When Will DCC become the standard?

[montanan]

Alan - My post of yesterday was not about who are the "true" model railroaders, but rather was to point out that traditional hobbyists - those dominating the hobby from its inception through the end of the 1980's - have a totally different outlook on what model railroading is all about. These folks were truly creative craftsmen. Their ilk was also reflected in the editorial staff of magazines like MR and RMC, as well as the magazines' content.

Beginning in the mid to late 1990's the hobby saw a noticeable influx of new blood. The bulk of these were seemingly much more interested in simply running their trains than in the traditional model building aspect, just as had been the Lionel enthusiasts of earlier years. Likewise, the younger element within this new group was deeply interested in electronic/computers and applying variations of these to their newfound hobby. They have also come to dominate the internet forums.

During this period, although MRC's content remained true to the traditional side of the hobby, MR acquired a totally new editorial staff, headed it up with two consecutive Lionel enthusiasts and changed the direction of its content. The content of the magazine dramatically shifted from page after page of modeling and historical articles to being dominated simply by pretty layout pictures and urges to buy-this, buy-that. Compare any 1950-1985 MR with a 2000-2010 issue and the contrast will be clearly illustrated to the reader. All these points are facts easily checked and demonstrated.

This brings me to the basic premise of my earlier post which is not about who is a true model railroader, but instead that the hobby began drawing a decidedly different group of people into it beginning in the late 1990's who approach to it, together with their new sort of buying habits, resulted in a dramatic change in direction and dividing the hobby into two distinct subgroups. For the newcomers, more open to the electronics end and doing more running with less personal ingenuity and foregoing most traditional model building projects, DCC fit right into the scheme.

Now I certainly don't contend that ALL traditional model railroaders shun DCC, only that by percentage they are far fewer and much slower buying into the supposed advantages of DCC (which are much more in the eye of the beholder and his particular approach to the hobby than anything else). I too know some traditional hobbyists who have been into the electronics end of the hobby for years and embraced DCC. But my personal observation has been that they are distinctly in the minority. Far and away the bulk of old-timers I know are still into DC.

A piece in MR a year or so ago claimed that DCC usage had finally reached 50% ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN POLL. However, with the dramatic alteration in content that the magazine had seen in the past decade it had lost a very large portion of its traditional hobbyist readership. If one doubts this just read the endless threads on all the forums during the 2000's about longtime hobbyists dropping their subscriptions to MR. So...it follows that MR's polling would not have been of any true cross section of hobbyists, but likely heavily influenced by the views and practices of the newcomers. I must then ask, just where does that honestly leave DCC's usage today among all hobbyists and what does it say about it in the future?

NYW&B

You made some very good point here. I will agree with you completely about having two different kinds of modelers. I have seen that the people who are new to the hobby do like the are quite different to the hobbiest that has been in it for years. I embrace scratchbuilding, trying to stay true to the era I have chosen to model in, research how industries were operated in my chosen era. I guess I would consider myself a traditional model railroader.
In my travels I have visited many club and home layouts and will agree that many of those that are new to the hobby seem to embrace the new electronics that have been coming into the hobby, such as DCC. I also have found that they seem to be very interested in running trains, but I haven't seen as much detail or weathering, with some exceptions, and in visiting clubs, found that very few of them had their own home layout, reflecting to your point of now having a home to set up a layout.
Also, I have visited amy home layouts, large and small, the majority of which are older modelers. Some, with larger layouts that have weekly operating sessions have changer over to DCC mainly for the easy of having numerous operators to have smoother running sessions. Some moved into DCC readiy, but some had put it off for a long time. Some also complained about the expense, but some who were better off financially had no problem with the change over.
On the other hand, I also visited some modelers who I would class as craftsmen modelers, and they seemed to ne more interested in the extremely fine super detailing of their railroads and no very interested in converting to DCC. To each their own I guess.
I will also have to agree with you about MR magazine. I do still subscribe, but like you said, the content has changed very much in recent years. I find less and less in the magazine that really interests me. Not being into DCC, the amount they print about the subject is of no interest to me. Not having the big bucks available to spend on the hobby that I would like to, a lot of what is in the magazine is only a dream. They do have some atricles that I am interested in, but no where as much as thay had vears ago. I am somewhat disappointed with them.

 

[Cjcrescent]

...Kits are going away not so much because folks don't want to build them anymore, but (just my own opinion here) many of us are working longer hours and have less and less hobby time.

