Have watched this thread with great interest. However, at my age, and with a large investment in NCE-DCC I won't change to another control system.
In addition, I also run a garden railroad with radio control/battery power, and find it superior because I don't have to do anything with the track itself. All contained in the diesels, which in large scale hold large battery packs, I have aux. battery packs in selected freight cars and can get over two hours of continual running without recharging.
I used the various first generation DCC systems, Dynatrol, CTC 80, I used Lynx infrared, on the HO, didn't like the results, so no more trying anything else, happy with what I have.
Bob
Found this reading thru a patent request from AJ Ireland (Digitrax) :
" If train 40 is situated on tracks that have no power it may have a backup battery to allow RF control and motion, without need for a Command Station and/or booster providing track power. Additionally the train decoder 41 can be configured to allow a RF control link from a throttle or other device via transceiver 98 to be used in preference to any track communicated commands, so the track signal merely provides power, and battery recharging capability if a rechargeable battery is used. This configuration is useful alternate mode for selected parts of layouts where it is problematic to provide sufficient track power over long distances or keep the track clean enough for reliable operation. "
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7164368.html
A club I used to belong to went Rail-Lynx a long time ago. They have since abandoned it for regualr DCC. Tunnels and hidden staging tracks were a HUGE problem with the IR control, the various repeater units they installed notwithstanding. And not too many people wanted to put a hole in the shell of their highly detailed locomotives to put the IR receiver in. Installations inside cabs didn't work NEARLY as well as locating the receiver in the center of a fan up top.
As far as what's being discussed here, the radio wouldn't need a lot of bandwidth - it's only sending a few control signals and there's no reason each 'function' would have to get an additional chunk of bandwith. In fact the best thing would be to send a digital signal containing (hey look, it's DCC) address, direction, speed, and function status. No reason why the actual bit codes couldn;t be the same as NMRA DCC for compatibility purposes - the change would then be where the microcontrolelr int he decoder got it's signal source - from the level detection circuitry that strips the bit code from the DCC signal in the track or from some sort of radio receiver. That would assume AC on the rails, or a DCC signal, with control commands coming via radio. However, the IDEAL system in the future would be self contained with batteries, much liek what's available for large scale today. Think of the possibilities. Reverse loops? No problem - just don;t power them within a train length of the connecting turnout. Realistic operations? Just power track sections near water towers and fuel bunkers. Forget to fill up the tender, your train stops (explosion sound effects anyone?). Dirty track? No problem, as long as enough is clean to keep the battery charged up. Really rusty weed-covered siding? No problem (other than prototypical derailments as the once a year train tries to traverse said track). It's all probably doable today in HO with F and E unit diesels and steam locos with alrge tenders. Might be a while before it can fit in a small switcher, or a Trackmobile.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
DanLW wrote:...I could bring up the idea of adding a DCC and switch system to the layouts in our club which are purely DC. But I kinda doubt it would fly, especially with the DC only guys...
DanLW wrote: You know what would be nice? The ability to have DCC functionality on a standard DC layout.Sure, you can run a DCC loco on a DC layout, but it behaves like a DC loco. It would be nice to be able to independantly control several locomotives at different speeds and directions on a DC layout.Impossible? True, nobody currently makes such a product. (Or is there something out there I don't know about?) But I suspect it isn't far off.Here's how I visualize the system working. DC track power would be turned to full on. Each loco has a DCC decoder with a wireless receiver/transmitter built-in. Control of each loco would be maintained with a wireless handheld unit which communicates over the air directly to each decoder, thus eliminating the need for a DCC power station.Basically what I'm talking about is sending commands to the decoder over the air rather than through the track.What this would accomplish is a way to have DCC functionality on ANY standard DC layout! No re-wiring, no new power stations, no turnout modification. I mean, the only reason we need a DCC power station is because the power station has to be able to send commands through the track power. But if we communicate wirelessley with the decoders themselves, we eliminate the middleman, and can have DCC functionality on a DC layout.This would be useful if you want to run DCC at a club which has just DC tracks. It would also be useful if you have a DC layout and don't want to bother with the logistics involved in converting track power to DCC. And for new layouts, all you would need is a no frills power supply that delivers a constant voltage to the track. No knobs, no control bus wires. Just output filtering and overload protection.Ideally such decoders would also be made to be plug and play compatible with current "DCC Ready" locomotives.The only barrier I see to this right now is the cost involved in making decoders with the required level of miniaturization. But given enough time, I don't see why we can't have an all in one board that works as a decoder, sound module and receiver/transmitter all in one at a size small enough to fit in most HO scale locomotives (and eventually N scale). I mean, NCE now has a ultra tiny 1A 4 function decoder which is .34"x.56"!How far out do you think this is?
