Eric, actually, there is one gentleman here who tried NCE. His name is L.Deagon MMR. He has had his system for over 7 yrs, and last I heard, it still doesn't work. He used to use the old PSI command control, (Dynatrol), but he even had major problems with it. He parked a P2K GP-18 across a gap once and the PSI reciever melted the shell!
I'm sure there's a story there, I'd like to hear it some day from the source.
I want to mention again, I used to own a Digitrax radio Chief and had both a DT400R and DT100R throttle. I taught myself to do the basic things with it, even though I really didn't think I'd keep it for the long haul. I never did some of the more exotic things with it, but then again I haven't done anything too exotic with my NCE system. I use it to run trains. I select locomotives, build consists, run trains, and throw switches. I turn headlights off and on. And on my bench system (a separate PowerCab), I set up and program decoders. These days my new decoder installs are all NCE and TCS.
Since I may have been the first to use the word "geeky", I should clarify what I meant. To me it means needlessly or deliberately complex or obtuse. Those who can master a system in spite of these issues think of themselves as "smarter than the average bear", and they probably are. I don't know how smart I am... I haven't had an IQ test in close to 40 years. My guess is I've gotten dumber over the years, if you're talking raw processing power. But I'm quite sure I could master Digitrax. Doesn't matter if anybody believes me or not. It's just that the only reason for me to master it would be to prove something that I don't need to prove, because I have an NCE system I'm perfectly satisfied with, which I chose after more than a decade playing with both Digitrax and Wangrow (basically just an older version of the current NCE).
I'm into my second half century... life isn't forever, and I no longer believe - as I did when I was 25 - that I have unlimted brainpower, that I can learn and absorb everything just so nobody says I'm stupid. I can do anything I want, but I can't do everything I want. I decided 11 years ago I wanted DCC, that the technology had matured enough. This was after three years of watching AJ give Digitrax demos and give vague answers to specific questions. Don Wangrow handed me a paddle at the 1997 Rosemont show, and I looked at the buttons, and proceeded to build a consist on his demo layout using almost the exact same steps I had envisioned 15 years earlier, when I was told I was an idiot because 16 channel analog CC was good enough and nobody needs more than 16. It was that NCE/Wangrow system that pushed me over the hump.
I didn't want a new career or a new degree, or a new merit badge... I just wanted something I could use and go with it. I probably ended up learning more geeky stuff about DCC than I planned for, but oh well. A large number of things that you could write a 20-page article explaining can be quantified in a 1/4 page table. Good example: lights. I read all kinds of articles about how to measure current draws, voltage drops, build constant voltage power supplies.... nowhere was there a table that said just use this bulb and this resistor.
Ok here's one: for HO DCC voltage, and normal function outputs from normal decoders: Miniatronics 1.5 volt, 15ma bulbs. For one bulb, use a single 680-ohm resistor on the function side (not the common). For two bulbs in parallel, use a single 330-ohm resistor on the function side.
No 250-page book from Radio Shack on how to build power supplies, no renting an oscilloscope, you don't even need an ammeter or voltmeter. Just those bulbs and those resistors. Oh yeah, it works on Digitrax, NCE, and Lenz systems as long as you use the "HO" voltage setting. It works on NCE, TCS, Atlas, and Digitrax decoders. Probably Lenz too.
I may need to know more than that little paragraph someday in the future, but right now it's all I need. This is after decades spending money on elaborate, *geeky* lighting kits and frying light bulbs, and being talked down to by electronics wizards who can't stand the fact that *for my application* their 250-page book can be reduced to a couple sentences.
The current Digitrax decoder manual is 78 pages (PDF).
The two yellow sheets of paper that come with every NCE decoder are equivalent to about 8 of the Digitrax pages in terms of volume/size. They tell you everything you need to know about programming NCE decoders and give actual examples of setups you might actually want to create.
There is no substantial difference in terms of the feature level of these decoders. The Digitrax decoders do not have 10x more features requiring nearly 10x pages of documentation.
The Digitrax manual DOES cover every decoder they ever made, which is the crux of the problem. Rather than pages 1-10 being for decoder type 1, and 11 to 20 being decoder 2, etc, each and every table and paragraph is loaded with ifs-ands-elses. By the time the third gen was added to the tables, it became unreadable.
Nothing has ever been done to correct this. Apparently the culture of smart people who have mastered Digitrax in spite of this convoluted mess of documentation have vindicated its author(s). One only need be smart enough, and it's not a problem.
That's what I mean by "geeky".
Andy
For quite awhile I've put the thoughts of DCC to bed after deciding I didn't really need it. However this thread has got me going again. Since I'm generally a lonesome polecat in the train room and $$ is an object of concern, I've decided on a starter set.