This is something that I completely don't believe. Back when I was working at UAB, I put in 10-12 hours a day, and was on call to them 24/7/365. During the years I was with them, I can count on one hand when I didn't have a vacation interrupted, a day off interrupted, sick time even interrupted by a beeper call. I STILL was able to build several Westerfield, F&C, Branchline, etc every couple of months. I may not have been able to put much time each day on them, many days none, but I got them done.

When I was still in school, one of my professors stated there was no such thing as a "lack of time". It was more of the case of unwilling to "take the time", to do something. He actually considered it a poor excuse, as we all have just 24hrs in a day, to say we don't have time. How we use that time is up to us. We can be efficient with it, or not. When someone tells me they don't have time, I don't believe it.

Now while I do believe that there are a majority now that don't want to build kits, that's OK, just don't tell me they don't have time.

I remember when Roy Stewart kept telling me that I should build a resistance soldering outfit instead of buying one. My response was "Roy I'm struggling to get a layout built here, and it will never happen if I have to build the tools! I'm building less and less rolling stock kits, and this is giving me time to build the structures I want. I think it all balances out in the end!

Did he give you any plans? I sure do need one, and right now they are TOO expensive for me to buy one. Based on parts needed, I may try to build one. But I need plans to do so. As to rolling stock, I have too many now. My Railops shows 440 cars in the database, but that doesn't include the kits, (about 50 I believe) still to build and a like number to complete.I don't think that my layout can support over 500 cars realistically. I think I need a roundhouse sale!

 

[diburning]

When I was still in school, one of my professors stated there was no such thing as a "lack of time". It was more of the case of unwilling to "take the time", to do something.

I don't believe that. To me, someone telling me that I am "unwilling to take the time to do something" means that the person is being pretentious and trying to tell you that you should spend your time doing what HE wants you to do, not what YOU want or need to do. He's telling you that what HE wants you to do is more important than everything else and is trying to coerce you into thinking the same.

There are 24 hours in the day, most of us use at least 16 of it. Depending on our personal situations, 16 hours may or may not be enough.

Personally, the amount of time I have varies every week depending on work schedule and whether I have anything planned. I have a list of priorities and it would be a cold day in hell if someone came along and dictated what my priorities are!

I build kits when I have the time. Kits don't go bad, so if I don't have time, it can sit until I do. I don't have a problem buying or building kits. Sometimes they are enjoyable, and sometimes they are frustrating. In the end, I am always satisfied because I built it with my own two hands. If there are any imperfections, they were created by my hands, and not someone else's.

 

[Cjcrescent]

Eric, That's just the point I was making. This Prof was an efficiency expert, and somewhat of a philosopher, (if that has anything to do with it), and even back almost 40 yrs ago, he saw the beginning of the "down grading" of family and personal time. He never said you must do this. That wasn't his point, it was his observation.

After working for over 40 yrs from starting with a paper route, working as a gas station attendant, minor car mechanic, construction work, college, nursing school & 30 career as an RN, now that I'm retired, I can really understand his meaning. I believe that his meaning is this. You must take the time to do things for you and you alone, because if you don't, someone else will dictate what is done with that time.

After all these years, I believe he's right. Look at the upsurge in time worked, versus time off. Time spent away from home doing things that aren't exactly stress free. The less and less time parents are spending with their children. All of these and many more have been documented by more than one scientific and industry study.

 

[Cjcrescent]

Now to all the folks who have commented and/or followed this discussion. This, for the subject matter which can be touchy at times, has been one that has been extremely civil, matter of fact and respectful.

I don't think that this kind of civil discussion would have occurred on any other forum without someone losing their temper or getting personal. I must compliment everyone on their demeanor and especially on the respect they have shown all.

These are the type of discussions that you could have around a kitchen table while drinking some coffee with close friends.

Kudos to all and my thanks!!!

 

[montanan]

Out of curiosity, I sent an e-mail to MR magazine and got a reply from Jim Hediger, senior editor saying that they don't have any exact numbers, but since sound decoders have become available, DCC is used by approximately 40 percent of modelers.

 

[Cjcrescent]

I still wonder about how many modelers does this represent? Was this figure derived through their own magazine polls, the NMRA, MRIA, just who? If it was from their own magazine polls, that wouldn't be enough of the total modelers. Would it be through the NMRA? Again, not enough modelers are members. Now if it was through MRIA, then I would probably believe that this figure was more accurate.

 

[ChevelleSSguy]

Out of curiosity, I sent an e-mail to MR magazine and got a reply from Jim Hediger, senior editor saying that they don't have any exact numbers, but since sound decoders have become available, DCC is used by approximately 40 percent of modelers.

Intresting. I would have thought it would have been higher then that. I wonder what someone like Joe Fugate would estimate the percentage of his readers are? Im thinking they are likely much higher, given his publication is digital, thus more readers into a higher technology that would appeal towards DCC more.