You know what would be nice? The ability to have DCC functionality on a standard DC layout.
Sure, you can run a DCC loco on a DC layout, but it behaves like a DC loco. It would be nice to be able to independantly control several locomotives at different speeds and directions on a DC layout.
Impossible? True, nobody currently makes such a product. (Or is there something out there I don't know about?) But I suspect it isn't far off.
Here's how I visualize the system working. DC track power would be turned to full on. Each loco has a DCC decoder with a wireless receiver/transmitter built-in. Control of each loco would be maintained with a wireless handheld unit which communicates over the air directly to each decoder, thus eliminating the need for a DCC power station.
Basically what I'm talking about is sending commands to the decoder over the air rather than through the track.
What this would accomplish is a way to have DCC functionality on ANY standard DC layout! No re-wiring, no new power stations, no turnout modification. I mean, the only reason we need a DCC power station is because the power station has to be able to send commands through the track power. But if we communicate wirelessley with the decoders themselves, we eliminate the middleman, and can have DCC functionality on a DC layout.
This would be useful if you want to run DCC at a club which has just DC tracks. It would also be useful if you have a DC layout and don't want to bother with the logistics involved in converting track power to DCC. And for new layouts, all you would need is a no frills power supply that delivers a constant voltage to the track. No knobs, no control bus wires. Just output filtering and overload protection.
Ideally such decoders would also be made to be plug and play compatible with current "DCC Ready" locomotives.
The only barrier I see to this right now is the cost involved in making decoders with the required level of miniaturization. But given enough time, I don't see why we can't have an all in one board that works as a decoder, sound module and receiver/transmitter all in one at a size small enough to fit in most HO scale locomotives (and eventually N scale). I mean, NCE now has a ultra tiny 1A 4 function decoder which is .34"x.56"!
How far out do you think this is?
Well essentially what you're describing is DCC only using DC on the tracks instead of AC, and having each engine be radio-controlled instead of being controlled thru the track. I don't think that would be impossible, but I don't see why it would be that necessary either?? From your post, I think you have several misconceptions about DCC. DCC doesn't require you to re-wire your layout if you're in DCC; if you're building a new layout, it greatly simplifies wiring (especially reverse loops if you use auto-reversing modules to change track polarity for you). You don't need to install new turnouts to operate on DCC. Remember too that AC power travels better than DC - that's why our wall outlets work on AC rather than DC.
I mean, I get what you're saying. If you had a DC layout, you could just turn the track power all the way up and install radio decoders and add a radio transmitter to your existing set-up. But it's not less difficult or complicated than connecting two wires from your layout to a DCC controller and installing a DCC decoder in your engines.
jpeters711,You were not "quickly attacked" when you brought up Rail-Lynx a year and a half ago. Rail-Lynx, OTOH, was quickly attacked because it has several hefty downsides to it, not the least of which is drilling holes in the roofs of equipment (or the tearing out of cab interiors).
Rail-Lynx is:1). More expensive if you have 12 or more locos - A typical wireless DCC layout: Digitrax Zephyr ($160) + DT400R ($180) + UR91 ($115) + 4 x UP5 ($16 x 4 = $64) + 12 DCC decoders ($15.50 x 12 = $186) = $705 (prices from Tony's). Same layout for Rail-Lynx: MRC DC Power Supply ($40) + Transmitter throttle ($139) + 12 IR recievers ($40 x 12 = $480) + 12 extra sensors ($1 x 12 = $12) + 12 sensor mounting boards ($3 x 12 = $36) = $707 (prices from MRC and Rail-Lynx.com). Note that there is no discount on Rail-Lynx products (or at least I couldn't find any online), while Tony's is usually 20% off MSRP.2). Address selection - There's only 256 available addresses for Rail-Lynx, while DCC has 9999. This means that with DCC, one can use the cab number for the address in most cases (especially if you just model one railroad). With Rail-Lynx one would have to somehow remember which IR addess goes to which engine. BTW, at my club, we currently have 752 locos registered, so 256 is not even close to being enough for us. Also, how does one get above 169 with Rail-Lynx? Their instruction book online says that that each address wheel only goes up to 16 and there's two of them (16 x 16 = 256 addresses). To get address 27, you have the top wheel at 2 and the bottom wheel at 7. I guess to get 169, you turn the top wheel to 16 and the bottom wheel to 9, but how do you get higher than that?
