Have you heard Crest Electronics (makers in the past of the Train Engineer and other control systems) is coming out with a radio control with a plug into a standard 8 pin DCC ready socket and that they will soon release a battery version, all this for HO scale!
Sounds very interesting. Hope it can operate some of the onboard sounds. That was a shortcoming of their current control systems I believe.
- Douglas
Supposedly yes! Their system that everyone used for HO operation was realy designed for larger scales originally. It seems that the market in the larger scales is not what it was for their products and so they are back in other scales, including HO.
Interesting. Probably need to support more than 8 to 10 locos at a time (IIRC that's about what my old Crest Train Ehngineer supported) to make a major dent in the appeal of DCC. Of course, this will be the first generation and they always seemed to improve on what they we're offering as things developed.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
At least 50 but I remember reading about the poabilitr of going up to 99.
mlehman Interesting. Probably need to support more than 8 to 10 locos at a time (IIRC that's about what my old Crest Train Ehngineer supported) to make a major dent in the appeal of DCC. Of course, this will be the first generation and they always seemed to improve on what they we're offering as things developed.
The current Crest Train Engineer Revolution transmitter supports 50 loco addresses. I have one of the original G scale Beta test models from several years ago - time has prevented me from doing much with it, but It can be used asa trackside radio system in any scale just like the old 10 cahannel system could.
That is what I currently use on my layout, I use the old 10 channel Train Engineer with a cab control system.
The new HO offering will simply provide HO sized recievers for use with the new Revolution transmitter - and Crest, which is part of Aristo Craft, continues to up grade the software in the Revolution. Future upgrades will be possible via download.
The new HO version will support battery or track power from what I understand.
They are expecting to have product available in the next month or two I believe.
Sheldon
I have the even older 2 cab version. It is fantastic and the only problem I ever had was when I was first setting it up. I tried to link it and it wouldn't work (bought it second hand and the internal fuze had blowen it turned out).
Crest, being a part of Polk Hobbies, may not be around for long.
I just received this email this morning... another sad comment on the present state of things.
Polk’s Will Close Its Doors 12-31-13
Since 1935, we have provided service and innovation to the Hobby industry. In this latest downturn, we cut back staff to the minimum required to survive. Then the government battle over the debt ceiling drove the consumer market down even further.We’ve managed to stay in business, but the continued depression for the consumer has caused us to fall into debt that is unsustainable. We have put several million dollars into product development over recent years, but the need for customers to cut back on non-essentials has caused this investment to be lacking in returns.We have seen leisure activities like golf courses plunge in popularity, as funds for such recreation have dried up. It seems to be the same for hobby time investments. Our products are no longer inexpensive as they were in the 1930s-era Depression. The cost of manufacturing along with minimum production runs and long lead times has caused a lack of ability to continue as a sustainable entity. It’s no longer a business!It has been a pleasure to help our creative consumer base to enjoy their hobby and we have no regrets in doing so. Our business grew every year until the 2008 as the recession caused a shrinking of the mindset to stay active in our large-scale model train arena. We know that smaller scales have remained viable, but the higher cost of Large Scale trains and the space required to run them have not maintained their share of the market. Our airplane R/C portion of our business was lost when our patented frequency changer was lost to the 2.4Ghz portion of the marketplace, with no frequency compounds needed any longer.For 80 years, the Polk family has made a fair living in the Hobby industry. I can’t help but remember the scores of co-workers that have helped make this organization as special as it was. Thanks to them all, but notably: Gil Rose, B.M. Song, J.K. Kim, Sam Kimm, Tom Flynn, Cliff Crane, Charlie Binder, Marvin Binder, John and Sherry Shievdayal, Aixa Lebron, Joe Bamberger, David Newell, Walter Matuch, John Mikesh, Navin Shievdayal, Marguerite Hubert (Rose), Michael J. Vickey, Jonathan Polk, Scott Polk, Fred Polk, Irwin Polk, Nathan Polk, Maryann Polk Bob Calandra, George Adams, Michael Hauptmann and so many others, it would take a book to list them all. While I can’t list all the hundreds that were part of the team, they remain in my heart and mind.Our humble thanks to our loyal customers. Our apologies for not being able to keep this almost 80-year-old business going. It’s a heartbreaker for us all.All the best,
The Polk Family
Crest Electronics was split off from the other years ago, if my info is correct.
