maxman I guess you are correct........it is hard to be interested in a secret project.
I guess you are correct........it is hard to be interested in a secret project.
Not sure exactly what this mystery project is, but as someone eluded to the possiblity of .... DCC controlled onboard automatic couplers already exist - I've seen a few of them in operation.
There is this one (poor design) ....
http://www.tonystrains.com/download/mr-ddc-1003.pdf
And this one which is really slick ....
http://precimodels.com/en/8-products/1-dcc-uncouplers
Plus a few others if you Google for them.
Mark.
¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ
The bottom one appears to be a commercial version of one Dick Bronson shows on his RR-CirKits site and that he demonstrated at the Timonium train show, hmm, 11-12 years ago. Somewhere back therem I know I probably spent 2 hours sitting at his table talking about electronics and checking out the Tower Controller and his other gadgets.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Mark R.Not sure exactly what this mystery project is, but as someone eluded to the possiblity of .... DCC controlled onboard automatic couplers already exist - I've seen a few of them in operation.
Well, we know that the item may or may not require voltage (or is it current?), requires some sort of pulse, should work in a loco or car without any modification to same, and cannot be automatic couplers because it has no moving parts.
Ah! I know! Vaporware.
My OP was were there any DCC decoders like i described. You experienced DCC folks have made it clear there arent any. In essence, my OP has been answered.
Wasnt my intent to stir up all the commotion. Remember, I can still fail at this! Then where would we be?
Thank You folks for all your help. Please stay tuned, I PROMISE if it works, i will tell all!
MaxMan - no it isnt a vape unit.
PM Railfan claimed: Wasn't my intent to stir up all the commotion
Wasn't my intent to stir up all the commotion
But, it's great commotion! This is an above average thread, to be sure. Keep up the good work!
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
MisterBeasley PM Railfan claimed: Wasn't my intent to stir up all the commotion But, it's great commotion! This is an above average thread, to be sure. Keep up the good work!
Just to add to the commotion, I have been playing with the idea of remote uncouplers for about a year now and wanted to try a new approach; using a wire that expands when current is applied (don't remember what it is called but is available from one of the electronic houses). This would eleminate all solenoids or other electro/mechanical parts. Just an idea that I haven't attempted to test out yet.
-Bob
Life is what happens while you are making other plans!
farrellaa using a wire that expands when current is applied (don't remember what it is called but is available from one of the electronic houses).
Nichrome?
maxman farrellaa using a wire that expands when current is applied (don't remember what it is called but is available from one of the electronic houses). Nichrome?
Maxman,
Not nichrome, that is used to heat stuff! Don't want to heat the plastic bodies! I will try to find it and post info. I also thought of using it to operate semaphore signals. Just haven't had time to explore this item.
farrellaa maxman farrellaa using a wire that expands when current is applied (don't remember what it is called but is available from one of the electronic houses). Nichrome? Maxman, Not nichrome, that is used to heat stuff! Don't want to heat the plastic bodies! I will try to find it and post info. I also thought of using it to operate semaphore signals. Just haven't had time to explore this item. -Bob
Actually, there was an article in MR a number of years ago where they were experimenting with that wire. One WAS using it to open couplers and another was pulling down crossing gates. Not really something new ....
PM Railfan My OP was were there any DCC decoders like i described. You experienced DCC folks have made it clear there arent any. In essence, my OP has been answered. Wasnt my intent to stir up all the commotion. Remember, I can still fail at this! Then where would we be? Thank You folks for all your help. Please stay tuned, I PROMISE if it works, i will tell all! MaxMan - no it isnt a vape unit.
If you could be more specific at to your requirements, I would bet there ARE decoders that could be configured to do what you want. Function outputs can be set for anywhere from 0 volts to the full voltage available at the track, some up to half an amp. Some decoders are programmable to allow a pulsed (adjustable) output as well.
Trouble is, not only do we not know what it's for, we don't really know what you need. I'd be willing to bet there IS a decoder that will do exactly what you need, but if you can't verbalize what that need is, I'm afraid you ARE on your own ....
Mark R. farrellaa maxman farrellaa using a wire that expands when current is applied (don't remember what it is called but is available from one of the electronic houses). Nichrome? Maxman, Not nichrome, that is used to heat stuff! Don't want to heat the plastic bodies! I will try to find it and post info. I also thought of using it to operate semaphore signals. Just haven't had time to explore this item. -Bob Actually, there was an article in MR a number of years ago where they were experimenting with that wire. One WAS using it to open couplers and another was pulling down crossing gates. Not really something new .... Mark.