I dont personally think DC will ever go away but I could see the numbers getting smaller and smaller over the years.

 

[diburning]

I wonder where they got those numbers from? There are plenty of modelers who don't subscribe to magazines, use the internet, or belong to clubs.

 

[Espeefan]

This is something that I completely don't believe. <SNIP>
When I was still in school, one of my professors stated there was no such thing as a "lack of time". It was more of the case of unwilling to "take the time", to do something. He actually considered it a poor excuse, as we all have just 24hrs in a day, to say we don't have time. How we use that time is up to us. We can be efficient with it, or not. When someone tells me they don't have time, I don't believe it. Now while I do believe that there are a majority now that don't want to build kits, that's OK, just don't tell me they don't have time.

Well Carey you know how it goes. Professors have theories and people have situations While prioritizing does come into play, I believe that most of us still in the work place have a hard time juggling what we have to do with what we want to do. I know I do. Between the job, the house, the honey-do's, the kids (not so much a factor for me anymore but for some of us) the writing, the painting & airbrush business I get less time to sit down & model for me. During this time I'll be picky, and over the years I tend to build what I need for specific situations, such as specific freight & passenger cars, structures, and still re-motoring & painting all that damn brass I've bought over the years! A Red Caboose or Intermountain freight car kit isn't going to make the cut for modeling time when I can pay five more bucks and get it assembled. OTOH a Sunshine or Westerfield kit of a specific PFE car I want will, along with structures. Almost any layout needs a ton of them, and the ones I want are mostly wood kits. Time most definiely is a factor unless I neglect something else.

Did he give you any plans? I sure do need one, and right now they are TOO expensive for me to buy one. Based on parts needed, I may try to build one. But I need plans to do so. As to rolling stock, I have too many now. My Railops shows 440 cars in the database, but that doesn't include the kits, (about 50 I believe) still to build and a like number to complete.I don't think that my layout can support over 500 cars realistically. I think I need a roundhouse sale!

No he just mentioned a high amperage DC transformer and a carbon rod. I bought the American beauty 250 watt unit. I never found one that was worth it cheap. You might watch e-bay or look for a used one. Maybe use the proceeds from that roundhouse sale. I don't use mine every day, but when I need it, there is no substitute! Just paint a loco or two for someone. A good one will cost about 1.25-1.5 paint jobs. And get a 250 or 300 watt unit if you buy commercial. Don't waste your money on the low amperage units. You'll be sorry.

 

[Espeefan]

Alan - My post of yesterday was not about who are the "true" model railroaders, but rather was to point out that traditional hobbyists - those dominating the hobby from its inception through the end of the 1980's - have a totally different outlook on what model railroading is all about. These folks were truly creative craftsmen. Their ilk was also reflected in the editorial staff of magazines like MR and RMC, as well as the magazines' content.

Beginning in the mid to late 1990's the hobby saw a noticeable influx of new blood. The bulk of these were seemingly much more interested in simply running their trains than in the traditional model building aspect, <SNIP> I must then ask, just where does that honestly leave DCC's usage today among all hobbyists and what does it say about it in the future?

NYW&B

OK I understand you points better now. I think that for many, possibly even for me if I had a large completed layout, and depending on my age and energy levels I might be inclined to stay with DC. Still, most of the old timers I know have made the switch. This doesn't really prove anything except that we know different people. There is probably no way to get the true numbers unless they did a poll at the national, and then you'll get a cross section of NMRA members. Plenty more modelers don't belong. I don't see a practical way to answer the original question, but I would not have a problem believing we are either close to or at the tipping point for exactly the reasons you mention.

There is also the evolution of the hobby. The main reason for all that building was that in the early years of the hobby, there wasn't much available commercially. It was scratch build with a few commercial components and that's it. The casualty rate among beginners was pretty high. Now you don't need as many skills. Still, people do develop them. As to DCC, it's a natural development. Microchips run everything else in the world, why not our trains? Every time a new technology debuts these discussion happen. If you take those older magazines you mentioned and read letters to the editor, the same discussions were had about injection molded shake the box kits, but they brought a lot of people into the hobby.

On the face of it, you get more features, it's easier to wire, and not terribly expensive. Initial costs are pretty close to DC if you compare fairly, even for small layouts. Thoose are pretty good reasons for new hobbyists to choose it over DCC. Oh oh out of time...off to work!

 

[montanan]

Intresting. I would have thought it would have been higher then that. I wonder what someone like Joe Fugate would estimate the percentage of his readers are? Im thinking they are likely much higher, given his publication is digital, thus more readers into a higher technology that would appeal towards DCC more.

