First off the dirt on most peoples layout is the result of sparking when the wheels meet the rails (the black crud you wipe up, it was diagnosed by a chemist who anilized the stuff). New batteries -2"x-1"x3/4"
selectorwhy would we try to eliminate feeding those rails...at all? It seems to me that the battery will need almost constant charging in order to keep up a healthy voltage, especially during demanding haulage, so it should be in contact with, and getting charge from, energized rails throughout the system.
Yes. Perhaps I was unclear when I said that I would have some of the rails unpowered. My point was that they could be left unpowered in areas where it is more convenient.
Examples: no more worrying about reversing loops causing a short circuit; just leave the whole reversing segment unpowered. And if you want to detect trains, you can leave a couple inches unpowered to sense current or as capacitance sensors. And you don't need to power your turnout frogs or install keep alives. And you don't need to clean your track much, or maybe at all. Cleaning track inside a tunnel sounds like a nuisance that fortunately I have not yet had to do.
For sure any track that is easy to wire up should be wired. I would guess if around half your track was powered you'd have smooth sailing but I have done no actual calculations to back that up.
The trouble with recharging from the track is it takes a bit more hardware and space is still a premium, today. Good news is batterys are 20% smaller than just last year.
RRR_BethBr One of my particular interests in the time I was away from the MR hobby has been RC flight - a hobby that has been entirely transformed in the last 15 years by (primarily) lithium batteries, brushless electric motors, and spread-spectrum radio technology. I'm curious; is model railroading taking notice? Is there a(ny) movement towards battery-powered, radio controlled trains in popular indoor sizes (HO, in particular)? I'm imagining a layout that needs no track wiring, no reversing circuitry, no hunting down shorts and wiring faults underneath the benchwork and scenery. I haven't started the conversion to DCC yet, and I'm of half a mind not to bother. The potential for R/C just seems... better. Am I alone in this thinking?
One of my particular interests in the time I was away from the MR hobby has been RC flight - a hobby that has been entirely transformed in the last 15 years by (primarily) lithium batteries, brushless electric motors, and spread-spectrum radio technology.
I'm curious; is model railroading taking notice? Is there a(ny) movement towards battery-powered, radio controlled trains in popular indoor sizes (HO, in particular)?
I'm imagining a layout that needs no track wiring, no reversing circuitry, no hunting down shorts and wiring faults underneath the benchwork and scenery.
I haven't started the conversion to DCC yet, and I'm of half a mind not to bother. The potential for R/C just seems... better. Am I alone in this thinking?
I will stick with your question.. No opinions. Already too many of those.
Model train control is evolving even as we speak.
I found these links in the MRH forums about Ring Engineering's RailPro system. One DCC fellow who posted the links became a dealer and also administrates the RailPro User Group.
http://pdc.ca/rr/catalog/product/railpro-and-accessories/51
http://rpug.pdc.ca/
Last I knew, the company owner was in the MRH forums.
Rich
If you ever fall over in public, pick yourself up and say “sorry it’s been a while since I inhabited a body.” And just walk away.
Ring's not the only game in town. Tam Valley Depot and NWSL both have systems that work with DCC, in that they change the medium of signal transmission from through the rails to direct radio. You still use a DCC decoder with them so you can use your favorite (and certainly get better sound than you do with Ring's sound modules). Power can be through the rails or via on-board battery. NWSL does have the charging circuitry that allows you to recharge via the rails.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
I sure hope not!!! Having to change batteries on all my locos constanly, or recharge them all between sessions, will be a huge pain. If this becomes the way of doing things, it will probably drive me out of the hobby.
I'm also into RC POV aircraft, but I only have two planes and a quadcopter that need to be charged between adventures. That's no big deal, and I accept there's no way to wire a plane to the ground during flight, lol.
But battery powered trains is a bad idea, IMO. On the other hand, what I would see as an improvement is to add a capacitor or even a rechargable battery to a loco (that the loco continously charges) with just enough power to give the loco power over frogs and other dead spots. Now, that would be a good idea :-)
No worries. Barring some HUGE breakthrough in battery technology, there's no way this will become the majority control method. DCC hasn't fully taken over after more than 15 years, no way will battery power take over. Since dead rail systems can coexist with DC and DCC trains, it will be there as a supplementary control system.