I believe that Polk Hobbies and Aristocraft are closing their doors but that Crest is "o.k".
"Ladies and gentlemen, I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news is that both engines have failed, and we will be stuck here for some time. The good news is that you decided to take the train and not fly."
While this news does make the future of the CREST products unclear, it might further explain the new seperate web site and the move to HO with the REVOLUTION product line.
Aristo Craft was originally an HO company, then move into large scale. Like many family run businesses, this may be the end, or it just may be a major redirection.
If the large scale market is failing, maybe ending the cash problems there will allow CREST to continue with the electronics, for all scales.
Personally, never completely understood the large scale thing, maybe it has just run its course for now.
OK, I just spent some time on the Aristo forum and yes it appears the Crest brand and products will continue. They are closing the Aristo Craft model train brand and any remaining Polk's model airplane products.
Crest has a new address only about 8 miles from the Aristo address and a number of product listed as in stock that has not been in stock on the Aristo site for some time now.
Business transitions like this can be hard to understand for the general public, seems they are trying to keep the Crest name out of the Aristo/Polk's closing issue, and focus on the expansion of Crest into HO.
The Crest name was created years ago to signify that the controllers would work with ANY large scale trains, not just Aristo Craft. They are obviously trying to use that same strategy here to seperate Crest from Aristo Craft.
It is very likely that the younger Polks' own Crest seperately from Aristo Craft and that this signifies the "complete" retirement of their father, Lewis.
This family has done great things in the hobby business, and I wish them all the best.
The reason for going the G route was the science of the time. The only way to go on board was to have a larger space to do so. Now about 20 years later, electronics have shrunk to the point of HO being viable. They are well aware of the new batteries coming, I am sure, and with them new possibilities.In fact the very latest is a litho battery that is 2000 times as powerful as todays and charges 1000 times as fast. This is amazing stuff and we are advancing faster than I ever thought possible in this short period of time. In fact the power of batteries has increased more than ten fold in less than 3 years. This means that batteries are getting more powerful and are shrinking faster now than electronics, maybe N scale battery powered trains is less than 10 years off and small HO battery powered trains will be able to be built. But will this mean the death of DCC? To all you DCC people, real question here, would you rather rely on track of break free of that need?
RREBELL,
Why couldn't you just say,what you wanted to say about battery power and leave out your comments and bashing DCC people.......Sounds like you want an argument.....To each they're own,,,,leave it at that...
Cheers,
Frank
zstripe RREBELL, Why couldn't you just say,what you wanted to say about battery power and leave out your comments and bashing DCC people.......Sounds like you want an argument.....To each they're own,,,,leave it at that... Cheers, Frank
rrebellNo, it was a legitimite question to those that run DCC. I know DCC and have run with others equipment and even have some with sound myself but have not invested in a controler so how would I know if this is a game changer.
Back in the April 1980 issue of MR there was an article by Andy Sperandeo where seven command control systems were reviewed. These systems were by Alphatronics, Dynatrol, EMS, Onboard Control, Rail-Command, RFPT, and Salota. In addition, in the following May issue there was a review of an MRC command control system called Protrac R/C I. Of course, none of these systems would interface with another. Each of these systems utilized a receiver which was also not compatible with anyone else's system. So far as I know, none of those first seven companies are viable today. And MRC, while still viable, probably does not offer any support for the Protrac. So anyone who had invested any amount of money in those systems is out of luck.
Now fast forward a number of years and we still have a number of different companies providing a DCC product. The systems themselves are, for the most part not compatible. The difference is that the decoders are. So if my ABC command control family run vendor decides to call it quits, at least my investment in decoders is intact.
Now along comes Crest with a new idea which requires proprietary receivers. What, exactly, is my incentive to invest in a single source supplier as had to be done back in 1980? The only way I see any expansion of this idea is if Crest licenses their receiver design so that they can be produced by others, and if other vendors are willing to develop their own systems that could utilize the Crest-like receivers. Because the market is limited, I really don't see any other vendors looking to invest any money. And I don't see Crest being willing to give their receiver design to anyone else since that only creates competition for their own product. And yes, that competition would hurt them because once you sell someone the Crest system what else do you have to separate them from their money besides additional receivers?
