I see in the upcoming (May) issue of MR they are going to do a feature on battery powered/radio controlled trains. I said about 10 years ago I thought onboard power would be the next big thing but I also wonder how soon it will be practical. I am amazed by the advancements in battery technology just in the past ten years. I can certainly see having batteries strong enough to power a good sized consist and yet small enough to fit inside a single loco. It seems to me the biggest problem is going to be keeping them charged up. If you have a large fleet, it would be a royal pain to have to move them to a charging station after each session. Maybe it will be possible to charge them in place through the rails but then you lose what I think would be one of the benefits of onboard power and that is eliminating the need to keep your rails clean. I don't think it will be that big a deal to convert decoders to receive instructions via radio signal rather than through the rails. I'm betting there will be about a 20 year conversion period between the time the pioneers venture into battery powered locos and it becoming the norm, similar to the way DCC was gradually adopted.
My guess would be that a trailing boxcar is used for the batteries and maybe even the radio receiver.
I agree that as battery techology advances battery powered trains will come along. The idea of "dead rail" has moved along rapidly since its introduction and it will probably be a significant player within a few years. It will be quite interesting to see the DC vs DCC vs Battery forum squabbles as things progress .
Joe
There was some chatter about this a few months ago.
The consenus, only partly informed, was that the batteries would be onboard the locos, be good for seven hours continous use, and recharge from the rails.
If the end of a session leaves all your locos in either staging or Engine storage spaces at a yard, then wiring would be simpler and less extensive, and a short period of power on would prepare for an operating session.
Be interesting to see what the article says is the actual status at this point.
Dave
The trouble with getting battery-powered trains is that there is little motivation for their development. On our home or club layouts, we essentially have an infinite power supply at our finger tips, and all we have to do is wire it up and it's done. When you compare that with constantly need to recharge batteries, to me it's a no-brainer with current technology.
In the last few years we've seen improvements in the opposite direction - keeping locomotives running over less-than-perfect track. Look at the Tam Valley "frog juicers" and TCS keep-alive decoders to see where we're going.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Not having to worry about track power or shorts is a real plus. The batteries today will suport 6+ hours of constant use (how many of us do that). The new batteries will give 10 times that or be much smaller, they are starting to manufacture them now with even better ones in testing stage. Can't wait for my cell phone battery to last a week!!!!!!
I just wonder about the cost.
Once the technology is mature, I could see the cost to rise $100 to $150 over the price of a similar DCC engine. This is based upon my experience with mobile phones and assumes that a cheap control protocol like Bluetooth is implemented. I think battery technology is there for this. Charging through rails although possible would need some development. The question is who has deep enough pockets to develop this and can see a viable ROI.
Derek
UPinCT I just wonder about the cost. Once the technology is mature, I could see the cost to rise $100 to $150 over the price of a similar DCC engine. This is based upon my experience with mobile phones and assumes that a cheap control protocol like Bluetooth is implemented. I think battery technology is there for this. Charging through rails although possible would need some development. The question is who has deep enough pockets to develop this and can see a viable ROI. Derek
I could see this developing the way the personal computer did. In the 1970s, PCs were built by hobbyists from components. Within a decade you could buy a complete ready to use system right off the shelf.
There is already radio control technology for HO scale locomotives. Ring Engineering makes railpro which uses a hand held control unit with a touch screen, and a small circuit board that can plug in like a DCC decoder. Currently, ring engineering sells a power supply which powers the rails with a constant DC voltage. They can also run on DCC (but won't respond to DCC commands). A system like this could easily be converted to use battery power. The batteries could be put in a dummy locomotive, and wires that look like MU cables could connect the locomotives.
Kyle There is already radio control technology for HO scale locomotives. Ring Engineering makes railpro which uses a hand held control unit with a touch screen, and a small circuit board that can plug in like a DCC decoder. Currently, ring engineering sells a power supply which powers the rails with a constant DC voltage. They can also run on DCC (but won't respond to DCC commands). A system like this could easily be converted to use battery power. The batteries could be put in a dummy locomotive, and wires that look like MU cables could connect the locomotives.
The problem with this approach is that many layouts model branchlines and short lines where double headed engines, whether steam or diesel, would look out of place hauling a short 6-8 car train. The battery pack could be put in boxcar right behind the loco, but what if you are modeling a logging or coal mine operation where a boxcar would be out of place. I don't think this is really going to catch on until everything can be built small enough to fit into a single loco.
