Topics

Controlling HO DCC system MTH ?

Mark Cartwright
 

No
Apparently however - it is the other way around, with the ESU ECoS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJDefT8Udck

I discovered that some DCC Decoders will not fully function even on their own brand (Digitrax to Digitrax Zephyr vs Chief) as some CV's are interpreted differently, but could work effectively that is equally with the ESU ECoS.
====
Now it's  time to tell me this can't possibly be, as all DCC Systems created under the Banner of the NMRA were created equally so.
Q' Pla !
:)) Mark

Don Vollrath
 

The 'banner' of the NMRA governs only the DCC signaling interchange to the track and a few particular CVs for normal but minimal operation. From there each manufacturer is free to invent and define what the plethora of other possible CVs actually do and how. So it is not surprising that one needs to carefully read and understand the manual for each brand and type of decoder to determine how to get it to function like you want. Ditto with the variety of DCC control systems. Some are more versatile or limited than others. But your command station and programming method still needs to work in concert with the design of the decoder. DecoderPro exists to help make it somewhat convenient and sense of it all.

DonV

PennsyNut
 

Back in the dark ages, our USGovt chose to force the auto mfgrs to standadise the shift quadrant on auto trans to put neutral between drive and reverse. Do you remember that? Well, the NMRA made a feeble attempt to standardize DCC. But the mfgrs apparently think they have better ways of doing things. IMHO I don't see why they do! What is wrong with setting reasonable standards so that we, the poor people (and I refer to the majority of modellers) can purchase a command station and a decoder and expect them to work together. It's bad enough that the decoders are different, but now we have DCS from MTH and it is sole proprietary. Heck even the 3-railers have Lionel and MTH also. And all we have to do is: Refuse to buy MTH. And they will get the message. If their sales drop, who know what they might do? Maybe go away! This business of forcing us to purchase additional equipment to change CV's? Need a booster to change some. Sorry for my rant.
Morgan Bilbo, new to DCC

Lee Phillips
 

I agree 100%  
Shame the computer people don't get it either 
Lee

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:25 AM PennsyNut <pennsynut@...> wrote:
Back in the dark ages, our USGovt chose to force the auto mfgrs to standadise the shift quadrant on auto trans to put neutral between drive and reverse. Do you remember that? Well, the NMRA made a feeble attempt to standardize DCC. But the mfgrs apparently think they have better ways of doing things. IMHO I don't see why they do! What is wrong with setting reasonable standards so that we, the poor people (and I refer to the majority of modellers) can purchase a command station and a decoder and expect them to work together. It's bad enough that the decoders are different, but now we have DCS from MTH and it is sole proprietary. Heck even the 3-railers have Lionel and MTH also. And all we have to do is: Refuse to buy MTH. And they will get the message. If their sales drop, who know what they might do? Maybe go away! This business of forcing us to purchase additional equipment to change CV's? Need a booster to change some. Sorry for my rant.
Morgan Bilbo, new to DCC

whmvd
 

THing is, development doesn't happen in a way that helps your view of it. There isn't a standards body that sets standards, after which everyone starts building the same stuff. What happens is that stuff gets developed, and the standards body comes in afterwards looking at raising the best and most consistent practices to a standard, but: the non-standard stuff already exists, ie being sold, and can be very good. Just not compatible.

You are very right in manufacturers getting the message whenb people vote with their wallet. Problem is, a lot of those votes come in before the customers are well enough informed to buy what's best for them.

Ah, economics. You can't beat economics, but sometimes you might want to.
Wouter


On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 16:25, PennsyNut <pennsynut@...> wrote:
Back in the dark ages, our USGovt chose to force the auto mfgrs to standadise the shift quadrant on auto trans to put neutral between drive and reverse. Do you remember that? Well, the NMRA made a feeble attempt to standardize DCC. But the mfgrs apparently think they have better ways of doing things. IMHO I don't see why they do! What is wrong with setting reasonable standards so that we, the poor people (and I refer to the majority of modellers) can purchase a command station and a decoder and expect them to work together. It's bad enough that the decoders are different, but now we have DCS from MTH and it is sole proprietary. Heck even the 3-railers have Lionel and MTH also. And all we have to do is: Refuse to buy MTH. And they will get the message. If their sales drop, who know what they might do? Maybe go away! This business of forcing us to purchase additional equipment to change CV's? Need a booster to change some. Sorry for my rant.
Morgan Bilbo, new to DCC

Mark Cartwright
 

Morgan and all....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udyy2gQyNso
Listen to this carefully about people going off in many directions.
and NOT being Focused.
====
Apple was like this circa 1997 with Open Doc...a program which was NEEDED for a Macintosh 9500 computer to get onto the internet... but it didn't work. I know > I stupidly took a On Line History Class which I could not complete....Cause of Open Doc not being compatible with JAVA.
But I digress...
What the NMRA essentially did with DCC is Non Sequitur.
Yes, a Volunteer Organization which did set BASE Standards of Handshaking Code.
Then by allowing the many manufacturers to develop their own proprietary codes...put the DCC (American) Market in disarray...

They created Committees which don't actually talk to one another.
This is NOT the first time the NMRA has done this.
Read down to Question #5 .....
http://www.railwayeng.com/rrhints.htm

and Yes the answer.
Two Committees which for political reasons were allowed bad management.
Here's the video...Trying to speed match a train while being shackled to two other guys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okl8ESz01SY
======
If you follow NMRA specifications at 100%....Your layout will fail.
Which has been good for me ...Cause I buy defunct/failed layouts often at 10 cents to the MSRP+ Dollar.
Instead use for example BNSF or UP specifications and give a look see to the European World of DCC.
My apologies, if this seems like a Discussion...but I felt an answer to all these woes should be spoken.
:)) Mark

================================
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_R5fK73Eaw
I created a NOMAD Headquarters Building for my N Scale Layout....Based on this Model 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6214TMDJf4
The National Organization of Modelers and Ardained Designers. (NOMAD)
Cause...The way you guys write about some of these guys, you would think they are ordained by God.
Are you Ordained (Ardained)?
But I know for a fact some John Armstrong designs maybe good at O Scale but they don't work in the confines of N Scale.,
There are some decoders in this world...Which simply do not work on any DCC System even their own to the praises their Advertising Department bestowed upon them.
But i no longer care...I standardized with ESU.