Here's a requirement that I have before I invest DCC, which I want to be soon....I'd like to be able to run locomotives through phone apps and ipod, iphone, etc. using a wireless router and have the system conncected to a dedicated computer that performs whatever tasks that would be useful for. I have no shortage of extra wireless routers and computers and have no problem wiring. The problem is that when I try to research this I come up with almost no information other than some people do it. That's not real helpful....can someone shed any light on the systems that have these capabilities?
For a new poster, He was probably overwhelmed, with all the replys and the direction, the original question swayed. It happens.
Respectfully,
Frank
I think the OP has left the room and is taking up knitting!
-Bob
Life is what happens while you are making other plans!
Geared Steam Sheldon All kidding aside, I love beautiful wiring, and that, is beautiful. 36 relays and the wiring strips, all properly labeled.
Sheldon
All kidding aside, I love beautiful wiring, and that, is beautiful. 36 relays and the wiring strips, all properly labeled.
Thank You,
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
rrinker Oh but you DO have a computer. Just because it only can solve one problem (which signal aspect to display based on track setup) and just because it uses relays for the logic - it's still a computer. Just the other day there was a bit of a sidetrack in one of the Yahoo groups I monitor which covers what was my very first computer back in 1980, that discussion veered to relay computers and there were some examples of recently constructed ones. All relays and LEDs and switches, no integrated circuits, no CPU chip. Other than the LEDs, emulating some of the very first computers. In fact, the origin of a "program bug" comes from literally, a bug caught in one of the relays in one of the early computers. So yes, you ARE using a computer, albeit one circa the era represented on your layout, not one of recent vintage. --Randy
Oh but you DO have a computer. Just because it only can solve one problem (which signal aspect to display based on track setup) and just because it uses relays for the logic - it's still a computer. Just the other day there was a bit of a sidetrack in one of the Yahoo groups I monitor which covers what was my very first computer back in 1980, that discussion veered to relay computers and there were some examples of recently constructed ones. All relays and LEDs and switches, no integrated circuits, no CPU chip. Other than the LEDs, emulating some of the very first computers. In fact, the origin of a "program bug" comes from literally, a bug caught in one of the relays in one of the early computers. So yes, you ARE using a computer, albeit one circa the era represented on your layout, not one of recent vintage.
--Randy
Very true, and I designed and installed a lot of those for industry back in the 1970's and early 1980's.
The relay circuits used for the signaling are nearly identical to the those used by the prototype from the first signaling systems to some still in use today, so you are correct, they are very era approperate to my 1954 time frame.
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Lou,
My version has also been installed on a single track, non signaled layout that represents 1915.
And a bunch of guys who use DCC at home have operating sessions on that layout at least once a month.
In that application, a typical "town" or subdivision that would normally require four or more "blocks" only requires two cab assignment sections. As Randy described, two trains can approach the passing siding, one enters one track, one enters the other, and with the the touch of two push buttons and two manually operated turnouts they pass each other and leave in opposite directions.
Operators there also use Aristo wireless throttles and there is a dispatcher who talks to station agents, who pass train orders to engineers - just like they did back in those days. but still trains don't move until proper authority is given and cleared.
And again, the operators are not bound by control panels, every control they need at any given spot is duplicated as they progress around the layout with their wireless throttle.
One other note of explaination - while the system will work with any kind of turnout, the power routing does not rely on power routing through the turnout points. I actually prefer feed through turnouts like Atlas, they make some of this easier/better. I have never liked or trusted points to route power, and there are numerous circuits to be switched. Every turnout that controls power routing is connected to a 4P2T relay that actually directs the track power, including power frogs and signal logic. And other relays manage the push button cab assignment system. The detectors I use have relay outputs and combine with the turnout relays to provide all of the signaling logic needed, so the only extra cost for signaling is the detectors and signals themselves - no computers, no fancy circuit boards.
