DCC price, a goodly portion of the purchase price to put forward to their next DC/DCC-ready loco. Personally (and I say this as my opinion only) I have no desire to lay out an extra $100 on each purchase in these days of a tough economy just to hear my loco rumble, toot, and flash its lights a little. And I think that I'm not alone in this outlook.

NYW&B

 

[Charles Smiley]

QUOTE: "3: I like to be able to speed match different locos in a consist, say a GP-7 and an F unit, or a GP-9 and an F-7B by different manufacturers. "

That is huge! Before, I had only certain combos that would run together without lots of slacka-jacka motion that looked fake and toy-like. But the speed-matching flexibility is almost completely squandered with the junky method used in "consisting".

Consisting needs a huge re-think. Drag & drop aps on a I-pad would be a thought -- but they are too darn big for one-handed ops. Plus, I still prefer a real knob and direction switch when switching. Touch screens are nice, but you have to look at the screen to operate the loco. And that is a problem when switching and using delayed uncoupling.

Maybe my grand kids can just wear a thought-beanie accessing a Wish-Grant-9000 controller that will take care of all the details.

 

[railfan]

When will DCC become 100% "The standard"?

Chief Slacka-Jacka say "when big moon is high in sky".

 

[Espeefan]

Alan, while these may be major considerations specifically for you, and I think we can all appreciated them as such, I honestly believe most of them would be considered very minor features, or advantages, of DCC by most other hobbyists with small to modest-sized advanced layouts. A couple of those items cited are even largely just "advantages" to those operating modern diesels anyway...a group still quite a small minority in the hobby today (see the survey stats on the most popular modeling eras by percentage).

As I mentioned previously, I monthly operate on a large DCC layout with a group that includes several fellows that I regard as true DCC zealots and OPS guys. Yet even among them consideration of various of DCC's unique features beyond simple sound never seems to come into play during an OP session.

Regarding point #4, when a DC operator buys the DC/DCC-ready version of the model he can often save 30% or more over the full-blown DCC price, a goodly portion of the purchase price to put forward to their next DC/DCC-ready loco. Personally (and I say this as my opinion only) I have no desire to lay out an extra $100 on each purchase in these days of a tough economy just to hear my loco rumble, toot, and flash its lights a little. And I think that I'm not alone in this outlook.

NYW&B

Well...I'm mostly a steam era modeler, though I have Fs', Gp's, and some early Alcos & Baldwins. There are also a few SW-1500's the odd MP-15, and even a U-50 (I couldn't resist) but nothing you could call modern. I also operate at a large club that is DCC. About half the guys just want to run trains at the op sessions, and the other half are "techies". The techies do the "hard stuff" for the guys that just want to run, so the speed matching, programming and such does get done. You just might not be seeing it happen.

Sound is a discussion to itself. I don't have sound in everything, nor do I want to. I have been adding it after the fact on some models I have bought in the last year or so. I don't save any money, but I do get a full function decoder and not a stripped down version, and I can usually fit a better speaker than the one that the factory would supply. This all comes down to a term I hate to use: Play Value. There it is. I don't like it but it is applicable. Younger modelers especially favor it. Our younger members (20's-30's) just about always buy sound or add it if they have the means. DCC adds features, and gives you more toys to play with. I don't know any younger modelers who are strictly DC'ers, though I'm sure that they are out there somewhere. This reminds me of the 33 1/3 LP album, the 8 Track, the Casette, the CD, and now the MP-3. I have albums that I have owned through all of the media. I resisted changing media each and every time, finally gave in with the usual grumbling, and in the end was glad I did. The market has already recognized this, and we get either DCC models or non DCC that can be converted by removing a plug or jumbers and dropping in a decoder. Since they are selling what we want, it's hard to look at this any other way. Still, if a guy wants to stay DC, more power to ya! It's a hobby after all

 

[ianacole]

The only reason I got back into the hobby after a ~25 year hiatus was DCC. The ease of wiring a layout and the ability to control multiple locos easily were the primary attractors, but sound, lighting control, and other feature were attractive as well.

 

[LoudMusic]

When will DCC become 100% "The standard"

Never. This is a good thing! DCC is more complicated and more expensive. It will never be as inexpensive as DC because more hardware is required. If DCC gets as inexpensive as DC is now, DC will also be less expensive than it is now. DCC will never catch DC.

This is a good thing because we need the millions of people who buy cheap model railroad stuff to stay in the hobby keeping the manufacturers going so that they can make the expensive stuff that the hardcore modelers are interested in.

 

[railfan]

DC is the bait. DCC is the trap. Gotcha!

Mike