3). MU'ing - It takes longer with Rail-Lynx. If one wants to run an MU, first one must select a loco, then hold down SHIFT, then press ARM. Then you have to dial in the MU address, then hit SHIFT and then press SEC. You must repeat all of the above for each loco in the consist. With Digitrax and a DT400, you put the lead address on the right knob, then select the next loco with the left knob, then hit MU then Y +. For each additonal loco, you only have to select the next loco and hit MU then Y +. You don't have to keep re-selecting the MU address.4). Function control - DCC has up to 29 functions these days. Rail-Lynx has...1?
5). Sound - Um, I haven't seen any for Rail-Lynx.
6). Receiving IR Commands - I've watched Rail-Lynx in action at a train show, and yes, the operators had to lift their throttles to shoulder height and point them down at their locos. IOW, they got zero bounce from the ceiling (it was at Springfield, MA). I do not believe that layout uses it anymore. With DCC, if you have track power, you have signal because with DCC, the power is the signal.
Rail-Lynx costs you more and gives you less. If they ever go out of business, you're completly sunk. It's more awkward to operate, it's not compatible with anything else, and things like tunnels, second decks, and ceiling types can completely defeat it without $35 repeaters and a string of LED's.
After looking into it, I don't know why anyone would buy it.
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
As stated early on in this thread, the subject has been beaten to death over the last years, months, but we still use DCC or DC control on our layouts.
I also have a garden railroad, which has been in operation since 1989, and has always used battery power (on board) and radio control. The system has been refined over the years and prices have gone down and capability have gone up. Advantage One for me is not cleaning the track, I use aluminum rail, which is less expensive, and the system is laid on a trench of gravel for roadbed. But, I digress. The system I use is RCS, Australian company with dealers in America. The latest system I installed in a USA GP9, has a new battery technology and charger and it doesn't run down very quickly. I have operated a few hours daily for over a week with this engine and it is still going. The other diesels I have also use the RCS but older versions and several diesels have two battery packs onboard with a toggle, one pack runs down, flip the toggle, keep on running. I also have a couple of trailer cars (passenger) with battery packs that can/do plug into the end of the B unit and provide additional running time.
Again, the advantage of not using GooGone, sandpaper, track cleaning cars far outweighs the need of cleaning some debris off the track after a storm and / or replacing some ballast that washed out. Oh, and once in a while, a pile of poop from a passing cat or racoon. I really believe if I had the space and money, I would use the garden railroad indoors and do away with HO altogether.
DanLW wrote: wjstix wrote:Remember that virtually all DCC decoders have an option that allows you to also operate the engine on DC...in fact more and more engines are coming to market with decoders that work either way factory-installed. True, but those DCC decoders behave as DC locos. Any DCC functionality is lost while they are on DC track. Which is fine until you want to start doing two different things with two or more [DCC enabled] locos on the same DC track.
wjstix wrote:Remember that virtually all DCC decoders have an option that allows you to also operate the engine on DC...in fact more and more engines are coming to market with decoders that work either way factory-installed.
True, but those DCC decoders behave as DC locos. Any DCC functionality is lost while they are on DC track. Which is fine until you want to start doing two different things with two or more [DCC enabled] locos on the same DC track.
I was referring to the cost / installation factor. If you now run on DC, you can buy engines that are DCC (and sound) equipped but will operate perfectly well on DC.
Raised on the Erie Lackawanna Mainline- Supt. of the Black River Transfer & Terminal R.R.