I dont personally think DC will ever go away but I could see the numbers getting smaller and smaller over the years.

I agree, I thought it would also be higher, but I have no idea on where they got the figures. It's the only number of any kind that I have seen.

 

[DianneB]

.... traditional hobbyists ... were truly creative craftsmen...... Beginning in the mid to late 1990's the hobby saw a noticeable influx of new blood. The bulk of these were seemingly much more interested in simply running their trains than in the traditional model building aspect

I see this quite clearly!

As a plastic model builder I came to model railroading in the late 1970s for the joy and satisfaction of building but, as a renter, I never had space for a layout. Building was something I could do here and there whenever I had a few hours free and wanted to get away from the mental rat race of a high tech career. In the early 80s I gave away much of what I had built but kept a couple of locomotives.

Being recently retired, I just returned to the hobby and started looking around. The differences I see, particularly with the information availability of the Internet, are:

- a VERY MUCH wider variety of kits, particularly specialty kits. They may have been around 30 years ago but would have been hard to find

- a wide variety of vendors world wide and much more price competitive

Looking locally (3 larger hobby shops) I noticed:

- almost NO "craftsman kits". What is on the shelf is very easy to build and intended to place "out of the box"

- large inventories of RTR pieces

- no "high end" products.

As for DCC, I never heard of it in the 1970s or early 80s - it was a pipe dream! But even in the short time I have been back in the hobby I can see the writing on the wall and will retrofit my old locomotives with DCC. It just doesn't make sense to build a layout with the complicated wiring required for DC when it is so much more simple to build "a two wire system". The idea of being able to run two locomotives on the same track is great and being able to run two locomotives up to each other, nose to nose, in prototypical fashion is unbelievable!

I consider myself a "purist" and scratch-builder as a modeller and maybe my high tech background has influenced me but for me it will be DCC from inception all the way through.

(Sorry for rambling LOL!)

 

[NYW&B]

With the questioning of source accuracy for a DCC use percentage statistic voiced in some of the last few posts, let me point out problems regardless of source in that particular area and how murky the situation really could be.

The question of the 40% figure response offered by MR's Jim Hediger tends to assume it may have been based on an MR reader survey. If so, consider my point upstream that MR's editorial content and readership currently leans heavily toward the new modeler, who would also be anticipated to belong to the non-traditional segment of the hobby and be expected to strongly favor DCC usage. In that respect, is even 40% possibly an inflated figure relative to the hobby at large?

Upstream MRIA was suggested as perhaps a more accurate source, were any figures available from them. But would that really be better? Any figure they might provide would simply be raw unit sales numbers which say nothing about the buyer. These would address strictly sales of today's limited run locomotives and thereby reflect simply the choice of a very limited and select portion of hobbyists. Further, with these figures being simply across the board sales they would include the many non-hobbyists who buy train sets as one time Christmas presents, etc. This artificially skews the numbers once again. Either way, the figures would in no way reflect what the actual numbers are among all hobbyists, or even what percentage are buying DCC.

A final thought, one I'm sure DCC enthusiasts will find rather objectionable, is that by virtue of the well established facts that the hobby is steadily aging and shrinking in popularity, that new locomotives have been appearing in ever smaller batches for quite a number of years now, together with the apparent very slow gains it made over the past decade, DCC may actually have just about reached its saturation point in the hobby. This could make further significant gains in DCC popularity beyond the current figures (40%-50%) possible only through attrition as the vast Baby Boomer "traditional" segment of hobbyists steadily declines.

Considering all the above, and even though the manufacturers are clearly pushing DCC/sound, I think it quite possible it will never truly become 100% THE standard powering method of a major fraction of layouts before it, too, is supplanted by a newer technology (on-board battery perhaps?).

NYW&B

 

[Cjcrescent]

Well Carey you know how it goes. Professors have theories and people have situations While prioritizing does come into play, I believe that most of us still in the work place have a hard time juggling what we have to do with what we want to do. I know I do. Between the job, the house, the honey-do's, the kids (not so much a factor for me anymore but for some of us) the writing, the painting & airbrush business I get less time to sit down & model for me.

I had all that to deal with too. I haven't been officially retired that long. After I left UAB, I worked, (mostly part time) for another 5yrs. I didn't officially retire until 2010 when Social Security said I couldn't work anymore.

But all in all, you've just proved the point I was making. You basically said that you've lost your choices in what you can do for yourself with the time you have.

No he just mentioned a high amperage DC transformer and a carbon rod. I bought the American beauty 250 watt unit. I never found one that was worth it cheap.... I don't use mine every day, but when I need it, there is no substitute!