As far as this business of being able to operate without having to rely on track power goes, in my opinion a lot of that is blown out of proportion. I believe that there still has to be a limited amount of wiring done to have an place to recharge the batteries. So there are still going to be a small amount of dirty wheel and track issues that will have to be addressed.
I do recognize that things like wyes, turntables, and return loops will not require any additional wiring except, of course, for those who wish to run their DC or DCC locos concurrently with their Crest equipped locos. For those folks, there is no wiring advantage as it will all still be required.
For me, this new technology is not a game changer. I see no advantage. So, thanks, but no thanks.
Well for me, the idea of a locomotive that has its own power source, sound system, motor and lighting control under its own shell that is accessed via specific RF frequency from an untethered hand held throttle would seem to be, by far, the best control system ever developed for HO scale model trains..
However, a Crest system that plugs into an existing (analog) pc board would not seem to benefit onboard sound operators, since most analog locomotives are not equipped with a speaker. At first blush, there wouldn't seem to be enough space under the shell of a locomotive to plug in a chip, speaker, AND battery without the modeler making major modifications to the innards (weights) of the locomotive.
It will be interesting to see how Crest plans to deal with the space limitations.
My current fleet of onboard sound locomotives work fine with the DCC control system I have now. Converting from one operating system to another makes more sense for me when the conversion is both inexpensive and not labor intensive. If I were to build a new layout, it would be interesting to see if I could really get by with having no wiring at all.
Doughless ...My current fleet of onboard sound locomotives work fine with the DCC control system I have now. Converting from one operating system to another makes more sense when the conversion is both inexpensive and not labor intensive.
...My current fleet of onboard sound locomotives work fine with the DCC control system I have now. Converting from one operating system to another makes more sense when the conversion is both inexpensive and not labor intensive.
I see the road blocks you are addressing. The one I saw pics of as far as receiver plugs right into an 8 pin DCC plug to use track power, don't know about the battery. The same one has the ability of sounds with new sounds downloadable but not sure of all the details. Oh and of the former systems mentioned, I think only Dynatrol still is viable, how viable is in question but then my Train Engineer is not supported or has been in over 10 years (I have a backup just in case). Another point is that they could licence the technology.
Pretty much my feeling as well. Do I think it's a great idea? Absolutely. I do prefer the idea that they can charge from track power, so i can power the nice simpel tangent track and increase run times, but leave reverse loops and other tricky bits completely unpowered with no chance of shorts.
What I don;t like about current offereings is that they are all proprietary. None are compatible with the others. It's just like the early days of command control, with a dozen systems all incompatible. No one fo them ever gains significant market share, and neither will proprietary radio systems. Some say the issue with the radios isn;t the same - kindly explain how? You have 4 or 5 manufactures each with their own idea of how it ought to be. Some of the manufacturers sell other products besides their radio systemm so they may not be in danger of disappearing tomorrow, but if they only sell a few of their radios, will they keep making and supporting it? We need a standard, like the NMRA did for DCC, otherwise the direct radio systems will be nothing more than a distant also-ran to DCC.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Actually, Rail-command, made by CVP Products, is still fully supported by them.
http://www.cvpusa.com/railcmd_system.php
They are also in the DCC business with their Easy DCC product line, and in the large scale direct radio with their AirWire900 and have now introduced a small scale version of that system for smaller scales.
http://www.cvpusa.com/mini_airwire_convrtr.php
Be it track powered or battery, there are a number of advantages to direct radio. The obvious one is reduced under layout electronics - especailly for large layouts, which with DCC can require numerous boosters, circuit breakers, reversers, radio throttle repeaters, etc.
Battery power reduces that under layout infrastructure even more.
All comments about Crest or other recievers fitting in locos are a straw man - not every loco easily accepts a DCC sound decoder and speaker. The sizes of the CVP and Crest recievers are similar to most DCC decoders - batteries are the other part of the story.
BUT, even track powered, direct radio uses simple filtered DC - becaue it is just the power, not a carrier for the control signal.
The biggest other advantage I see coming with direct radio, is better throttle designs, a more user friendly user interface.
Better throttles could - and should - be developed for DCC. But the truth is there is not much incentive for them to design better throttles. They have lots of money tied up in the current designs, and all available data suggests that while most new modelers entering the hobby are going DCC, few existing modelers who have not yet converted are likely to convert in the future.