Capt. Grimek wrote:Hmmm...hadn't thought about this, but wondering now if aluminum foil or wire screen scenery bases ever cause transmitting/reception problems with radio control throttles like Digitrax DT 400 Rs? I won't be starting scenery for quite a while but would like to know if it would be best to avoid it with today's DCC radiosystems or as a precaution for "future" systems?
It could only be a factor (if it would be a factor?) if the wire or aluminum scenery is between the handheld control unit and the receiver/base unit. The radio receiver can be up on the ceiling so scenery wouldn't be blocking it.
Remember the engine is getting it's DCC signal from the rails, so it doesn't matter if it's running in a tunnel lined with aluminum foil or whatever. The radio signal is just between the DT400R and the UR91 receiver.
I don't know about the radio effects of metal based scenery, but it is hard on the hands when you have to re-do a section built over wire screen. I went to fiberglass screen even though I had to support it more just for that reason.
Oh. The handheld radios transmit to a receiver located usually above the layout. The receivers in turn are conneced by wire to the DCC booster then to the track bus. So unless you burried the receivers under a metal mountain, it should have no effect.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
Hi Paul,
Some may shy away from installing the sensor. That is definitely something to consider. Although I have yet to do it, two sensors can be placed in the cab, eliminating this concern altogether. And tearing out the guts...is true also for any non-DCC-ready loco. A place is needed inside for the circuit board. A smaller N-scale, NMRA standards, can be used. So, I am not sure what you are saying with your first point.
Price. You got to be kidding. No boosters, no command module. $40.00 for a sensor, $150.00 for a controller. Done. Is there a DCC system out there for $200? Each loco to be controlled with Rail-lynx will need a sensor. So, 40 per loco. You only need to buy one controller per operator (not per loco) if you are a round robin group like us. Each member buys his or her own. I don't want to lie. I now have four controllers for guests who are not regular operators, including family members and non-railroad friends. Otherwise, we share when we have a convention with out of towners for example.
You are right. You can run only 256 locos at the same time. I don't expect to go beyond that. Setting up switchlists for twelve operators is my current goal. I don't think I will ever have 256 operators at my house.
Muing could not be simpler. simply use a second channel to run both engines at the same time.
You may have a point with functions. However, we now build around the wall layouts or 4ft penisulas coming away from the wall, limiting the reach to 2ft. We love switching and being able to reach everything, including turnouts. We use caboose handthrows are a systems of piano wire and Radio Shack DPDTs slide switches. When the switch is thrown, it can also control semaphores. The controller can brighten head and rear lights independly at different levels. We were looking, perhaps you want more which is ok, for a simple controller. Speed can be controlled with one thumb or by three buttons, forward, reverse, stop. Using this button is especially simple when switching. No speed change is necessary.
Your last two points are very important if the model railroader wants sound or plans to join a club with very high ceilings. Rail-Lynx has no sound. Although sound is cool, have you ever operated on a layout with say 12 locos and sound? I can't imagine that being enjoyable. I am thinking more of a display for the public or kids who visit or maybe just running by yourself. The sound would be cool and not drive the other operators crazy since it would not be an operating session. Which leads to public display. Rail-Lynx IR signal works extremely reliably in all our experiences with a typical white ceiling tile installed. while you are watching your loco, the tethered wireless controller in one hand, it is naturally pointing at the ceiling. when you hit stop, slow down, accelerate, it will respond without thinking about pointing. One thing I have noticed with people unfamiliar with Rail-Lynx is that they point it at the loco. this is not necessary and not optimal. Let the signal bounce and spread of the ceiling. I built a house for my hobby. My basement is 14 course. The ceiling is a bit high for a basement, but I never experience problems. So, you may be right not to recommend the system for anyone who has a 35 ft ceiling in their basement. Again, when I see other people fiddling around with programming and we run our locos without any changes to their layouts, we just scratch our heads.
I almost forgot tunnels. Someone wrote they have 35 long tunnels. Now, Rail-Lynx does have repeaters for tunnels, but I prefer to keep my tunnels very short and avoid repeaters all together. The reason is you need a bit of room in the tunnel to get the signal to bounce inside well. It has been done, but I prefer as little hidden track as possible. My staging is open on the top and separated by a scenic divider. If you must have long tunnels, this is something to consider. Not impossible, but it will need to be reckoned with.