Just as a side note, the reason we do not have the new batterys now, and they are amazing, is that it would reqire plants to be built and with new breakthroughs every 6 to 9 months, no one wants to commit for fear of having old tecnoligy. I am not kidding, there are breakthroughs that often and not just building on something that is just an improvment but whole new ways of doing things. At some point someone will take the plunge but not yet.
BernieOn the other hand, what I would see as an improvement is to add a capacitor or even a rechargable battery to a loco (that the loco continously charges) with just enough power to give the loco power over frogs and other dead spots. Now, that would be a good idea :-)
isn't it call a keep alive?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
rrebell Just as a side note, the reason we do not have the new batterys now, and they are amazing, is that it would reqire plants to be built and with new breakthroughs every 6 to 9 months, no one wants to commit for fear of having old tecnoligy. I am not kidding, there are breakthroughs that often and not just building on something that is just an improvment but whole new ways of doing things. At some point someone will take the plunge but not yet.
Also that new battery technology has to be tested and proven not to burn your house down. Probably not being done for the same reasons you stated.
No, most of the new stuff is far safer than what we have now. You got to relize how much it will cost for all the new tooling, most of which is not found in currant production. This means you decide to go with one design but 6 months later a new design rolls out that has 20% more capacity, even 10% would make the first manufacturer go out of buisneess in short order. First time in history that tecnoligy is moving maybe a bit too fast, think nicad vs lithium happening at least once a year if not faster. Things like led's are getting better and faster as fast as Moore's law and the price has come way down. I lit my train room with CFL's less than 5 years ago, LED's were over $12 vs $1 for CFL's, power consumption was about the same. Converted last year to LED's for around $1.50 each but use about 60% of the energy, I was surprised that they used almost half the power, very surprised.
We keep hearing about these awesome new batteries - if they have an energy density that much greater than lithium-polymer then why aren't we seeing them in things like high end consumer electronics? The inside of a small form factor laptop, or a smartphone, or a tablet is almost ALL battery and that's to get 8-12 hours of battery life between charges. If there is a new battery with 10x the energy density then the smartphone and laptop makers would be ALL OVER it. Same size as tooday but 5-6 DAYS of battery life, or smaller with 2x the battery life, or even smaller with the same battery life.
I'll believe it when I see it. And even after it appears in high end electronc devices, the next stop will probably be battery powered RC, cars, copters, planes, quads. THEN it may trickle down to model trains - IF there is any demand for a cell smaller than a typical 1S Lipo. There may be little demand for something smaller, the damnd may be for the same size but lasting way longer. There needs to be a market for this outside of model railroading - on board battery in smaller scales is a niche within a niche hobby and is not going to be the driver. But if they could do it, wouldn;t you think someone like Apple would just love to have a machine with the power of the latest Macbook Pro in a device the size and weight of the Macbook Air with twice the battery life of the current Air?
This "we'd have these batteries but no one wants to commit to builing a manufacturing plant for such a rapidly changing technology" line sounds suspiciously like "the oil companies are suppressing the 100mpg carburetor" that STILL can be found in the back of magazines like Popular Mechanics. Tesla just built a HUGE factory just to make batteries - the Battery Wall uses the same battery technology found in the Tesla cars. Elon apparently did not get the memo that his plant will be obsolete in 8-9 months.
gregc Bernie On the other hand, what I would see as an improvement is to add a capacitor or even a rechargable battery to a loco (that the loco continously charges) with just enough power to give the loco power over frogs and other dead spots. Now, that would be a good idea :-) isn't it call a keep alive?
Bernie On the other hand, what I would see as an improvement is to add a capacitor or even a rechargable battery to a loco (that the loco continously charges) with just enough power to give the loco power over frogs and other dead spots. Now, that would be a good idea :-)
Yes and they've been around for more than a few years now. The Lenz USP has been around for around 12 years now.