# Returning to the hobby--dumbfounded by DCC!



## Thud_11 (Dec 18, 2013)

After well over a decade of being in storage, I'm bringing the G-scale trains of my childhood back out! I've carefully cleaned all my track, and have test run all my loco's to find they are all still in good working order. I currently own 2 Aristo FA-1s (one with analog sound) 1 FA-1 B unit, an Aristo Rogers 2-4-0 with chuffing tender, and a USA trains NW-2. My goal is to convert these to DCC with battery power utilizing some system like LGB's MTS or aristo's Revolution. This will be especially nice considering I'm in the process of installing a www.ceilingtrainkit.com ceiling mounted layout in my living room and would like to avoid using track power/analog control up there if I can. I guess what I'm asking for is some suggestions on what DCC system to go with, basic plain english directions/or direction to a forum build thread on how to get my FA's running first, and any other tips and tricks that you'd be willing to offer. 

Since I put the trains away, my love affair shifted from trains to planes, which ended up getting me involved with radio controlled airplanes/amateur UAVs (fpv) and even all the way to becoming a professional aviator in the Air Force. That being said, I'm fairly technically inclined and have a workshop full of every kind of tool imaginable so I feel that with a little guidance I could have my collection refurbished with DCC. Plus having single LT's pay doesn't hurt either! :-D Cheers - "Thud"


----------



## BigRedOne (Dec 13, 2012)

I think you may be mixing two concepts. DCC supplies both power and control signals via the track. Battery (with R/C) supplies power via the track, and control via RF - the same as your RC aircraft. MTS is a track-power DCC.


----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)

By definition DCC is track powered. The best solution for battery today is AirWire, it does have a DCC output. RCS is close to introducing a new system. For inside on a raised layout I would go with track power.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Mike, from a technical standpoint, there's nothing in the definition of DCC that mandates track power. It's more that when the protocol was written and adopted, track power was the only game in town, hence everything written in that context. 

Airwire (and similar wireless DCC interfaces) don't change the control protocol, the just modify the paradigm from a central command station controlling multiple decoders via power through the rails to on-board, address-specific command stations controlling a single decoder. They still use the same bi-polar square wave to send command signals to the decoder. It's that bi-polar square wave that's at the heart of the DCC protocol. 

That having been said--and getting back to the original question--I agree that track power is the better option for an indoor ceiling-type railroad. Battery power doesn't lend itself well to installations where access to the locomotive is limited. You've got to be able to get to the loco to charge the batteries, either on-board or by removing them. 

To Thud, what is it you're hoping to gain by going with DCC? Are you looking to control multiple locos on this layout at once? Sound? Many overhead ceiling-type layouts are simple loops designed to be turned on and left to run, which is perfect for "traditional" analog DC control. 

Later, 

K


----------



## josephunh (Mar 27, 2013)

Thud my first question to use is why would you want to use battery on a ceiling mounted system? That means getting up there all the time to take the loco down to recharge the batteries. If battery is what you want though and do not want to learn programing to use DCC then might I suggest: http://www.remotecontrolthrottles.com/


----------



## Thud_11 (Dec 18, 2013)

To clarify some points, the ceiling layout will only represent a small portion of my collection in terms of loco's and track. My biggest desire is to have wireless control throughout for multiple trains on any temporary layout I might have running through my house/yard. Now that I think about it, the track power on the ceiling layout makes perfect sense, but it still seems like a good option for me considering I have plenty of familiarity with hobby-type batteries (mostly Lipo's), computer chargers to balance/charge them, and it would certainly circumvent all the power issues I've been having with the track power on some of my larger temporary layouts. Thanks again for all the input guys. Cheers! - Thud


----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)

Kevin, where do you find your definition of DCC.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

If you are considering DCC look at NCE 10 amp wireless system. Yes its track power with current direct to the rails but other than that it's R/C. Simple and easy to use. Later RJD


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Mike, that's from the NMRA's standards. They're written such that the signal itself and the CVs which control it are the core of the DCC standard. Its foundations are firmly rooted in track power, and the standards frequently mention "track" and "rails," but only within the context of confirming compliance of the DCC signal itself to the standards, or providing a frame of reference for hook-up wires, plugs, or pins. In my reading and research on DCC over the past 5 or so years, I've never seen anything from the NMRA or manufacturer which mandates that for something to be considered "DCC," it _has_ to be used in a track-powered environment. 