MR reader review has more guys who enjoy Rail-Lynx. Use the system you want. By no means do I believe that Rail-Lynx is for everyone and clearly it doesnt seem as if you like it. But I can't understand judging something I have never used. Products should be reviewed before they are judged. That is just my opinion. Happy Model Railroading!
jpeters711...Price. You got to be kidding. No boosters, no command module. $40.00 for a sensor, $150.00 for a controller. Done. Is there a DCC system out there for $200? Each loco to be controlled with Rail-lynx will need a sensor. So, 40 per loco. You only need to buy one controller per operator (not per loco) if you are a round robin group like us. Each member buys his or her own. I don't want to lie. I now have four controllers for guests who are not regular operators, including family members and non-railroad friends. Otherwise, we share when we have a convention with out of towners for example...
Actually, there are several DCC systems out there for less than $200. Rail-Lynx is very competitive for smaller setups, especially when compared to wireless DCC. With wired DCC throttles available for less than $70 and radio throttles available as low as $100, plus Rail-Lynx receivers running about twice the price of DCC decoders, Rail-Lynx can easily cost quite a bit more than DCC on larger setups.
...You are right. You can run only 256 locos at the same time. I don't expect to go beyond that. Setting up switchlists for twelve operators is my current goal. I don't think I will ever have 256 operators at my house...
Not being able to run more than 256 locos at a time is not the issue(most DCC systems can't even run that many at a time), the issue is the addressing scheme. With DCC's 4 digit addressing, you can just use the number on the side of the cab as the address instead of having to remember or keep a list of your loco addreses.
Well. One day there will be a time the Copper wire will be obselete and not used to transmit anything. Imagine for one moment that the guts in your computer box is just one chip with a wireless output signal to your monitor. Both need some kind of power to stay on.
I wear hearing aids. They put about 1.4 volts out of zinc inside combining with air outside for several weeks. I can put a bunch of hearing aid batteries and make alot of energy in a short time.
Then you need to tell this engine what to do.
Now think for a moment. If a switch engine runs a yard ladder and memorizes the track by counting wheel revolutions and can sense couplers by feeling metal on a magnetic sensor or something, you could out fit each freight car and caboose on that yard and tell the switch engine to assemble a train of 8 cars of these kinds or types.
Then the switch engine will sort and build the 8 cars for you and go get the caboose. All without your input. Think that your mouse's laser beam already takes many shots at the surface underneath and knows what to count and how fast or slow to compute the mouse pointer on your screen.
Why cannot a model engine use the same mouse laser beam to track it's own situation on the railroad and take cues to do certain tasks at certain times such as approaching a red signal broadcasting stop some distance away.
You still need a power source to keep the locomotive alive to do all these things. That will never change.
What IS happening is the products are changing a little to allow you to tell a DCC engine with sound to ring the bell or toot the whistle at your command by holding a small wireless radio unit near the rails close to the engine.
What do you think will happen when the engine counts it's own wheel revolutions and own position on the layout and knows that the grade crossing is approaching at whatever speed it's moving and will toot the horn on it's own.
Will running trains be fun? Probably, but you would have created a play land for robots with small brains to move around in for your entertainment. And move around they will do without much input from you.
I remember one day they put me into a tractor semi and I reached down with the right hand looking for the gear shift. Only it wasnt there at all. It turned out that the rig had a automatic transmission and you put it into "D" and go.
I had a real problem with that for a long time. But I put about 220,000 miles on rocky mountain ice and snow as well as 24/7 steaming hard as you can go with a husband/wife team. And that transmission only needed a reboot about once a month to dump the software stack otherwise it would flood the engine's own computer with garbage overflow and kill it.
That is approx 800-1475 miles every 24 hours on the dot 24/7 from Cherry to 220K miles in about 10 months including down time, load time, repairs etc. That transmission stood up to it. The one thing I did not allow it to do was decide what gear to ride the jacobs on the mountain downgrades. Those I kept for me in manual mode.
And ALWAYS that truck shifted on very small changes in grade that correctly demands a gear shift. The only thing the rig does not know is what is around it. If you gave it sensors to see the traffic and people around it, I bet you it will go off from A to B and do it without anyone.
Nah. I think I prefer to drive trains with a throttle thank you. That's fun.