But the developement of direct radio is starting fresh, and on a newer technology base, so better, more user friendly throttles are already in place in direct radio.
I'm not ready to switch from DC yet, but I will be watching products like the Crest Revolution (I do own one of these), and the Mini AirWire900, and others.
If for no other reason than to see which one might be a good replacement as a track side radio throttle if any of my 10 channel Train Engineer throttles ever break down.
I don't think any of these companies thinks they will "replace" DCC, but they may well make a big dent in the 60-70% of model railroaders that do not use DCC. That's right, 60-70%, by all reasonable estimates. In HO DCC seems to be at about 50-60% and growth has slowed to mostly new entries into the hobby. In large scale track powered DCC is at about 0% useage, with one form or another of direct radio being most popular. In O scale and high rail DCC has only made a small inroad with the two rail scale crowd - a small group to begin with. High Rail still dominated by MTH and LIONEL propriatary systems, old AC and simple DC. N scale is likely right behind HO in DCC acceptance, but again, that might barely be 50%.
So that leaves a lot of people with model trains and toy trains to sell control systems to - people who may have been waiting for exactly what direct radio offers - better technology with less complexity.
But what do I know, I'm just a guy with a pickup nad some little trains without brains.
Well put! I will have to check out airwire. I do think Crest is on to something in the fact that theirs plugs into existing DCC sockets, that certainly keeps it simple. The reason I have not gone DCC is I have seen too many fried decoders already, luckily non were mine. Also I was not happy with the sound cutoffs due to track in a couple of sound decoders, they were just too picky.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't think any of these companies thinks they will "replace" DCC, but they may well make a big dent in the 60-70% of model railroaders that do not use DCC. That's right, 60-70%, by all reasonable estimates. In HO DCC seems to be at about 50-60% and growth has slowed to mostly new entries into the hobby.
This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here.
DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone.
As far as direct radio battery DC, the Original Poster has started a number of threads like this one. And as long as the products don't quite exist yet for HO, it is easy to imagine them as a panacea. When Crest publishes photos of actual HO engines with on-board batteries and direct radio receivers installed and demonstrates them working on an actual layout with people in the aisles, it will be a newsworthy item.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
rrebellThe reason I have not gone DCC is I have seen too many fried decoders already
I've operated on dozens of layouts totaling hundreds of engines and have only seen this happen once or twice -- and always due to human error. The danger is vastly overstated
On the other hand, the potential dangers of over-charging lithium batteries in confined spaces leading to overheating and fried equipment is also real, although it will happen rarely. Ask Boeing.
Nothing's perfect.
Been DCC for 10 years and I saw my first fried decoder just this summer. And it wasn't one of mine. One of my fellow club members was working on an Athearn loco he had a decoder in, on a LIVE TEST TRACK, with most of the wires just twisted, not well trimmed, and not soldered. You can imagine what happened next.
Not going DCC because you fear blowing decoders? Haven't blown one yet, nor have I seen any otherwise working ones just blow out on a large club layout where a given set of locos will run continuously, pulling long trains, for an hour or so at a time.That includes both user-installed and factory equipped locos.
Tam Valley's radio system also connects to a standard DCC decoder.
cuyama ATLANTIC CENTRALI don't think any of these companies thinks they will "replace" DCC, but they may well make a big dent in the 60-70% of model railroaders that do not use DCC. That's right, 60-70%, by all reasonable estimates. In HO DCC seems to be at about 50-60% and growth has slowed to mostly new entries into the hobby. This is absolutely not true here in Northern California, where more formally DC layouts are being converted to DCC year after year. Around here, the active, growing layouts are nearly all DCC. Dusty, neglected layouts in a corner somewhere are still nominally DC, but virtually everyone around here who operates with multiple crews has moved to DCC in N, HO, and O. Growth has certainly not "slowed to new entrants" around here. DC is fine, DCC is fine. But misstating the actual trends is not helpful to anyone. As far as direct radio battery DC, the Original Poster has started a number of threads like this one. And as long as the products don't quite exist yet for HO, it is easy to imagine them as a panacea. When Crest publishes photos of actual HO engines with on-board batteries and direct radio receivers installed and demonstrates them working on an actual layout with people in the aisles, it will be a newsworthy item.