Tam Valley has an interesting variation, they have a small trnasmitter unit the connects to the track outputs of any DCC system, and the reciver connect to the input of any decoder. You operate your DCC system as usual, but instead of the signal going through the rails, it's radio. The receiver side can be powered by on-board batteries or through constant rail power.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
jecorbett Kyle There is already radio control technology for HO scale locomotives. Ring Engineering makes railpro which uses a hand held control unit with a touch screen, and a small circuit board that can plug in like a DCC decoder. Currently, ring engineering sells a power supply which powers the rails with a constant DC voltage. They can also run on DCC (but won't respond to DCC commands). A system like this could easily be converted to use battery power. The batteries could be put in a dummy locomotive, and wires that look like MU cables could connect the locomotives. The problem with this approach is that many layouts model branchlines and short lines where double headed engines, whether steam or diesel, would look out of place hauling a short 6-8 car train. The battery pack could be put in boxcar right behind the loco, but what if you are modeling a logging or coal mine operation where a boxcar would be out of place. I don't think this is really going to catch on until everything can be built small enough to fit into a single loco.
Personaly, I think that a true battery powered locomotive will not happen. Why pay a higher price to have batteries, and have to fit them in your locomotive, plus have to remember to recharge them, when you can have an unlimited amount of track power. I believe in the future we will see hybrid locomotives, ones that have batteries that last at least a minute, but run off of track power whenever possible. It would be the best of both worlds. You wouldn't have to worry about somewhat dirty track or dead spots, and you wouldn't have to worry about your batteries dying.
Kyle jecorbett Kyle There is already radio control technology for HO scale locomotives. Ring Engineering makes railpro which uses a hand held control unit with a touch screen, and a small circuit board that can plug in like a DCC decoder. Currently, ring engineering sells a power supply which powers the rails with a constant DC voltage. They can also run on DCC (but won't respond to DCC commands). A system like this could easily be converted to use battery power. The batteries could be put in a dummy locomotive, and wires that look like MU cables could connect the locomotives. The problem with this approach is that many layouts model branchlines and short lines where double headed engines, whether steam or diesel, would look out of place hauling a short 6-8 car train. The battery pack could be put in boxcar right behind the loco, but what if you are modeling a logging or coal mine operation where a boxcar would be out of place. I don't think this is really going to catch on until everything can be built small enough to fit into a single loco. Personaly, I think that a true battery powered locomotive will not happen. Why pay a higher price to have batteries, and have to fit them in your locomotive, plus have to remember to recharge them, when you can have an unlimited amount of track power. I believe in the future we will see hybrid locomotives, ones that have batteries that last at least a minute, but run off of track power whenever possible. It would be the best of both worlds. You wouldn't have to worry about somewhat dirty track or dead spots, and you wouldn't have to worry about your batteries dying.
I'm on the fence on whether or not this will catch on. It's usually a mistake to underestimate innovation. The trend in technology has been to make things smaller and more powerful. Your laptop has more computing power than room sized computers from 40 years ago which needed their own airconditioning systems to keep from overheating. Your car has a more powerful onboard computer than what Neil Armstrong took to the moon. I think this will catch on if they can make the batteries and receivers small enough so each locomotive will have its own power and controls. It would be simple enough to use DCC type controls for MUing lashups. The key will be creating a convenient recharging method that doesn't require sending locos to a charging station after each operating session.
jecorbettI'm on the fence on whether or not this will catch on. It's usually a mistake to underestimate innovation. The trend in technology has been to make things smaller and more powerful.
battery technology is one of the most critical technological challenges of today. While battery technology has improved over the last 40 years, it hasn't improved at anywhere near the rate of electronics and computing power which while increasing in processing speed also requires a similar increase is power.
If either batteries or supercaps were used in model railroads wouldn't it make sense for them to stop at some station with powered rails to recharge, just as steam locomotives had to replenish both water and coal and diesels has to replenish with fuel. Would this become part of operation?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Battery powered direct radio is already the system of choice in large scale.
With or without batteries, considerable developement is happening in direct radio for HO, and a hybrid system is likely the best future, batteries with some live rail for charging.
Advantages - less under layout infrastructure. Have any of you looked under the layout of a LARGE DCC layout with signaling and detection - just as much, or more, hardware and wire than my advanced cab control DC layout.
Sure small and medium sized DCC layouts without signaling or DCC controlled turnouts don't need much in the way of wiring, but start needing lots of boosters, sationary decoders, detectors, etc, etc - the picture chages quick.
Battery powered direct radio would greatly reduce all that.
Sheldon
jecorbett I see in the upcoming (May) issue of MR they are going to do a feature on battery powered/radio controlled trains. I said about 10 years ago I thought onboard power would be the next big thing but I also wonder how soon it will be practical.
I see in the upcoming (May) issue of MR they are going to do a feature on battery powered/radio controlled trains. I said about 10 years ago I thought onboard power would be the next big thing but I also wonder how soon it will be practical.
