[Makemineadouble]

To be fair we did suggest this several weeks ago. I think we recognise and accept that the Hornby system has it's own unique requirements and problems.
There appears to be no acknowledgement that the Hornby system needs to be improved to make it compatible. Just an arrogance that they have a system, they are right and if Gary is to be believed everyone else's system is wrong, including the NMRA.

The latest review in Model Rail hardly highlights any problems with the system, which I find misleading. It rubber stamps every thing which is a poor review. Given the amount of advertising Hornby place with model Rail I'm hardly surprised.

So by all means separate true DCC and the other sort of system

I never used the term DIY did I

 

[Makemineadouble]

QUOTE Elite isn't the horrible, incompatible piece of junk that some are trying to make out. The truth is it works, it works quite well in fact & it will fuction with other manufacturers gear as long as you choose carefully.

With respect - and you must expect over reaction on this type of forum, there are computability issues with the Hornby system.
Why would I or anyone else spend three times the amount on a system - well I've had my system for over 7 years. It's performed flawlessly in that time. It's done everything it was designed to do. I've had great value for money. What more can one say. I've had experience of a DCC system that didn't do the job, one always remembers poor quality and poor performance. It's simply a question of paying your money and making a choice. I'm sure that for folks that simply want to drive a few trains the Hornby system is adequate - if quirky at times. Durable well lets see how it fairs on the time test. When you can come back and tell me you've had 7 years outstanding service from your system I'll sit up and take notice.

 

[Makemineadouble]

QUOTE Well it looks like I've got a seven year wait before considering DCC...thanks for saving me money MMD.

Not at all buy yourself a real DCC set-up. A Digitrax DCS50 (Zepher) simply isn't much more than conventional DC and is fully expandable. If you don't fancy Digitrax then go with Bachmann and the Dynamis. I view loconet as the real advantage for Digitrax. to quote MacKays the Lenz dealer here:

QUOTE WHAT IS THE BEST DIGITAL SYSTEM
* There is no answer to this question. Anyone using conventional 2 rail DC should only buy an NMRA-conformal system. Clearly buying a system with a long proved track record is going to be an advantage but having said that, we have not yet come across any 'dud' systems You have to ask yourself what you want from DCC and how much you want to pay

Well said Mackays.

 

[Makemineadouble]

QUOTE I'm not too sure why MMAD is so interested in Hornby DCC when he is getting on so well with his Digitrax system

I'm simply interested in other systems Doug, I've made it very clear I have no axe to grind. I think the most pleasing thing I can think of is for Hornby to straighten the odd quirks in their system or at least given a commitment to doing this. Reading the comments about Hornby on the other forum some were almost verging on slander. If was Simon Kholer I would be very disappointed. In terms of commitment I've seen very few other CEO presumably putting a hard weeks work and then demoing products first hand all weekend that is total commitment and I take my hat off to the him

Overall Hornby are producing some tremendous products and so are Bachmann. I think we should be grateful we have competion, and a will to improve products by both major players in a relatively small market.
Summary Hornby product range excellent. Hornby DCC I'm not so sure, as someone else put it " to date probably Hornby have sold more DCC units than all the other makes combined (in the UK). so anyone interested in DCC should have a healthy interest in what other makes and companies are doing it's all part of the knowledge base.

 

[Makemineadouble]

QUOTE Not true - or at least it didn't happen that way. Lenz had already developed their version of DCC when the NMRA started to look around to see what was on offer when they started to take an interest in the subject. They chose the Lenz method as their basis, as being the best implementation of the principle at that time, with plenty of expansion capability. This was the so-called 'Baseline' system (most know it as '2 digit'). When the NMRA took over, they expanded the standards to include the Advanced features we expect to see today.

I totally concur with this. Bernard Lenz is the father "if you like of modern DCC". Overall the NMRA DCC standards have been very successful and far sighted given that the ones were currently playing with were ratified quite a number of years ago.