Just my opinion, but your idea looks like an expensive convoluted way to accomplish something that already exists.
Wire DCC to the entire layout and run the DC blocks with zero stretching, or with toggles to change individual blocks between DCC and DC.
Your idea to control the engines with radio will be incompatible with wire screen tunnels and will have range limits. AC has less line loss, that's why the national electrical grid is AC.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
jpeters711,Jeez, it's a good thing I clicked on this thread. Hard to believe it's been two months since we last posted on this. Anyways...
My point in "tearing out the guts" was in reference to the locomotive cab interior. Many modern models of diesel locos (like Atlas, Athearn, P2K, et al.) have full cab interiors that would need to be removed in order to use the twin IR receivers. Here's a pic of a Kato GP35 from Rail-Lynx's own website to illustrate what would be needed for a cab IR installation:
Those sensors make funny looking engineers and firemen... BTW, I wonder what the cab windows do to the IR signal? Do you have to open all the windows? Or can the IR "see" through the clear plastic and any window posts and frames? Hmm...
In reference to the price, please go back and read (really read) my post. I said that Rail-Lynx is more expensive than DCC for a typical wireless layout when you have 12 or more locomotives. Note that reference to 12 or more locomotives. Rail-Lynx receivers are $40 ea. DCC decoders are $15.50 ea. if you buy four. The more locos you have, the more expensive Rail-Lynx is. The tipping point is 12 locos for a typical wireless layout. After you have 12 locos, Rai-Lynx is more expensive than DCC. Under 12 locos, DCC is more expensive for a typical wireless layout. Since I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of model railroaders that would be interested in wireless control (and have the skills needed to install a DCC decoder or an IR receiver) own more than 12 locos, I feel pretty secure in saying that Rail-Lynx is more expensive for those that would actually use it.
As CSX Robert said, there are several DCC systems for under $200. The Digitrax Zephyr set is $160 (as I said in my post in October), the NCE PowerCab is $150, the MRC Prodigy Express is $143, and the Bachmann E-Z Command is $96.
Throttle prices are not the issue as they are approx. the same price (some DCC throttles are more, some are less...it's a wash, more or less).
With only 256 addresses available, how do you keep track of which locos are which address? With DCC, one usually only needs the number on the side of the loco. I don't think too many people care if you can run 256 engines as once, but they do care how easy it is to select a specific loco. BTW, how do you access IR addresses above 169 on Rail-Lynx? The directions on the website are not clear on this.
MU'ing with Rail-Lynx is quite time consuming, according to the directions on their own website. Please read my Oct. post and tell me if I got it wrong.
Yes, I have operated on a layout with 12 or more sound locos. www.ssmrc.org We have shows and Oprerations where there can be dozens of sound-equipped locos on the layout at close-to-full volume. However, it is a 6300 sq. ft. room with 12' ceilings and a lot of white noise generated by the cooling fans, HVAC, and people noise (talking, etc.). I know that with my sound engines, I need to turn the sound down when I get home because my home layout is much smaller at 25' x 50' with an 8' ceiling.
The only place I've seen Rail-Lynx in action is at the Springfield Show (MA) at the Big E fairgrounds in the Better Living Center. http://www.amherstrail.org/abl/04show/04show.1.html The operators were having to point their controllers down onto the locos.
The problem with tunnels is that you shouldn't have to design your layout around the limitations of your command system. If you want a tunnel, or a roundhouse, or a second deck, you shouldn't have to worry if your loco will work.
I don't need to actually use Rail-Lynx to give my opinion on it. All I have to do is look at the Rail-Lynx website and do the math (which is not open to variable opinions...they are what they are) and determine that Rail-Lynx is more expensive than DCC for a wireless layout with 12 or more locos. Then I can read the Rail-Lynx manual and compare that to my years of DCC experience and say that Rail-Lynx is more complicated to MU locos and have fewer options (like CV's and functions). Then I can read opinions from Rail-Lynx backers such as yourself where even they admit one needs repeaters in tunnels and such, or it's best not to have them in the first place. Using these facts and opinions, I can form my own conclusion that Rail-Lynx costs more and gives you less.
Last Chance,I wouldn't use wheel rev's for counting, because what if your loco slips? It'll get "lost" and not know where it is, wouldn't it?
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************