The answer is simple, when it is economical. There is car-plane going to be available from a European company in the next couple years - cool yes - affordable, not so much - and of course commen? Not for a long time (even considering a whole new set of flight rules).
As for battery powered trains, as someone mentioned, something like the Railpro from Ring Engineering seems like the logical leap in that direction, where yes, battery power is provided but track power is still there to charge the batteries. Maybe a bit like "keep alive" on steroids and control is through the air and not through the rails.
http://atlasrescueforum.proboards.com/thread/3521/ring-engineering-railpro-review
There is a discussion in the above topic at Atlas Rescue.
For me, and many others, cost is a major consideration as to what we adopt on our model railroads, as well as featuers.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
The more I read about the various issues and fixes or systems, the more I like the idea of a simple keep-alive feature on what we already have. If batteries are 'that good' in recent years, then surely a small one capable of extending an otherwise dead locomotive for maybe 10-15 full seconds is doable, and all inside the tender shell or fuel tank of a diesel. That feature would solve about 90% of all the hair-pulling for about 90% of all users in a given scale.
Yes, keep alive seems like just the "tweak" DCC needs to have to address one of the only major short comings - break in power due to dirty track or dead spots such as switches/turnouts. Cost of course is still a barrier or limitation to many of us, as ideally all DCC decoders would have a keep alive circuit in them. Some day...
What could be more simple than a radio decoder and battery, the decoders (without sound) are as small as .8x.4x.2 as in a Deltang Rx60-22. Around $40 before the euro plunge.
Again I will remind all in this descussion that we are really just talking about the further minaturization of an existing and popular technology.
Spend a few minutes on the Garden Railways forum and you will see what I mean.
I agree, cost, interchangeablity, availablity are all issues that will drive populartiy of any such new products.
There are several good direct radio systems on the market now - and more work is being done to expand them deeper into the HO market - with and without battery power.
Now, I don't expect many people to convert from DCC to direct radio or direct radio w/battery power.
BUT, it is a very real possiblity that it could soon be a serious contender for new people entering the hobby, or existing modelers still using DC.
Personally, I think the guy who puts a together a complete product line, and has an easy to use throttle (a big problem in my view with DCC), will have a good shot at both the market segments mentioned above.
And I am still convinced the existing percentage of DC users in HO and N scale is pretty large - likely 50%.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And I am still convinced the existing percentage of DC users in HO and N scale is pretty large - likely 50%. Sheldon
I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the percentage, but DC is still has a large share of the hobby. I was talking to the manager of my LHS about selling my collection of DC locos, mostly Athearn BB diesel and Rivarossi steam. I asked him if there was still a market for it. He said whenever he puts them on the shelf of second hand equipment, they always sell. He said nobody is getting rich off of them, but there is still a demand for them and I doubt many people are buying them with the idea of putting a decoder in them.
My thought on keeping the batteries charged - take a leaf from one rather unusual prototype.
The Six Companies Railroad (operated for the purpose of building Boulder, now Hoover, Dam) hauled loaded concrete buckets from the batch plant at Lomix through a 1600 foot tunnel to the base of the dam to provide material for the dam itself and the intake towers. Motive power was battery mine motors, which charged from a third rail in the tunnel. There was no third rail at either the batch plant or the unloading site sidings.
So-o-o - power stretches of 'plain Jane' track with AC at a suitable voltage and provide a charger circuit on board. Battery power will carry the loco across puzzle palaces of fancy switchwork and into other places where running power leads would be a problem. No need for a seven hour battery - seven minutes would probably be adequate. If a stud contact system was used the rails would be available for signal detection circuits.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Your idea means that a large club layout would have to be redone to add all the required 'charging' trackage --- no thanks. I'll stick with DCC until such time as battery technology catches up.
cacoleYour idea means that a large club layout would have to be redone to add all the required 'charging' trackage --- no thanks. I'll stick with DCC until such time as battery technology catches up.
An existing club most likely has all track powered and therefore doesn't need to add any recharging trackage.
I see that the NCE wireless antenna modules uses an RF transceiver module that costs ~$8. How many of us would be willing to pay at least an additional ~$8 for a wireless decoder. (The NCE Pro-Cab is $130 and the wireless Pro-Cab is $198).
cacole Your idea means that a large club layout would have to be redone to add all the required 'charging' trackage --- no thanks. I'll stick with DCC until such time as battery technology catches up.
Again, no one is thinking that many exisiting DCC layouts would be converted.
BUT, the two technologies can and do co-exisit. I believe the Railpro system will run with DCC or DC as its track power. And there is is little reason why charging circuits could not be designed the same way.
It still amazes me that so many of you come at these kinds of topics from the standpoint that everyone else is already doing what you are doing.
