I'm curious to know more about RailPros patent/idea for supporting consisting by linking locomotives together as stated (twice) on the following page: RailPro vs DCC
I wasn't able to find the patent or a description of this concept. Can anyone point to some webpage or describe how it works?
thanks
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Can;t find anything, but it may well have been filed in the name of the engineer who designed it rather than as "Ring Engineering". On their page they give the patent number for the Railpro system itself.
And yet another of those things I absolutely have to take exception with. They state that with DCC you are expected to set over 30 CVs and use a speedometer. Not if you stay away from Tsunami decoders which are some of the only ones on the market that do not accept 3 step speed tables, meaning only THREE Cvs, not 30. Or maybe an automatic BEMF decoder like TCS, in which case there are no CVs to set and no speedometer needed. The locos don;t talk directly to one another? They didn't with DC power either, and people consisted locos together with DC all the time, and still do. It's a neat feature, but completely unecessary. There is no need for two or more locos to run in perfect lockstep with one another in order to make an effective consist. As long as they are close, they will share the load quite nicely. Sure, if one creeps at 1 tie per second on step 1, and the other won;t even spin the motor until step 20, there will be problems with one pushing or dragging the other.
There's a big difference between what you CAN do and what you HAVE to do.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
You won't find that info as it is patent pending, not patented.
As an analog DC holdout, I personally find this whole thing hilarious. Rather like a solution looking for a problem.
Like MTH's TCS, Rail-Pro seems to want to supplant DCC, an open-source system supported by numerous manufacturers, with a sole source proprietary system. Am I the only one who sees problems with that approach? Or does Ring Engineering think they have the lasting power of General Motors?
Enough, already. I have to wire up the next extension of my MZL control system.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with 1964 control technology)
I do like the Rail-Pro touch screen. The DCC manufacturers could take a lesson from that. However, I'm looking at about $4000 Cdn to convert. Also, the control modules wouldn't fit in several of my 'critters'. Both of those are non-starters for me.
Boy, what I could do with $4000 to spend on model railroad stuff though!!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
hon30critter I do like the Rail-Pro touch screen. The DCC manufacturers could take a lesson from that. However, I'm looking at about $4000 Cdn to convert. Also, the control modules wouldn't fit in several of my 'critters'. Both of those are non-starters for me. Boy, what I could do with $4000 to spend on model railroad stuff though!!! Dave
The real question is has Ring Engineering gotten approval to sell the product in Canada, because it is a wireless system and as such, must be approved first.
Since I can't find any real info on there site, I would assume they lack the necessary approvals. (It is offence to import unapproved radio equipment.)
I run a RailPro system here in Canada and I have no problem aquiring equipment here. There is a RailPro supplier in Canada. Although Ring will not ship product from the US to Canada, there is quite a few model railroad suppliers in the US that will. There are a number of Canadians using RailPro and they love it like I do.
There is a lot of information on our user site http://rpug.pdc.ca/
The other Mel