Why is there so little info on DCC

I didn't even know 3 rail DCC was a thing until I checked this post.

That could a contributing factor. I thought DCC was exclusive to two rail.

I would say the other factor is DCS/Legacy/ERR coming with locomotives already. It's kind of like PC coming with Internet Exploder back in the day.

Some of us are working on it now. Stay tuned. Traditional DCC has a few adherents in three rail but that only works with the exclusion of TMCC an DCS. The recently released Blunami DCC will work together TMCC and DCS. I think you see a few more coming on board when they see its capabilities.

Pete

Lots of reasons.  Originally in the 1990s and thereabouts, the availability of high amperage DCC equipment was scarce and manufacturers of DCC had little or no interest in three rail O gauge, a much smaller market than HO and N, as examples.  Lionel developed TMCC to be compatible with the high amperage AC open frame motors used historically and currently (in the 1990s) in their three rail locos.  MTH developed DCS for similar reasons apparently.  MTH did include DCC in many of their PS3 (edited ) locos beginning in the first part of the 21st century so they could operate on two rail O gauge layouts. Two rail O gauge is an even smaller niche market than three rail, so once again, DCC manufacturers had little incentive to develop products specifically for O gauge, two or three rail.

Since all of the current production of three rail locos have TMCC/Legacy/LionChief/Bluetooth or DCS (Protosound 3), there isn't much motivation to spend more money on DCC for most hobbyists, except for those who like to tinker with such things. No motivation on the part of hobbyists means a tiny market, at least at present.

@Norton posted:

Some of us are working on it now. Stay tuned. Traditional DCC has a few adherents in three rail but that only works with the exclusion of TMCC an DCS. The recently released Blunami DCC will work together TMCC and DCS. I think you see a few more coming on board when they see its capabilities.

Pete

Can you send me a pm with any info you have on installing the Blunami into a 3 rail loco?

Neil Young (Liontech) was one of the pioneers of command control for 3-rail.  I think he came up with TMCC circa 1994 because at that time, there was no off-the-shelf DCC solution that would operate amp-hungry Pullmor motors in the electrically noisy AC track environment.  It worked well enough that Lionel began "bundling" it with severaly new top-line locomotives.  So although proprietary, it became a quasi-standard.  Especially when Lionel began allowing competitors to offer TMCC in their trains as well.

DCC doesn't care how many rails are on the track, but I doubt that it would operate a Postwar motor very well.  At a minimum, I think the motor would need to be isolated from chassis ground (outside rails.)  If you have only new can-motored stuff, DCC should work great.  The main roadblock to using it is the initial cost of the command base, handhelds, etc.  Also, the effort of installing a decoder in each loco.  If Lionel and MTH offered their locos "naked" (i.e., with no electronics in them) and for a lower price, DCC would be a very viable way to go, as long as you aren't interested in running your train at a club, or someone else's house.

For this reason and others, I like the "direct R/C" options better than DCC.  With direct R/C, there is no command base.  Just a receiver in the loco that modulates track power to the motor, and a hand held controller or phone app.  This is exactly how Lionel's LionChief works.  I also know of three aftermarket options:  AirWire, RailPro, and Blunami.  With a small "helper circuit" to condition the track power going into the decoder, you end up with a loco that will give you individual control on ANY layout.  Hope this helps!

A bit off topic, but what I am curious about, if anyone knows, do any of the other scales control, using DCC or other systems require the use of Smart devices? I couldn't find any substantiating evidence that they do; and if that is accurate, then it appears both Lionel and MTH are alone in "pushing" consumers in that direction, ostensibly due to the high cost of making handheld controllers, e.g., DCS and Cab II.

@Mad_Liver posted:

Can you send me a pm with any info you have on installing the Blunami into a 3 rail loco?

I have exactly ten days experience with Blunami and DCC. I can tell you its easy to get the motor, sounds, headlight and rear light going. Reading “War and Peace” would be easier than finding info in the manual and the Blunami manual is one of the better ones out there.

If you are thinking about it I would suggest just getting a diesel version and just jump in.