Thanks for your thoughts, take care,
Sheldon,
Well, I'm part of the way there since I've got Mallerys #2 book, but not #1. I suppose I'll spring for the MR CD collection once I can find a stray couple of C notes that don't already belong to someone else before I've made them. The staggered blocks concept sounds clever though I confess I've never thought much about signaling my pike, seeing as it represents a back country branch/terminal line rather than a class one railroad. Still, the idea of integrating turnouts into X sections seems like one of those "Why would anyone choose to do different?" ideas. Since hand made turnouts are more easily made power routing than not, the whole affair (your system that is) seems like one logical step after another. Thanks for the clarifications and hints, they're certainly food for thought. Hope you make some progress on your layout, but don't be a stranger to the forum. We need some seasoned vets here as well as the constant flow of same same beginner questions.
Lou
Javelina All kidding aside Sheldon, I do wish you'd make good on your threat to publish something on your MZL system. It sounds interesting, and a lot of folks, myself included would probably like to know more about it. I don't fear relays or wiring diagrams ever since I rebuilt my old Porsche 914s Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection. I do confess to a near pathological revulsion to computerizing every durn thing though. I even pine for the days of "old school" phone systems, the ones where you could actually hear every word, rather than every third one. As a machinist familiar with both conventional and CNC systems I remember the old timer who told me "CNC makes the hard stuff easy and the easy stuff hard!" Geezer had a point. Lou
All kidding aside Sheldon, I do wish you'd make good on your threat to publish something on your MZL system. It sounds interesting, and a lot of folks, myself included would probably like to know more about it. I don't fear relays or wiring diagrams ever since I rebuilt my old Porsche 914s Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection. I do confess to a near pathological revulsion to computerizing every durn thing though. I even pine for the days of "old school" phone systems, the ones where you could actually hear every word, rather than every third one. As a machinist familiar with both conventional and CNC systems I remember the old timer who told me "CNC makes the hard stuff easy and the easy stuff hard!" Geezer had a point.
I do have a book about 3/4 written on my version of MZL, but time is a real issue for me at this point and I will admit, my interest in "socializing" with other modelers is a very low priority at this time.
Actually, what I have done is really simple. If you have three key model railroad resources, and a basic understanding of relay control practice, you can figure it out your self.
Ed Ravenscroft's MZL description in Model Railroader - this uses turnout position to direct track power eliminating over half the "block toggles".
Bruce Cubb's original relay based signal system and intergrated cab control, also described in MR - This and MZL integrate signaling into cab selection only giving green signals to trains with clear routes both in terms of route and power.
Paul Mallery's Electrical Handbooks 1 & 2 for Model Railroads - read the part about using push buttons in muliple locations rather than toggle/rotary switches to assign track sections (blocks) to the throttles - this provides walk around control for the wireless radio throttles by duplicating cab assignments at multiple points around the layout, eliminating doubling back or being anchored to a control panel, and they are also duplicated on a dispatchers panel, for CTC control.
That's all I did, was combine these three main ideas, with Aristo Wireless throttles, and a few secondary ideas like the staggered section break to prevent section overrunning.
All "interlocking sections" (groups of turnouts) are X sections - that is they get there power from the adjacent sections (blocks) automaticly based on route postion. They are also the "buffer" sections described before that prevent collisions. And, they also work like real CTC interlockings - you cannot throw the turnouts while the train is in the the interlocking section - so you cannot throw a switch under the train.
I know, this way too much operational realism for some of these guys.........
Maybe one day life will calm down around here and I will finish the book, who knows?
