Write us a letter at: letters

Editorial and the Library

After reading your February 2008 Editorial, I can’t help but to respond. I had previously been thinking about the subject on numerous occasions as I read your magazine. Perhaps many different fields of interest could compare what you are suggesting, the shotgun coverage of everything vs. concentrated coverage of fewer areas, but I’ll use something very common to many of us: the public library. Often its goal is to meet everyone’s needs, or to be “All things to all people.” This can really strain the resources. Sometimes libraries become “Specialists” in a particular area — perhaps railroading, but more likely Best
Sellers. When this happens, they gain and loose patrons, support, and financial backing based on their chosen direction. Hence, I hope you have carefully considered that as a subscriber to your magazine, I pay for the service and like the public library patron, I want something in return.

I enjoy looking at some information about the other scales as you suggest, but like most people (I presume), I like to get concentrated material for what I pay. I model in HO scale, and after skipping over the articles on DCC and high end products, I read your magazine in about a third of the time I spend on a couple of others. Everyone skips something, even in their own scale, and I suspect most of the material in the other scales. I can’t imagine that some of the modelers in less popular scales are reading more than that! It is not the change in the magazine size that has me questioning whether to continue as a subscriber, it is the content that directly relates to my model railroading. Please don’t confuse that with my opinion that you produce an excellent magazine, and that is why I subscribed to it in the first place. Time will tell for me and perhaps for your approach as well, but I have less to lose. I wish you luck and thanks for producing your fine product regardless.

Jim Sabourin
Cape Cod, MA
Thanks for the candid assessment, Jim. Publisher Mike Lindsay and I have kicked around the idea of going to an HO-only publication or any number of other changes, but that’s mostly where the other big magazines already are. What we’ve found by listening to our subscribers is that our readers really are interested in what happens in other scales and technologies. There are a surprising number of multi-scale modelers, working in either HO or N and then in either O or Large. Readers who buy our magazine for our S- or O-scale coverage may raise their expectations in these scales after reading about what is available in HO or N. And they should. I recall a winter I spent on Cape Cod and how much I enjoyed looking out to the sea’s horizon. That’s also the wonder of an all-scales magazine, Jim. We can see the horizon. —John

Have we reviewed Aristocraft’s basic train engineer?

Has MRN ever done a review on Aristo-Craft’s Basic Train Engineer? If so would it be possible to get the review? I would like to use this on an HO layout, [and] was concerned about smooth starts and stops. I can’t find any info on the Internet.

Thomas Kao
Waukesha, WI
What a fun question, Tom, because — believe it or not — that was the first review I ever did for Model Railroad News! I loved the product, still have it, and still use it. I’ve put it to work on N, HO, and less often with small locos for Large Scale. It does, indeed, give smooth starts and stops, unless you push the emergency stop button. If you’d like to see the full review, you can order a back issue of the February 2001 edition. Contact the office for details. —John
Figuring out the figures

I recently wrote you folks about the lack of selection in HO scale of many ethnic groups that now reside in the Western Hemisphere, or more locally, our own United States. Hopefully, even printing such an article will not offend someone but here are some additional thoughts on the subject.

1. Virtually all HO-scale engineers and fireman sold today are Caucasian. This is really a thing of the past. Many, many locomotive crewmen are Afro-American or Hispanic. So, where’s a set to be purchased of such a contemporary group of railroaders?

2. We now have available the best passenger coach and dome cars ever. So after all that wonderful interior detailing, where are the passengers? And better yet, how do you get them inside the cars? I’m tired of seeing empty famous name trains being marketed. Surely with the technology available today, this should be no big problem for a manufacturer to add. Somebody’s not thinking....

3. Same with HO-scale vehicles. I see a line of empty HO cars and trucks waiting in traffic for a signal light. Where did everybody go? To get a hamburger? Now try and get an HOscale driver into an Athearn close top Model A Ford... no way. To be fair, Woodland Scenics does have a few vehicle sets with drivers and passengers, but the rest of the vehicles should only be in a parking lot.

4. Why doesn’t some manufacturer produce seated figures for vehicles and not only for station benches and passenger car interiors (in equipment where you can actually get to the inside without major surgery).

OK, that’s it for now,

Joe Bux
HO-scale Missing Persons Bureau
Hi, Joe. Without going to hugely great lengths on this, I’ll take these things item by item.