The reality is that with current technology, track power makes up 99.9% of the DCC market, so the two concepts do go hand-in-hand. But as that technological limitation becomes less and less significant (as we're seeing with products such as the G-wire receiver or Airwire's Convertr), I think that popular association will dissolve in favor of considering "DCC" as specific to the command protocol itself regardless of how power is applied. (The NMRA's standards already allow for what it terms "alternate means" of supplying power to decoders.) That, or you'll see popular definitions break out two separate DCC concepts as "traditional DCC" vs. "on-board DCC" or some such. I've read where small scale guys are experimenting with the batteries used in park flyer R/C planes or those really small indoor R/C helicopters to power their HO trains using Airwire's Convertr to power their HO sound/function DCC decoders. It's a brave new world, if you ask me.

Later, 

K


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Not just H0 battery R/C Kevin.

*Deltang R/C* have it down to "N" scale now.
They run them off just one Lipo cell and use voltage multiplying technology to get traction voltage.
5 Channel DSM2 compatible means any compliant R/C can be used such as Spektrum and Orange R/C and my new TX range.


----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)

Things are definitely changing. I would maintain with a complete DCC control system you will be able to place any DCC equipped locomotive on the rail and run it. Taking some of the technology and applying in a limited application is not the same thing.


----------



## Dick Friedman (Aug 19, 2008)

I hate to start the answer to a question with "I wouldn't DO it that way," but the consensus seems to be that anything hanging from the ceiling and requiring the owner to climb ladders frequently is a bad idea. Straight DC is the simplest way to power a simple loop for pulling several cars with a small to moderately sized loco. For a really large locom (a big boy) straight DC makes sense, since the batteries are likely to go down quickly with a loco of that size/weight. 

Most often DCC IS a track system. Fixed power goes to the rails, and DCC decoders and transmitters tell the locomotive to take that power and use it to make the trains go. MTH's proprietary DCS is the same thing, but not compatible with DCC. It is very nice, though. Seems that DCS is trying to become more compatible with DCC.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I would maintain with a complete DCC control system you will be able to place any DCC equipped locomotive on the rail and run it. Taking some of the technology and applying in a limited application is not the same thing. 
Except it's not a "limited application." I can do everything with my Airwire- or G-wire-controlled DCC decoders with on-board battery power that I can using the same decoders in a "traditional" track-powered DCC environment. There's no difference in terms of programming or operation. The command protocol being sent to the decoder is identical in both camps. If I were to install a switch to power my decoder from the track vs onboard receiver, I'd have no difference in performance depending on which way the switch was thrown. 

Absolutely, battery-powered DCC is a different model than track-powered DCC. But it's no different than battery vs. track power in general. If I'm running battery power on my railroad, you're not running your analog DC loco on my rails either. However, if you've got a DCC-equipped locomotive and I've got a trail car with an on-board receiver/command station, I can plug your loco into my trail car and run the decoder in your locomotive. All I need is two wires. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Thud, I have a number of comments and suggestions for YOU on this subject you raised. 

I will not get involved in this argument here online, as I feel some of it is patently untrue and misleading. 

Drop me an email if you wish, I might be able to further help you in your decision and perspective. 

(see my signature for direct email address) 

Greg


----------



## Jim Agnew (Jan 2, 2008)

Hey Greg, welcome back


----------



## Randy Stone (Jan 2, 2008)

I know this is a question about HO, but, I have a question about Bachmann HO locomotives listed as DCC Equipped. Are these locomotives made to only run as DCC? or can they be run on plain DC track power?


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Randy, they should come factory set to run both on analog DC and DCC track power. The decoder will read the voltage coming in from the rails and make the determination as to what to use. Note: if you're using Pulse Width Modulation as a source for your analog DC, you may find the decoder won't work. I don't know how widespread this is, but my experience has been very hit-or-miss in that regard (to the point where I just use filtered DC when testing installations). 

A clarification to my post above: The Airwire G3 control board (and its predecessors) combine the on-board receiver, command station and motor-control decoder all in one board. They are one-trick ponies in that regard; there's no way to control the motor or lighting functions of these boards via a "traditional" DCC system. Having said that, I think the model Airwire's using for their "Convertr" board (and to an extent, QSI's G-wire receiver though it's not nearly as clear-cut) is likely to be the direction the "onboard DCC" side of things goes in the future--a wireless receiver/command station combination that can provide a DCC output to any DCC decoder. (This is the configuration I had in mind in my earlier post with regard to powering a DCC-equipped loco from a trail car.) I think it's easier for a manufacturer--especially one who already has a line of wireless transmitters for use with their base stations--to develop a small wireless receiver that's compatible with their existing transmitter. (Or, a third party developing a bluetooth or wifi receiver that communicates to a mobile device.) As I wrote earlier, it's a brave new world, and 10 - 20 years from now the systems we're using today will be as antiquated as the early predecessors of DCC are to us today. The "definitions" we defend today one way or the other will be completely meaningless with that new technology. It's all going to blend together and branch off in new ways we can't even begin to imagine. 

Later, 

K


----------