Well northern California must be behind the curve, because here in the Mid Atlantic nearly all those "social type, operating session" modelers have already converted to DCC - and for the most part I understand their reasons.
I'm sure that there are a a few modelers left who have not converted but will, and I suspect most new people will go DCC for the forseeable future. Butt there are many "lone wolf" modelers, who's layouts are by no means "neglected or dusty" who have not imbraced sound and have no interest in DCC.
Or, should we assume they are not "real modelers" so they don't count - they are just grandpas playing with train sets because they are not in your social click?
My info comes from local dealers who talk to their customers, and know what their customers buy - control system wise and locomotive wise - they still have lots of HO and N scale DC customers who show no signs of switching.
Every informal poll taken on this forum has shown DCC useage to be about 60%, and it would be fair to assume most on here are tech savy, social or both, with few indicating they will switch over in the future.
I make no claim that Crest will produce a perfect product, or how long it will take to bring it to market, or that battery power is just around the corner in HO. But there are four manufactuers investing in direct radio - they must see some sort of future based on some sort of data or customer response?
I don't plan to go to direct radio or DCC and time soon, if ever. I don't want onboard sound and my trackside radio throttles work just fine with my user friendly advanced cab control system. Other people I know using the same type of system as me feel the same way - we are happy with our control system just as you are happy with DCC.
But I am interested to see what develops. And DCC is built on very old technology at this point, and the user interfaces in DCC are poor in my opinion.
Still happy in DC, just watching the developments.
Well stated and it holds true for my area as well. DCC around here hasn't slowed and continues to grow. The LHS has more DCC items in stock now then ever, and it's moving, not sitting around. Different parts of the Country can/may have different trends. That stands to reason. But I personally do not see a trailing off/slowing of growth in expanding DCC or entry into DCC in my area. I also personally have not seen enough blown decoders to warrant being frightened to take a step into DCC or full on DCC conversion . It's probably best to simply say "I do not like DCC" and move on and be happy. I like and still use DC...I like and use DCC...both operating systems are tried, tested, and true for HO and N scale. Radio does nothing for me whatsoever. Besides, as others have stated, until we see actual working operating control units for HO and N scale, HO and N radio equipped locomotives and other devices operating and reviewable, and en masse marketing and availability of these products then this is all moot, pure speculation, and borderline guesswork. But, if radio floats your boat...all the power to you (pun intended). Each to their own.
Happy modeling!
Don.
The blown decoders is just one of the reasons, so don't take that as the only reason and also I was stating for me, personally, not as a trend as far as DCC. Also, on a forum it is hard to relay where one is coming from. I have always thought at least 10 years out, I tend to throw all my eggs in one basket including financially, I tend to be a lone wolf because I find it hard in my area to find people of the same mindset as me, not that I avoid being social. DCC is great for some and for clubs, it is really the only game in town but it is not without issues and through various forums, I talk to a lot of people and we all communicate our problems so I am exposed to more than my group of friends and have knowledge of what goes on at a half dozen large clubs as far as what's happening and where they are going (right now two are DCC only, two are being built as DCC only, one is both and one is being converted to both from just DC). As far as batteries are concerned, unless you follow this stuff, most don't have a clue to the daily breakthroughs. The only thing limiting the adaption of total onboard control is not the battery but the electronic components in the controllers and if you know Moore's law, you know that that will soon not be a problem! In fact, due to photonics, one university just announced a major breakthrough!
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd DCC is built on very old technology at this point
Compared to your 40-year-old MZL?
Thanks, that was good for a laugh.
rrebellThe only thing limiting the adaption of total onboard control is not the battery but the electronic components in the controllers
That doesn't seem correct at all. For HO and smaller scales, batteries are the largest volume and weight element and lag the components significantly (since batteries don't improve with Moore's Law)
There is also an array (pun intended) of RF (radio frequency) issues that come into play in antenna design and frequency and modulation choice for direct radio. Polk obviously made some wrong choices there earlier, which is part of the reason they say that they are going out of business.
Direct radio DC battery will likely come* for HO at some point. But until folks like you can show us photos of working installations of Crest's system in typical HO engines (with or without sound), it's vaporware.
* Edit: I should say something like ""practical, widely deployed drop-in direct radio DC battery will come for HO at some point"-- obviously early systems are out now.