I found the wire, it is called 'Muscle Wire' and made of nitinol, a titanium allow. I does produce heat though, which I had earlier indicated that it didn't, but apparenly not enough to damage plastic. There are numerous applications and articles about it. Just Google 'muscle wire' and read on.
Didn't mean to sidetrack the original subject here. I apologize to the OP.
PM Railfan...I get ya on the 2 pulses. Thats the whole thing i was afraid wouldnt exist on a decoder that DID actually have aux channels. If that even existed to begin with. Which, now I know doesnt. BUMMER!...
To be clear, there are decoders that DO have auxillary channels (we call them function outputs, not channels) they just won't do exactly what you want. Most motor control decoders have at least two function outputs, and some of them have as many as eight. They are usually used for lighting, but they don't have to be, and any function outputs that are not being used for lighting can be considered auxillary ones. They don't have the programmable pulses you want and unless you get into large scale decoders the function outputs will not drive a 1 amp load - which brings up something I don't get. You say "1 amp should do it", it's "low powered", well on most model railroads I don't think 1 amp is considered "low powered", seeing as a 5 amp or even less DCC command station will often power the whole layout.
Good morning everyone.
Well I feel better about this. Indeed i must admit i too would be guessing left and right at this if it wasnt "my" post. I spose a little 'commotion' isnt a bad thing. And i have enjoyed immensely the input from you folks.
So i tell you what. Maybe I am going about this the wrong way. I came here seeking help for a DCC 'contoller' affectionately known as a decoder. I need this, as you all know, because of its digital capabilities.
Those being, access from the user by address (car/loco number). And then once selected, I wanted the user to be able to make something happen.
For decades now since i first used a Kadee, I have been working on these projects: working coupler, smoke unit that smokes more than just out the stack (whistle blow off, pop valve blow off, working cyclinder cocks etc), working dyno car, and a few other 'trinkets'. At that time, DCC wasnt heard of yet.
Now its here full force. Time to take the ideas off the drawing board an put them into action. We have smoke units today, and other ways of measuring loco output (not a dyno, but...) so i focussed on making couplers work.
So for those who guessed coupler, youd be right. HOWEVER - no one has mentioned the exact 'type' of coupler. EVERY coupler that you folks have shown me is mechanical.
Those in themselves are not practical. Why? Because in actual operation, a mechanically operated coupler tends to have problems when the coupler swings from left to right and vice-versa.
I knew from the first day couplers could not be mechanically operated. And not just for the reason i mentioned above. But also, because of the tiny linkages needed to make it happen. This would be such a problem for the smaller scales.
I want this to be a universal working coupler that can span the scale size gap. Also, mechanical couplers need actuators. So, what if you have something like a flat car? Now you got this hump of motor on your flat car to operate a coupler. Doesnt look good aestetically.
Heres the requirements I set for this project:
Must NOT be mechanical. Must use track voltage. Must not alter the car body in any way. Must use a coupler that works with other couplers (Kadee). Must work like existing couplers (Kadee) so that it will work universally on layout with Kadees (trying to save yall money here). Must work like a Kadee (so that no one has to remove the magnets used to operate Kadees) in that when stopped over a Kadee track magnet, it works like a Kadee, with a Kadee (will have the fake 'air hose' magentic accutator). Sounds like alot huh?
I knew that if i could get the coupler to operate, all i would need is a way to activate it. Thus now that DCC is here, I have the control now. So did my couplers work? So far, yes! And NO mechanical operation!! WOOO HOOOO! It for all intents and purposes looks just like a Kadee. A simple piece of coupler in a regular coupler pocket. No chain or wire or servo toactivate it.
How does it work? he he he ok, i will tell you. We all have seen the little trick you can do with some winding around a nail. It picks up paper clips. But! What if you use TWO of these together? AND at the same polarity..... guess what, they "oppose" each other (if you wire it correctly! -thats key).
That can be used to make the couplers uncouple. In bench testing this idea I was able to make happen. Under ADC control that is. But the control isnt the focus. Actually at the time i figured control was the easy part. The hard part was how to bring the magnetic field to the coupler without sticking a ton of winding around the coupler. It must remain hidden.
Problem? Moving the magnetic field away from the windings (which is where the field is created). I believe i have dont that. Heres how....