Pete

@Landsteiner posted:

MTH developed DCS for similar reasons apparently.  MTH did include DCC in many of their PS2 locos beginning in the first decade of the 21st century so they could operate on two rail O gauge layouts.

Say what?  PS/2 never had DCC capability, that was added with the PS/3 board package.

DCC is a control system.    It is not tied to any scale or number of rails.    You just select your loco receivers (decoders) based on the amperage draw of you locomotive.    You can little tiny ones rated at .5 amps that will fit in an N scale loco and large ones rated at 8 amps that will fit in an LGB size loco.     Most of the decoders are rated 2-4 amps.    2 amps is generally considered plenty for HO.     Many older O scale locos draw 2.5-3.5 amps so you need a 4 amp decoder.     I think a lot of the newer stuff in O draws less than 2 amps  under load.

I know for sure of one using DCC in 3 rail and has been for years.   He is a member of my round robin group and models the Western Maryland.    I think I have heard of another loco guy doing 3 rail DCC but not sure.  

@Paul Kallus posted:

A bit off topic, but what I am curious about, if anyone knows, do any of the other scales control, using DCC or other systems require the use of Smart devices? I couldn't find any substantiating evidence that they do; and if that is accurate, then it appears both Lionel and MTH are alone in "pushing" consumers in that direction, ostensibly due to the high cost of making handheld controllers, e.g., DCS and Cab II.

Three of the larger DCC systems out there, Digitrax, MRC and NCE all have the good old hand held remotes. I believe there are at least a couple of other DCC systems as well, but don't recall the names or much about them. I think at least some of them may have 'optional' smart device apps.

I'm not a DCC user, but have always had some interest in it. It's becoming a bit more tempting the last few years with the discontinued remotes and unobtainable DCS and Legacy control systems.

More to the point, DCC is an open communication protocol.

I have been running DCC on my 3rail layout for several years starting first with BlueRailDCC and more lately with Blunami. The results have been excellent. The DCC capability in speed control, lighting and sounds is superb. There is an enormous amount of installation advice and technical data on DCC available on-line. The latest Blunami version from SoundTraxx has 4 amp capability which should handle Pul-Mor motors. The BlueRailTrains engineered Blunami app has built in shortcuts which makes operational adjustments easier than ever. Worth trying.

It is time for DCC to be the 3 rail standard like every other gauge!

@Paul Kallus posted:

A bit off topic, but what I am curious about, if anyone knows, do any of the other scales control, using DCC or other systems require the use of Smart devices? I couldn't find any substantiating evidence that they do; and if that is accurate, then it appears both Lionel and MTH are alone in "pushing" consumers in that direction, ostensibly due to the high cost of making handheld controllers, e.g., DCS and Cab II.

As rtr12 stated Digitrax, MRC and NCE all have the good old hand held remotes.

There are others, but the good thing about it is that (like Santiago said) DCC is open source so any of the systems can be used to control any installed DCC decoder.   It doesn't matter if it is SoundTraxx, TCS, Lenz, Digitrax, ESU, etc.  That helps prevent what it going on right now with Lionel and MTH with discontinued command controllers going for blood money, real or unreal shortages, and waiting for new systems (mostly WiFi) to finally appear (subject to ticket scalping). 

Moreover, for less than $100 you can make your own DCC control system using DCC++ or DCC++EX and readily available arduino based modules and lots of instruction all over the internet.  They use the open source Decoder Pro and JMRI.  Readily available WiFi modules make them wireless and you can use either the Engine Driver (Android) or WiThrottle (Apple) app to run the locos.  

John

3R DCC is very interesting.  It offers better sound and is not proprietary to any one manufacturer.  There are two major downsides: (a) the cost of converting a large loco inventory and (b) the incompatibility of Pullmor motors with DCC decoders currently available.

The curious twist on this is the Blunami product, which can provide Bluetooth control of a suitable can-motored loco without a DCC power source, yet incorporate the normal DCC decoder functions.  Most implementations of this, to date, use "dead rail", e.g., rechargeable lithium-ion batteries in the loco as the power source.