1. There is some diversity in race among figures, but perhaps not as much as you’d like. You can alter the appearance of a figure with a fine brush and the color paint of your choice. In the battle for inventory and display space, I suspect that one color out of the factory is about all we can expect.

2. Every time we review a Walthers passenger car, we usually remove the top of the car and shoot down inside of it, showing how easy it is to take off the top. I specifically mention that figures can be added if you wish. USA Trains and Aristo- Craft sell passenger cars with figures already installed, and we’ve covered that fact. If you’re tired of the empty famous name trains, then fill ‘em up!

3. Some HO-scale vehicles can be dismantled and figures can be added and some cannot. Most models are built for a collectible vehicle market that is far larger than model railroading. At the bottom of it, what race and gender do you want behind the wheel, because the tendency will be to build all of them that way on the assembly line. Perhaps we could talk Athearn into producing an unglued version for those who wish to install their own figures.

4. Seated on a bench and seated on a bench seat is still seated. The only conceivable difference would be hand and arm position for driving; passengers would be the same, either way. It might be commonplace to nip off the legs or even from the waist-down in order to get an easier fit.

More and more model vehicles are coming on the market with figures in them, but don’t count on them to represent any certain demographic group. We are model railroaders, meaning we may have to model things to suit our needs. It may be to our advantage to purchase vehicles that we can dismantle and add figures we have altered with paint or have selected to be females instead of males. —John
Confusion from SD40-2 review

I’ve just read the SD40-2 review in the February 2008 issue. Two things I don’t understand about what Athearn is doing these days. First, can you explain the differences among the many lines of product they currently have. There is Blue Box, RTR, and Genesis. Is this the lot, or is there more? And what are the differences?

Second, please explain what’s going on with their DCC sockets. The picture of the DH163 decoder on page 28 shows it to be hard wired to the board, as the 8- pin plug isn’t being used at all. When hard-wired, does the 8-pin dummy plug have to be removed to make the decoder work? Why is the decoder hard-wired if there is a plug? And why does the article refer to 9-pin plugs and 8-pin plugs? I only am aware of the NMRA 8 pin, which the board in the photo also shows. I am really confused with this decoder installation thing.

Ken Silva
Brownfield, ME
Hi, Ken. Thanks for letting me help clear the air on this, since the confusion is my fault. First, Athearn started many, many years ago producing the Blue Box line of locos and cars and this was their only product offering. This goes all the way back to Irv Athearn, the original founder of the company, and it was a remarkable accomplishment, offering a pretty good product for a very competitive price.

In the mid-nineties, after Irv’s passing, the new management of the company introduced a premium line of HO-scale products, the Genesis Line that would feature top-notch modeling, painting, operating drive components, and would come fully assembled. Around the year 2000, Athearn then started the concept of selling the Blue Box products already assembled under the banner of “Ready-To-Roll” or RTR. Quality and detailing was improved, and so the Athearn brand now has three product lines depending upon what you as a modeler desire to do and spend.

The Quick-Plug board fits into the philosophy since it offers many options. Left alone, it gives its locomotive straight DC functionality. By removing the dummy board from the 9-pin JST plug, you may add a decoder with either an NMRA 8-pin plug or a JST 9-pin socket. What you see in the photo is the latter, a Digitrax decoder with a JST socket in its end with the Quick-Plug’s connector inserted into it, making a very tidy installation. —John
About the new Atlas 0-6-0 testing

I enjoyed the Atlas 0-6-0 review but would suggest you test the speed ranges in conventional mode as well as TMCC. As any engine equipped with TMCC does not run very slowly in conventional due to a high starting voltage threshold, and the sound depends on the battery until it reaches 10 or 12 volts, we could be buying a beautiful switcher that starts off running too fast, and runs down the battery if we want to do slow switching. You can tell when the track voltage powers the sound by running it without the battery connected. Also I noticed in the photo there were two pickups on the engine, and two on the tender. Are all four used to power the motor?

Cal Christy
Downers Grove, IL
Yes, Cal, all pick-ups aid the locomotive in maintaining good contact, especially while traveling through turnouts, as the 0-6-0 has a rather short wheelbase. I discussed this model with reviewer Dave Otte, always something fun for me, since Dave has such a wealth of knowledge on these topics. He points out that this model is equipped with Engineer On Board (EOB) speed control system that works in both control modes and will keep the locomotive moving at a very slow speed, even when powered with a conventional transformer.