I use a screw (like some of you) to mount my Kadees thru the hole in the end of the coupler shank. Well, instead of using a short screw (that only goes 'into' the car frame) use a longer screw (about 1") that goes thru the car body and into the open space above the floor. This is where the windings will be. Simply made with a plastic inner sleeve so a modeller can just put in the screw and slide the windings down over it. Only to leave the two wires that activate the core to be hooked up to a power source (the DCC decoder).
Now this wont look great on a flat car or loco platform. Wait, it gets better! Through my testing not only did i discover the fact the little magnet trick could be reversed to make couplers oppose each other, my biggest question was can one make a magnetic field, then move it to where its needed. What do you know.... you can! But that will come later. I want to get a boxcar version done first, just to make this project complete, and viable.
Heres the next hurdle. Kadees arent magnetic, only the trip wire. And this is the phase i am at now. To make this work, the couplers must be made out of a "ferrous" metal. No problem. If Kadee can make them that small out of what ever material they use, certainly i can do the same thing with say.... iron or some other ferrous metal. Thus, my couplers dont tread on Kadees patents, except for looks. They still will utilize the sprung centering like a Kadee. And also the spring to keep the knuckle closed (universal!). Copper does is not magnetic so it doesnt intefere with the field.
By using the sprung knuckle (which is default - closed) i only need to make a circut that 'opens' the couplers allowing them to release. Thus the dreaded pulse for 7 seconds you been hearing about. This allows the user to activate couplers, hold them open while they indeed press other buttons on the DCC hand held and motivate a loco to move the cars apart. Then after the pulse times out.... the coupler close again and all is back to normal. the field only has to overcome the knuckle spring potential.
By using the pulse in this manner, track power is ONLY needed to uncouple. Therefore never draining a layout of much need power. You wouldnt want the couplers to use power to stay closed. A 10 car train would use alot of power to do this. Think of a club layout with many trains. Again, heres where the default 'no powered closed' position helps.
Copper is not magnetic, so centering springs can still be used aswell as the knuckle spring without interfering with the field. Only power used is to uncouple, and its only for seconds. 12 volts is needed because magnetism doesnt use amps, only voltage to assign polarity. 1 volt would work but it doesnt create a strong magnetic field. My tests used one AA battery (1.5vdc) to show oppsition (proved the theory worked). 12 volt track voltage is more than enough.
So in a nutshell, there you have it. A working coupler, yes. But NO MOVING parts. No small linkages. No servos, mechanisms, or major alteration to the car body except a screw mounting hole through the body (which we aready have in some cases). The magentic field is transfered from mounting screw directly to the coupler shank. Two couplers coupled that when like polarity (opposites attrack, similars oppose) is applied.... oppose each other.
Nothing more special than a new unique coupler and mounting screw is needed. I was going to bring my idea to Kadee because i dont want to make couplers. And Kadee in my opinion, is the best! I figured if they liked it maybe a DCC decoder manufacturer would get on board as soon as they saw that two 'funtion ouputs' were required. Very simple for them to update their decoders to do this. And walah! The industry now has working couplers in any scale.
Neat huh. Such a simple idea that no one saw the potential of the little magnet trick when used as an opposition, instead of using it as a magnet. Now this is easily done in a boxcar. The windings wouldnt take hardly any room but would be a vertical blob easily seen if in a gondola or flat car.
Again the magnetic field can be moved. THAT is the trick. To do this one, i envision that the windings and core will be horizontal, placed 'under' the floor and between the frame rails. All that is needed is a ferrous metal conector between the core and the coupler. Again, easily done. This is where it will be applied for locos and low bodied car bodies (flat cars and gondolas). Let me get the first one (boxcar) working first.
Im at Phase three of the project which is making the couplers. Thus why i wanted to wait until after the holidays. Too much going on here to be involved in the project right now.
Hate to break up the guessing party but i really did feel bad about not letting yall in on this. Having to repeat NO after NO when yall would guess. You were close, but mine arent mechanical. Electromagnetic, and I dont believe anyone mentioned those type. Nor have i ever seen any like mine.
Im sure some of you have questions and i will answer them as best i can. Now you know. And I still dont think there is a DCC decoder that can meet my needs. For power, yes... but none that i know of that have a 7 second timed pulse that can allow the user to seperate the cars while the couplers are activated. Hello DCC manufacturers????? Any reading this ?????? Hint Hint!
As this project continues, can you see why i didnt want to say anything. I still can fail at this. Last thing id want to do is make something we all would love to have, hype you all up about it, only to let everyone down if it fails. I would hate that. Remember, it can stil fail.