I will repeat again, it is unlikely that many modelers would leave DCC for direct radio with or without batteries, but it is highly likely that direct radio could soon be a major competitor with DCC for the new person entering the hobby, or the DC modeler who might be temped by a format "simpler" than DCC.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAgain, no one is thinking that many exisiting DCC layouts would be converted. BUT, the two technologies can and do co-exisit. ... it is unlikely that many modelers would leave DCC for direct radio with or without batteries, but it is highly likely that direct radio could soon be a major competitor with DCC for the new person entering the hobby, or the DC modeler who might be temped by a format "simpler" than DCC.
BUT, the two technologies can and do co-exisit.
... it is unlikely that many modelers would leave DCC for direct radio with or without batteries, but it is highly likely that direct radio could soon be a major competitor with DCC for the new person entering the hobby, or the DC modeler who might be temped by a format "simpler" than DCC.
why do you think direct radio and DCC are incompatible?
While DCC does specifiy an electrical standard for the rails, it's also a protocol for communication. Wouldn't such a protocol also be required for any wireless method?
Why not have a wireless DCC (to the locomotive) that can be operated along with DCC to comes thru the rails?
Which is what Tam Valley's system does. Their radio transmitter connects to the track outputs of the DCC system and is in fact broadcasting DCC packets to the receivers in the locos.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAdvantages - less under layout infrastructure. Have any of you looked under the layout of a LARGE DCC layout with signaling and detection - just as much, or more, hardware and wire than my advanced cab control DC layout.
So what about battery power would eliminate the wiring for the detection and signals? For that matter, with dead rail, how are you going to do the detection? Optical? That takes even more wires.
Wired communication is always going to be better than radio. Since the trains are running around on "wires" it sounds like a no-brainer to me to put the control signals and the power on the track. The large scale garden guys have a different set of problems than I do. As far as I'm concerned, for indoor layouts, Keep-Alive has made this a solution looking for a problem.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL Again, no one is thinking that many exisiting DCC layouts would be converted. BUT, the two technologies can and do co-exisit. ... it is unlikely that many modelers would leave DCC for direct radio with or without batteries, but it is highly likely that direct radio could soon be a major competitor with DCC for the new person entering the hobby, or the DC modeler who might be temped by a format "simpler" than DCC. why do you think direct radio and DCC are incompatible? While DCC does specifiy an electrical standard for the rails, it's also a protocol for communication. Wouldn't such a protocol also be required for any wireless method? Why not have a wireless DCC (to the locomotive) that can be operated along with DCC to comes thru the rails?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Again, no one is thinking that many exisiting DCC layouts would be converted. BUT, the two technologies can and do co-exisit. ... it is unlikely that many modelers would leave DCC for direct radio with or without batteries, but it is highly likely that direct radio could soon be a major competitor with DCC for the new person entering the hobby, or the DC modeler who might be temped by a format "simpler" than DCC.
I never said that it could not or should not be done that way, of course it can, and in some cases is.
But the DCC communication protocol is old technology and some of the direct radio products currently available use DCC protocols and some do not.
The S-Cab from NWSL uses DCC, so does the CVP miniAirWire900.
The Aristo Revolution and RailPro do not.
carl425 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Advantages - less under layout infrastructure. Have any of you looked under the layout of a LARGE DCC layout with signaling and detection - just as much, or more, hardware and wire than my advanced cab control DC layout. So what about battery power would eliminate the wiring for the detection and signals? For that matter, with dead rail, how are you going to do the detection? Optical? That takes even more wires. Wired communication is always going to be better than radio. Since the trains are running around on "wires" it sounds like a no-brainer to me to put the control signals and the power on the track. The large scale garden guys have a different set of problems than I do. As far as I'm concerned, for indoor layouts, Keep-Alive has made this a solution looking for a problem.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Advantages - less under layout infrastructure. Have any of you looked under the layout of a LARGE DCC layout with signaling and detection - just as much, or more, hardware and wire than my advanced cab control DC layout.
Karl, once again, for those already heavily invested in DCC there is no advantage to changing.
Signaling is complex and expensive with ANY control system, that's not going to change. Take a poll, you will find out very few modelers have signal systems....
And again, small or medium sized DCC layouts without siginaling do not require a whole lot of wiring. But assuming receiver costs could be made equal to current decoder costs, direct radio could be a big cost savings on a large layout that requires lots of boosters, circuit breakers, reversers, etc.
And with batteries it could eliminate reversers, being self charging on some track and battery powered on other sections of track.
Again, it will likey appeal most to those not yet invested in ANY kind of advanced system........
Does it bother you that DCC might have competition? Well guess what, in over 20 years DCC has not been able to "take over", it is not likely it ever will. And DCC has always had competition, again look at its lack of use in larger scales......