It is his observation that when someone invests six hundred dollars into a locomotive equipped with TMCC, why would they operate without it? He compares it to running a DC/DCC equipped HO locomotive in DC or DCC. If you have TMCC in both the loco and your power pack, that’s going to be what you use.—John

Readers speak on Standard CVs, #1

Regarding your Thinking of DCC in the February issue; yes, CV’s 5 and 6 are important to me; along with CV 95 that will work with a three-step speed table. Decoders seem to be set up to use the CV 67-94 speed table if you are consisting and most decoders include forward and reverse trim as part of the speed table’s.

I think the following CV’s should be the mandatory CV’s:
1. 1-8

2. 17-22

3. 29

4. 33-34 assigned to lighting FL(f )& FL(r).

5. 35-36 for bell and whistle F1 & F2.

6. 37-41. Agree on the coupler, cooling fan, dynamic bake, Doppler, and air brake locations for functions in this CV range.

7. 42. Use F8 for sound mute.

8. 43-46. Standardize location for other sounds in this range.

9. 95. Allow to work with three step and 28-step table.

These CV’s allow for speed adjustment to match locomotives for consisting and set function locations for lighting and output for sound effects. You don’t mention anything in the article about the output for F1-F8, but these are important for lighting and sound to be consistent, especially lighting and mute. Yes, they can be remapped, but why not have them as a standard location?

For Recommended I would add the following:

1. 25

2. 65

3. 66-94

These match the most common sound functions, help starting, and provide for using multi-step speed tables. There should be no optional CV’s. Optional should all be changed to recommend.

I had settled on QSI, Soundtraxx, and LokSound for sound and Digitrax for nonsound decoders. Unfortunately, Digitrax doesn’t allow for reverse trim using threestep speed tables, but it has great lighting effects. I will not use any MRC product and recommend to anyone who is planning on DCC sound not to use MRC because their functions work differently than the other three sound decoders.

Stuart L. Cato PE
Portland, OR
Read on, Stuart… —John
Readers speak on Standard CVs, #2

I just read your column on standardization of DCC CVs and thought I would send you my thoughts. (You did ask!)

First, I think that CVs 3, 4, 5, and 6 should be made mandatory. Most decoders already have them, and there is no excuse for leaving them out anymore.

Next, with regard to decoders that do not use the Uniform application of the recommended CVs they support. The NMRA holds the copyright on the term “DCC,” and they should vigorously defend it. In the CV table in RP9.2.2 there is a column for Uniform Spec. If a decoder does not conform to this table it should not be allowed to be called a DCC decoder, or DCC compatible, period! (I’m thinking of MRC’s implementation of CV21, but it should be applied across the board.) Of course, on recommended CVs the manufacture would still have the option of not supporting the CV at all.

Your comments on advanced consisting are interesting, but I disagree with you here. First, you have the problem of the thousands of decoders already in use. I don’t want to have to replace everything I have, so how could you make your scheme backward compatible? Second, how do you propose to broadcast the long consist addresses? With the existing method an advanced consist address is broadcast the same as a short address. Since long addresses cover the whole range from 0001 to 9999 there is no conflict, but how would you distinguish a long advanced consist packet from a long address packet? Last, how many layouts will ever use more than 127 consists at once? If the control system uses address aliasing, like NCE does, you can still select the consist by the lead or trailing unit address and you don’t even need to know the actual advanced consist address.

But there is a part if the NMRA PR 9.2.2 that desperately needs to be changed. That is decoder lock. Decoder lock is primarily used when two decoders are used in one locomotive, usually a sound and a motor/function. As set up by the NMRA, decoder lock locks the advanced consist address, CV19, so that if you use decoder lock you cannot consist the engine! This makes decoder lock USELESS for all of us who model diesels! I have nothing against steam engines, but the NMRA needs to recognize that many of its members are modeling dates after 1950.

I enjoy your column very much, keep up the good work. I just hope the NMRA committee and the manufactures are reading your column too.