There you have it. My XMas present to you all. What do you think?
Actually, ESU Lokpilot decoders outputs can be programmed to output a pulse for a set length of time (for uncoupling in particular). They have a 250 ma output, so your design would either have to draw no more than that or be driven by a transistor.
PM Railfan 12 volts is needed because magnetism doesnt use amps, only voltage to assign polarity. 1 volt would work but it doesnt create a strong magnetic field. My tests used one AA battery (1.5vdc) to show oppsition (proved the theory worked). 12 volt track voltage is more than enough.
Magnetism does use amps - when you hook up the coil, it is going to draw a certain amount of current and you need to know how much current to know how to drive the circuit.
P.S.
The Loksound decoders can even be programmed to automatically back the loco up (to relieve tension on the coupler), momentarily activate the coupler, then drive forward - all with one function button press.
At least one other of the Euro decoders, CT or Zimo, or maybe both, also have the uncouple function that automaticaly does the Kadee uncoupler dance for you.
Current draw is easy to calculate, just need to know what wire gauge is being used, and how many turns of it there are, around what diameter form. Or simply how many feet of wire are used in each coil.
Couple of issues, which I mentioned before, and some others:
1. Still going to be unsightly on a flat car, no matter how compact the coil is - because where do you put the decoder?
2. Going to need people to change couplers - again
3. Decoder addressing - most systems go up to 9999. Great, most of us don;t have 9999 locos and cars - but the standard thing to do is use the loco cab number, which is usually fine because few if any north american railroads used loco numbers higher than 9999. But cars numbers are another story
4. Power pickup - most freight cars don't have power pickups. Metal wheels at least are fairly common in HO and larger, though by no means universal. N scale commonly still has plastic wheels.
Honestly, if you want to make an remote control uncoupler with no extra moving parts - check out the Sergent Engineering couplers, they work like the prototype with a pin (in this case, a steel bearing) that drops to lock the knuckle in place. Currently, they are manually operated using a magnet wand to lift the ball on at least one of the couplers to open the knuckle. They do require at least one knuckle to be open in order to couple, and they are not automatic centering - they are JUST like the real thing, so on a curve you may have to push them into alignment.
The mechanically operated Kadees I've seen, there were no issues if the coupler wasn't perfectly straight, it could be pulled to one side or the other and still work. Even on that one, the motor was very small - keep in mind cell phones have gotten MUCH thinner than they were some 16 years ago, yet they still have that little motor in there for the vibrate option.10-15mm thick tops, maybe? You could almost mount the whole works on a truck.
An interesting idea - are you familiar with "prior disclosure" or have you already filed for your possible patent?
Joe
CSX Robert - Hey man thanks a ton! That is what i was looking for in the very OP. I am gonna peruse the sites (and the ones Randy mentioned too) and see if i can find an exact one.
The only amperage draw is going to be what is needed to overcome the winding resistance, and wiring connections. No amperage has been measured so far in just creating a mag field itself. This also is due to the fact, there isnt any load on the circuit except what i mentioned above. Polarity is changed with voltage. Amps run on either side plus or minus. This is such a small project im sure a decoder 'capable' of 1 amp will cover any miniscule amount i may need. All I need to do is settle down on a final power setting. Further testing will determine this.
Thank You for putting me on the right track of decoders!
Randy - 1) I know i know, this will never work on a 30' flat car! lolol. Like i said, let me get it working first on a boxcar to get the theory proven. Then I will figure ways to make it work on the many different cars. It may never reach a flat car or gondola.
I suspect, like many of us, if this turns out to be popluar, that in the interum folks will once again use "conversion cars". Or only a few cars instead of the whole fleet they own. I may never get it to work on a flat car. One idea is to make the decoder "plug-in-able" and disquise it as a load. The uncoupler cores would have to be affixed to the car underbody between frame rails. That much will work. Instead of fat/short cores, make them long and thin. Same field will be made.
2) Well, much like we all went from X2F couplers to Kadees, its gonna have to eventually happen, again. The idea here is that hopefully it will be popular enough the major manufacturers will install them from the factory in new models. Just like they once came with X2F decades ago, and now with knuckle couplers today. Tomarrows trains will have these as a standard option. (yeah i know, i think tooo big sometimes! but its a nice thought!)