Darn, I was hoping I wasn't gonna have to buy one, but I do know not to get a cheapie. I just remembered that he told me what to get once, can't remember the transformer amperage, and even gave me a carbon rod to start with. I kept that rod in the bottom of the tool box until I found it broken a couple of years ago.

Just paint a loco or two for someone....

I try to do as little as I can of that anymore. Just enough to keep my skills up. I paint for a select few, including some old clients that have stayed in touch, and the pace is much more relaxed and slower. I choose what I do and when I do it, mostly Southeastern. I also never do more than 1 at a time, and will not take another commission until the current job is finished. I average 3-5 a year now, and that's more than enough! Sometimes I think its too much.

 

[Espeefan]

I had all that to deal with too. I haven't been officially retired that long. After I left UAB, I worked, (mostly part time) for another 5yrs. I didn't officially retire until 2010 when Social Security said I couldn't work anymore.

But all in all, you've just proved the point I was making. You basically said that you've lost your choices in what you can do for yourself with the time you have.

Not really. I still do plenty of modeling, but the amount of time I get to choose what to do with has gotten smaller. I used to build every freight or passenger car. I don't have to anymore, so I just build the ones I really want and can't get any other way. I do build structures, mostly craftsman kits or bashes, and of course there's that loco work, and my recent foray into traction. I do plenty that is not RTR, but I also buy my share of RTR to save time.

Darn, I was hoping I wasn't gonna have to buy one, but I do know not to get a cheapie. I just remembered that he told me what to get once, can't remember the transformer amperage, and even gave me a carbon rod to start with. I kept that rod in the bottom of the tool box until I found it broken a couple of years ago.

I'd suggest 250-300 watts, I believe around 12 volts. Then all you need is a ground wire and a handle for the carbon rod, and a foot switch. The carbon rods can be had at any welding supply store, but on my unit I use the tweezer hand piece more than anything else. The carbon rod is fragile and you have to handle it with care. The tweezer electrodes are stainless steel with a copper jacket and are very durable.

I try to do as little as I can of that anymore. Just enough to keep my skills up. I paint for a select few, including some old clients that have stayed in touch, and the pace is much more relaxed and slower. I choose what I do and when I do it, mostly Southeastern. I also never do more than 1 at a time, and will not take another commission until the current job is finished. I average 3-5 a year now, and that's more than enough! Sometimes I think its too much.

Me too! Only about 3 or 4 models a year and I've been as low as one. Burnout! Still, it pays for toys and such. Not sure what you're charging these days but my base for a steamer is around $300.00. That will mostly get you there, so it's choice time Do you want one bad enough?

 

[Cjcrescent]

Good discussion with you Alan, but I think that we've hijacked this thread long enough. Let's just agree to disagree. I'm looking it from a medical aspect, as I generally look at all things not MR related. Would you believe that after 10 years away from it, I still have to keep my knowledge as current as I can. I still get asked for advice by family and friends.

Well it doesn't look like I'll be getting a soldering unit soon. I'll just have to keep doing my repairs and re-details with different temp solders and irons.

Didn't know you had cut down so much on painting. I just got a new one in. Its a Custom Brass CB&Q O5A. Gonna be fun. The front shield and steps on the pilot has been broken for years and it's gonna have to be stripped before any permanent repairs are made, but the guy wants it just black with the graphite & oil smoke and fire box. I have to replace all the rope pulls and some piping as well. Probably take several months. I don't charge as much as you, but almost, to cut down on people wanting to get me to paint their stuff. Trouble with word of mouth advertizing, is you can't shut it down. It has a tendency to carry on after you want it to stop.

 

[Espeefan]

Agree, we'll disagree But I don't think we really hijacked the thread. The time element is important to some. One of the LHS here has a Woodland Scenics 4 x 8 "layout in a box" built up in the train department. They run the whole thing with an NCE Powercab, and there is a DPDT switch to change over to a Digitrax system. It's a two wire installation. Very simple, manual switches and so forth. I believe they're selling the Powercab for $139.99. Again, not much more expensive than DC for a small layout.

 

[Burlington Bob]

WARNING: This video does contain a small amount of strong language, comparable to a Saturday Night Live TV show.

After all the discussion about DC verses DCC, I thought that this was extremely funny!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2umTTPFfiiY

 

[railfan]

WARNING: This video does contain a small amount of strong language, comparable to a Saturday Night Live TV show.

After all the discussion about DC verses DCC, I thought that this was extremely funny!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2umTTPFfiiY

That was hilarious! Good call B.B.! Or should I?......Dare I say?....HIT-larious!