Barry Draper
Alhambra, CA
I’ll yield on the consist ideas I’ve had, and some manufacturers are reading this, the last I heard. Read on.... —John

Readers speak on Standard CVs, #3

I converted to DCC in July 2006, and now have about 30 DCC equipped locomotives. Decoders are mostly Digitrax, but also NCE, Lenz, and two upgraded QSI sound decoders. Except for four sound decoders, I installed the units in all my locos. Since I am fully dieselized, I have no Soundtraxx decoders, and I have stayed far away from MRC units based on reported problems and non-standardization.

Based on experience, my hope is that the NMRA will extend the mandatory CV and other features list as follows:

• Required, not recommended, not optional —

• 2- and 4-digit addressing with 1, 17, and 18. Address numbers 1 – 9999 available.

• CVs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15-16, 19/20 (consist), 29, and 65-95.

• Standardize on a reset CV and the value to make that reset.

• BEMF or similar capability.

• Kick start capability.

• Standard functions — 1 for lights, 2 for bell, 3 for whistle/horn, 8 for sound on/off.

• Programming modes available - page, direct bit or byte, POM.

• Must have CV read back capability in all but POM mode.

On consisting, I am comfortable with a two number max address for the consist number. I would use CV 20 for a consist direction, if different from the normal direction, so that you don’t have to mess with the standard forward direction in 29.

For some manufacturers, this upgrade would be easy; for others a bit more challenging. For those who march to a fully different drummer, publicize their decision and let the market decide.

Now for sound? Mostly would be the manufacturer’s choice of features and CVs, but if other manufacturers copied the choices of a lead manufacturer, I hope the lead guy would not get huffy about “Proprietary” rights and instead be proud that they were the leader.

I’m looking forward to the range of responses from your readers.

Roger Thomas
West Windsor, NJ
Thanks, Roger. Well, you and the two preceeding you, have each expressed some differences, but you have also a very large area of common intersection, and I hope all manufacturers understand that while three may make a small sample survey, it is also probative. I haven’t received any contradictory letters whatever. But read on; we’re not done yet ! —John
DCC Standards — Not!

Thanks for your user-friendly series of articles on DCC “standards.” I belong to an HO model railroad club which about 10 years ago adopted wireless DCC (Digitraxx) primarily for the ability to control multiple engines without complex electrical wiring and the ability to control engines via radio (wireless capability) during our module shows.

We’ve recently added a permanent layout to what had been a module-only Club. At this permanent layout we’re taking the next step with DCC — turnouts controlled by hand-held, radio cabs, panels, and central dispatcher, and eventually signaling.

DCC’s other “capabilities” (e.g. ability to change CVs to customize an engine) get used on less than 1 percent of our engines. In fact most Club members’ only experience at changing CVs is when they assign an engine number instead of the decoder default of “03.”

We have one Club member who helps us make horn and bell selections on soundequipped locos (and he uses a different, more user-friendly, DCC system).

My Club has continuing experience with DCC gremlins (intermittent radio control, difficulty programming sound decoders, compatibility of analog and DCC engines on the layout, engines taking off for no known reason, engines not responding for no apparent reason, etc.), and since most of us only use our DCC sets occasionally, the more userfriendly and intuitive the better. A survey of DCC users to see what they really use may be helpful.

John Huntzinger
Woodbridge, VA
Good letter, John, because it brings up three important issues. First, many of your gremlin problems may be due to radio issues. When people are using multiple radio cabs, there is a chance that there can be two or more cabs using the same cab number. If you are at a show, some other club’s cabs can be running your trains!

Second, I love the idea of a survey, but my college degree is heavy on psych courses, including stuff like surveys. To be meaningful, we’d need a lot of respondents and that doesn’t happen in this industry, as a rule. I’ve learned to talk with and listen to my readers and hear what they’re telling me, which leads to the third thing.

I think your third paragraph is far more telling than a lot of DCC professionals would like to admit. Have you ever asked these members why they don’t change CVs on their locomotives? Do you even need to ask? Isn’t it because they find the process of programming more daunting than they care to undertake? So Mr. DCC Engineer, if you want to know what your next project is — make changing CVs more simple than programming your VCR. And to make that work better, you might have to standardize the CVs —John
We welcome all comments and letters from our readers!

e-mail us at: letters

or send us a letter to:
LETTERS c/o Model Railroad News
P.O. Box 1080 • Merlin, OR 97532-1080

Fax: 541-955-0346
Home • About MRN • Advertise • Contact Us • Moving? • Subscribe • Trial Subscription