3) Good point. DCC decoder makers are just going to have to understand that they will have to expand their addressing systems to include 6 digit numbers. If not, modellers will have to assign a 4 digit number and just make it work. Still working on this part. Maybe the DCC makers could also alter their products to use letters, thus "FC1225" could stand for Flat Car #1225. With digital, this problem is a small one.
4) We have been scooping up track power since model trains first came out. Since there are literally too many ways to do this, I figure this is going to be an easy solution too. Right now, I am using a form of Rivarossi tender pickups which in my opinion is a very good way to accomplish this part. Obviously not needed for locos. Lighted passenger cars will already have the power pickups too.
I looked at the Sergent couplers. Nice! But..... they still require manual operation. I want this to be totally hands free (except for operating the hand held DCC control). The couplers themselves look menacing towards the construction aspect. I want mine to be already made. Finished product ready to install with no construction. Just like a Kadee is.
Id like to avoid using something like the cell phone vibe motor you mentioned. Those cant be cheap! And again, introduce mechanical connections. That violates one of the requirements for this project.
In time (another 50 years or so) when nano sized motors are available, even my project will be worthless. Things will go this way and eventually end up being mechanical operation. Just like the real things. Many Thanks to you for all the help you have been with suggestions, and a sound board for getting around problems.
Joe in Pa - Newp never heard of prior disclosure, and no i dont have a patent application. Who in the world can afford that???? While the US law and US patent office dont recognize this, I use a "Proprietary Date Stamp" (or PDS) as my 'patent claim'. I alone already own this idea!
INHO, i hold a PDS as a higher claim than a patent. Im not one much for US law. Please explain prior disclosure if you wouldnt mind.
Thank You,
Douglas
What would work really well is to use the Sergeant couplers, then mount your wire-wrapped iron core rod so it protruded out over the top of the coupler head. Apply power and it would automatically raise the little ball bearing inside the the coupler allowing the knuckle to open.
Turn the power off and the ball would drop back down locking the knuckle in place.
How about creating a Magnetic field that can extend outside the car body. That would do it without being seen. That is, if it was a boxcar or some similiar car body. Just have to notch up the feed voltage. Ceratinly doable.
Thanks for killing my project! j/k
PM RailfanJoe in Pa - Newp never heard of prior disclosure, and no i dont have a patent application. Who in the world can afford that???? While the US law and US patent office dont recognize this, I use a "Proprietary Date Stamp" (or PDS) as my 'patent claim'. I alone already own this idea! INHO, i hold a PDS as a higher claim than a patent. Im not one much for US law. Please explain prior disclosure if you wouldnt mind.
Prior disclosure means that you have explained or illustrated an idea or concept prior to filing for a patent. Thus it is public knowledge. Such a disclosure can seriously impede or preclude your being granted a patent. In the US there is a time limit after disclosure to filing and in other countries no time gap is allowed.
Post removed
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
hon30critter Douglas: I for one am still interested in whatever it is that you are working on, if for no other reason than I don't like being kept in the dark. However, I am becoming a bit tired of the cloak and dagger stuff. I think that your percieved 'lack of interest' might actually be frustration on the part of those who have been following your thread but who still haven't guessed what your secret project is. Most people don't like being deliberately kept in suspense for extended periods of time. After a while they will just walk away. That might be what is happening to you. If you are worried about proprietorship, register a patent on the concept. Once you do that, you will be able to discuss your goal freely, and you might just be lucky enough that some of us are able to suggest solutions to your development issues. In the meantime, take your break and enjoy it. Dave
Douglas:
I for one am still interested in whatever it is that you are working on, if for no other reason than I don't like being kept in the dark. However, I am becoming a bit tired of the cloak and dagger stuff.
I think that your percieved 'lack of interest' might actually be frustration on the part of those who have been following your thread but who still haven't guessed what your secret project is. Most people don't like being deliberately kept in suspense for extended periods of time. After a while they will just walk away. That might be what is happening to you.
If you are worried about proprietorship, register a patent on the concept. Once you do that, you will be able to discuss your goal freely, and you might just be lucky enough that some of us are able to suggest solutions to your development issues.
In the meantime, take your break and enjoy it.
Dave
Ummm - Dave, He spilled the beans about what he is doing and how he is doing it about eight posts ago ! ....
Hi Mark:
I just figured that out. I guess I was getting so frustrated with the secrecy that I couldn't be bothered reading all the posts. My Bad!