My Blunami card arrived today.  It will be installed in a Weaver Baldwin Sharknose diesel.  The key to making this work on 3-rail, AC-powered track is to determine the degree of filtering and regulation needed in an onboard AC-DC converter (glorified rectifier), as the Blunami card cannot be powered directly from AC track voltage.  I will examine this in detail, since Soundtraxx could not provide me with a maximum 120 Hz ripple specification for the card's power source.  If my pilot project is successful, I will probably convert  my several pre-TMCC/DCS dual-can-motored diesels to Blunami/DCC (well, to the extent that their motor stall currents do not pose an overload problem for the Blunami card).  My two can-motored steamers' motors have a stall current well above the Blunami 4A limit, so they aren't conversion candidates.

I'm also looking at Blunami in the context of my club's S-gauge travel layout, for control of American Models and S-Helper locos.  Motor stall current is far less of an issue in S-gauge.

An enormous benefit of the Blunami smart device DCC app is the set of shortcuts to adjusting CV's. When I first encountered DCC, I was impressed by the huge number (close to 300) of adjustable CV's (short for Configuration Variable). I set up a logbook so I could keep track of the various settings. The Blunami app has greatly simplified CV adjusting which is one of the more complicated aspects of DCC. If you prefer, you can still adjust individual CV's via the app.

We S gaugers who purchase Lionel Legacy engines are apparently fortunate. All S gauge Legacy engines beginning in 2013 are DCC compatible.

Before all you 3 rail O gauge operators jump into the DCC pool be aware there is currently no way to fire electrocouplers with DCC. In S gauge that is not a big issue since most DCC operators replace the truck mounted electrocouplers with body mounted Kadee's. That works in S because most engines/tenders now have pads for mounting the Kadees. It also works because the minimum track radius made in S is the equivalent of O-54. We can run 40' to 50' freight cars with no problem but not passenger cars. I doubt anyone can run body mounts on O-31 track. I found the minimum radius to use body mounts on passenger cars (21" for O gaugers) is the equivalent of O-84 with generous easements.

If the electrocoupler is replaced with a standard high rail KC then no problem.

@KarlDL posted:

3R DCC is very interesting.  It offers better sound and is not proprietary to any one manufacturer.  There are two major downsides: (a) the cost of converting a large loco inventory and (b) the incompatibility of Pullmor motors with DCC decoders currently available.

The curious twist on this is the Blunami product, which can provide Bluetooth control of a suitable can-motored loco without a DCC power source, yet incorporate the normal DCC decoder functions.  Most implementations of this, to date, use "dead rail", e.g., rechargeable lithium-ion batteries in the loco as the power source.

My Blunami card arrived today.  It will be installed in a Weaver Baldwin Sharknose diesel.  The key to making this work on 3-rail, AC-powered track is to determine the degree of filtering and regulation needed in an onboard AC-DC converter (glorified rectifier), as the Blunami card cannot be powered directly from AC track voltage.  I will examine this in detail, since Soundtraxx could not provide me with a maximum 120 Hz ripple specification for the card's power source.  If my pilot project is successful, I will probably convert  my several pre-TMCC/DCS dual-can-motored diesels to Blunami/DCC (well, to the extent that their motor stall currents do not pose an overload problem for the Blunami card).  My two can-motored steamers' motors have a stall current well above the Blunami 4A limit, so they aren't conversion candidates.

I'm also looking at Blunami in the context of my club's S-gauge travel layout, for control of American Models and S-Helper locos.  Motor stall current is far less of an issue in S-gauge.

Karl, I am using a less than $4 DC-DC 5 amp switching convertor to power my Blunami with a full wave bridge. Amazon and the bay have many more low dollar options. I set it to 18v but the Blunami will handle up to 26v.
Coupler and synchronized smoke working now. Almost time to pour the epoxy as we say.

One of the purposes of this exercise is to see if a DCC engine will run on the same track at the same time as TMCC/Legacy and DCS engines.

Pete

@BOB WALKER posted:

The latest Blunami version from SoundTraxx has 4 amp capability which should handle Pul-Mor motors.

They handle Universal motors with three leads?