Right now I'm just happy to make some time to work on the layout - that's why I'm not on here much anymore.
rrinker Master Zone Layout Probably the most flexible DC cab system, at the expense of LOTS of wires. Instead of frantically flipping toggle switches or rotary switches (if you have more than 2 cabs) as you try to drive your train around the layout, the power is assigned by the selected route so if for example you set up a meet where one train takes the siding and one stays on the main, they can keep running towards each other, the cab for the one taking the siding will be assigned to the siding and the cab for the one on the main will be connected to the main. Once both are in the clear and the turnouts aligned to let the one int he siding back out and the one on the main to proceed, the cabs are assigned and you drive on. It lets you set up a more prototypical dispatcher control without all the arbitrary electrical blocks of lesser cab control systems and an engineer can simply drive the train, watching signals, instead of flipping controls to connect power. Still has issues if you overrun your block and bridge power to the next block, but then this is an issue no matter what the control system since you will either short something or crash into the other train. The whole thing was explained in a series of articles in MR back in the late 60's/early 70's. --Randy
Master Zone Layout
Probably the most flexible DC cab system, at the expense of LOTS of wires. Instead of frantically flipping toggle switches or rotary switches (if you have more than 2 cabs) as you try to drive your train around the layout, the power is assigned by the selected route so if for example you set up a meet where one train takes the siding and one stays on the main, they can keep running towards each other, the cab for the one taking the siding will be assigned to the siding and the cab for the one on the main will be connected to the main. Once both are in the clear and the turnouts aligned to let the one int he siding back out and the one on the main to proceed, the cabs are assigned and you drive on.
It lets you set up a more prototypical dispatcher control without all the arbitrary electrical blocks of lesser cab control systems and an engineer can simply drive the train, watching signals, instead of flipping controls to connect power. Still has issues if you overrun your block and bridge power to the next block, but then this is an issue no matter what the control system since you will either short something or crash into the other train.
The whole thing was explained in a series of articles in MR back in the late 60's/early 70's.
Good decription Randy, but actually if you build MZL, or any adavanced DC cab control system, without using common rail wiring, it can be wired to completely prevent a train from overrunning into a track section that is not assigned to it. By having seperate power supplies for each throttle, and gaping both rails, staggering the gaps at each "section break" will make it impossible for a train to pass from one section to the next unless both sections are assigned to the same throttle.
The offending train will simply stop in the "dead" zone because there will be no complete circuit from the + of throttle "A" on one rail to the - of throttle "B" on the other rail. With good planning this works just like ATC on the prototype - run a red signal and your train stops.
In a well executed MZL system, signaling, cab assignments and route selection are all fully intergrated, and with a dispatcher on duty, main line operators have the same experiance as those running DCC - they run their train.
But I surely understand why few people want to build anything like MZL today, since it requires understanding a lot of boring stuff about electricity, relays, polarity, signaling, and so on, and actually building a somewhat complex wiring infrastructure - even if the parts are inexpensive.
Depending on your modeling goals, skills and interests, DCC is often the best choice for many today, but in my case I want signaling and CTC, and my hybrid MZL with wireless radio throttles provides all that at a much lower cost than it could be done for on a layout the size of mine with DCC. Without expenses for decoders or features I don't need like speed matching and sound.
Some people want to play engineer, some want to play dispatcher, some want to play division superintendent. Basic DCC without signaling is great for those who want to just play engineer, I prefer to focus more on those other two job descriptions, but still be the engineer from time to time - MZL does that for way less expense than DCC.
DISCLAIMER - I have no interest in onboard sound in scales as small as HO. If you like onboard sound, you need DCC. I don't, so I don't.
A few more thoughts -
DCC is great for small layouts where multi train operation is desired.
DCC is great for layouts with lots of congested trackage.
MZL works best on medium to large layouts with only medium to low "trackage densities".
As explained above, MZL can provide simple effective collision avoidance that is basically free.
Contrary to popular myth, running multiple engines does not automaticly require DCC speed matching features, we have been doing it in DC long before DCC came along.
Many DC throttles can provide speed control as fine as DCC and even stopped trains with their lights on like DCC.
For me personally, I considered DCC several times but rejected it for a number of reasons.
The biggest reasons being cost of decoders for my 130 locomotives and poor ergonomics of all the wireless handheld controllers on the market.
But what do I know?
I'm just a hick with a pickup, some guns and some little trains without brains, so I built something like this to control them:
Yeah Randy, you're right, not even third rail/overhead catenary (the control system of the ancients) is perfect. Didn't they call the diode setup using opposing rails the Philadelphia system? Or was that the Poukeepsie system? Or the Detroit? No wait, the Detroit was a haircut.