Just a thought on gettting decoders under a flat car; make the decoders flatter? so they would fit under the frame, like the new ssd hard drives in computers. I know this is a stretch but very possible, almost like using a z scale decoder that has been lengthened to decrease thickness. Of course this would be a decoder manufacturer undertaking, but again we are all talking about future possibilities; and all of this is really possible with todays technology. Interesting thread and idea. Keep it going Douglas!
"...... I don't like being kept in the dark. However, I am becoming a bit tired of the cloak and dagger stuff..... "
Dave, and the rest of the clan,
What you said is the reason i decided to go ahead and spill the beans about it. That and the fact that it will help you folks, to help me get this project to fruition.
My intent for secrecy wasnt so much for "patent" reasons as my project is so simple that who would really buy it - if one can make it at home from scratch on their own.
My real purpose was I wanted to actually make a contribution to this hobby "on my own". Something I could call my "own". Benefit everyone, but its mine. It came from me, alone. Something to put on yee old headstone. When you think of Athearn, you think or Irving, for example. If you think of Kadee, you think of the two brothers that started that company. Be nice to see your name in lights with greats like those, wouldnt it? I would like to contribute to the hobby .... just like they did! And give back a little to that that has given to me so much.
I enjoyed immensely all the guessing, or "commotion" as I put it earlier. But really folks, how could you help me if you have no idea whats going on. Seems a tad unfair. And i could tell some of you were getting a little steamed. (pun intended)
And that is wrong. The project isnt even off the bench and folks are getting upset about it. Cant have that! Thats the wrong impression. I want this to benefit everyone, not upset them.
So there ya have it. My appologies if I caused anyone to be mift about it. And now that it is "public" knowledge, i expect anyone and everyone who has some good input here to speak right up.
I will miss the guessing though. Especially MaxMan who seems to have enjoyed it aswell. Ive given alot of careful thought to letting the idea out. More so because what if it still fails? I wanted the failure, if it happens, to be mine alone too. Why drag yall down with me? Or dash your hopes?
Well, I spose its all steam under the gantry now. So lets have some fun with it!!
Cheers!
PM RailfanI will miss the guessing though. Especially MaxMan who seems to have enjoyed it aswell.
Actually my only interest was that it seemed to be a loose end thread, and I hate those. That's why I came back after three weeks and asked how it was going. I admit that my curiosity was aroused when you misdirected us with your statement that there were no moving parts. I'm still not certain how one manages to uncouple a car without something moving.
farrellaa Just a thought on gettting decoders under a flat car; make the decoders flatter? so they would fit under the frame, like the new ssd hard drives in computers. I know this is a stretch but very possible, almost like using a z scale decoder that has been lengthened to decrease thickness. Of course this would be a decoder manufacturer undertaking, but again we are all talking about future possibilities; and all of this is really possible with todays technology. Interesting thread and idea. Keep it going Douglas! -Bob
We've already got decoders smaller than a dime. It really becomes a physics problem, like sound from tiny speakers. The smaller the surface area of the component, the less heat it can dissipate. It isn't an accident that decoders use PWM - PWM operates the semiconductors in their most effeicient modes, either full on or full off, not somewhere in between, and makes it possible for something smaller than your thumbnail to control 2 amps of current. One of the current crop of micro-size decoders should be able to be fitted to most HO flat cars, up under the desk, and only be visible if you turn the car over, assuming the wiring is done neatly.
Now about those intermodal spine cars......
farrellaa .... and all of this is really possible with todays technology. Interesting thread and idea. Keep it going Douglas! -Bob
.... and all of this is really possible with todays technology. Interesting thread and idea. Keep it going Douglas!
Bob - Like those new SSD's? I do to! They are Shweet! Thank You also for the kind words. Because of what you said about 'todays tech' is the whole reason I am working on this now. I truely think its possible to make working couplers viable in a non complicated way.
I know I would like to have them! I also know you DCC folks know way more about the DCC side of it than I do. Which is why I started this post to begin with. I am at the point where I need a DCC control.
RRinker Now about those intermodal spine cars...... --Randy
PM Railfan farrellaa .... and all of this is really possible with todays technology. Interesting thread and idea. Keep it going Douglas! -Bob Bob - Like those new SSD's? I do to! They are Shweet! Thank You also for the kind words. Because of what you said about 'todays tech' is the whole reason I am working on this now. I truely think its possible to make working couplers viable in a non complicated way. I know I would like to have them! I also know you DCC folks know way more about the DCC side of it than I do. Which is why I started this post to begin with. I am at the point where I need a DCC control. RRinker Now about those intermodal spine cars...... --Randy