This is fun, but it'd be a scream if we could get Sheldon to come out and play. But as Rich pointed out, he's probably busy trying to decipher his DCC controller handbooks.
The poor OP must be reeling with confusion..........
Outside third rail has its own issues when negotiating complex trackwork, like multi track junctions - which is why even thr prototype did things like add tiny pantographs and put overhed wire at those kinds of spots. And live overhead - well, if you have the patience for that, good for you.
ALl that actually solves is loop and wye polarity issues, it doesn't solve the control issue, you still need some sort of block system to run multiple trains. Thoeretically you can run 4 at a time with overhead - assuming all axles are insulated and the two rails are likewise isolated, but you end up with problems with reverse loops again. The trick is to use each runnign rail as a seperate return - that's two trains right there, and then yo use AC and put a diode in the control and the loco, so two locos running off the left rail, and two off the right rail. Of course, you can;t reverse then. But all four could run right up next to each other under independent control with no block toggles or any other sort of power direction.
maxman richhotrain maxman richhotrain My system is the finest, greatest, foremost, preeminent, premier, supreme, par excellence, unrivaled, second to none, without equal, unsurpassed, peerless, matchless, unparalleled, optimum, optimal, ultimate, incomparable, ideal, perfect. Rich So, you have one of those MZL systems? I beg your pardon. See, I knew someone would explain it to you if I waited long enough
richhotrain maxman richhotrain My system is the finest, greatest, foremost, preeminent, premier, supreme, par excellence, unrivaled, second to none, without equal, unsurpassed, peerless, matchless, unparalleled, optimum, optimal, ultimate, incomparable, ideal, perfect. Rich So, you have one of those MZL systems? I beg your pardon.
maxman richhotrain My system is the finest, greatest, foremost, preeminent, premier, supreme, par excellence, unrivaled, second to none, without equal, unsurpassed, peerless, matchless, unparalleled, optimum, optimal, ultimate, incomparable, ideal, perfect. Rich So, you have one of those MZL systems?
richhotrain My system is the finest, greatest, foremost, preeminent, premier, supreme, par excellence, unrivaled, second to none, without equal, unsurpassed, peerless, matchless, unparalleled, optimum, optimal, ultimate, incomparable, ideal, perfect. Rich
My system is the finest, greatest, foremost, preeminent, premier, supreme, par excellence, unrivaled, second to none, without equal, unsurpassed, peerless, matchless, unparalleled, optimum, optimal, ultimate, incomparable, ideal, perfect.
Rich
I beg your pardon.
See, I knew someone would explain it to you if I waited long enough
maxman, I am humbled in your presence.
Alton Junction
Javelina Where's Sheldon when we need him?
Where's Sheldon when we need him?
That last patient, sober description of MZL by Randy notwithstanding, the best DCC control system is none at all. The best control system is Third Rail or Overhead Catenary. No reversing problems, simple to wire, prototypical for many real railroads and easy to set up for signals.
There. I usually resist wasting gasoline on a well established fire but I just couldn't this time. Where's Sheldon when we need him? Come on pal, you know you want to!
As far as all the adjectives that have been used to describe how much better our control systems Dad is than your control systems Dad I'll just go with what the narrator on an old Rio Grande Southern film said about a trip through the Gorge, "Superlatives are inadequate".
Well, since N is just an arbitrary number....
If my N is 5 and your N is 4, I win. LOL.
selector Mine is best times N to the n-1 Thanks for playing, boyz'ngirls.
I believe that N to the +1 power beats N to the -1.
davidmbedardMine is best...
maxman richhotrain davidmbedard Mine is best... In that case, mine is bester. Oh, yeah? Mine is bestest!!
richhotrain davidmbedard Mine is best... In that case, mine is bester.
davidmbedard Mine is best...
In that case, mine is bester.
Oh, yeah? Mine is bestest!!
LOL
Your move, David.