The problem with using a dedicated track for charging, and equating it to prototypical operation, is that the modeler will be modeling the locomotive when its standing still. That's not the fun part. Its more fun to model when moving, just like we don't model a string a grain hoppers being loaded at 1 mph.
Having said that, charging locomotives for 30 to 60 minutes on a dedicated track(s) prior to an operating session doesn't seem terribly off-putting, although one does have to plan accordingly.
Edit: On second thought, if you were going to charge all of the locos 30 minutes before an operating session, you wouldn't need a dedicated track. Just have the whole layout powered to charge all of your locos no matter where they are on the layout. Then turn off the rails and operate dead.
- Douglas
Charging through the rails is obviously yet another debate to be had. For my setup, there was not a way to have the battery removable for charging. I also didn't want to handle the loco and have to maintain the loco charging lead (though I did leave one semi-accessible in case needed). Charging through the rails on a dedicated, maintained piece of track seems reasonable and I've got pickups on all four wheels per side.
As has been mentioned, it is more prototypical to have this "re-fueling" station and subsequent down time. Doing a constant re-charge through the rails, while possible (see Stanton's S-Cab system which has been doing just this for a few years now), isn't prototypical unless you're modeling electrics. Unless you need constant up-time like running at a show, I don’t see a need to constantly be charging. It only takes a bit over ½ hr to fully recharge, so not a big impact for me.
Darby
Pete Steinmetz Carl425: I'm not sure what "Folks" you are refering to. Personally, I don't know anybody that charges through the rails. What a pain in the you know what. It is so much easier to either remove the battery and charge off line or install a charging jack somewhere on the loco. Pete
Carl425: I'm not sure what "Folks" you are refering to. Personally, I don't know anybody that charges through the rails. What a pain in the you know what. It is so much easier to either remove the battery and charge off line or install a charging jack somewhere on the loco.
Pete
Pete, what gauge trains are you working with? In large scale it makes perfect sense to just take the battety out, or connect it to a cable. In HO than can mean a lot of delicate fiddling with hard to remove shells, etc.
A lot of HO guys are not going to want any kind of visable connector or port. So charging thru the rails seems very logical for the smaller scales.
Sheldon
Pete Steinmetz I'm not sure what "Folks" you are refering to.
If you look at the post I was responding to, you can see that the "folks" I was referring to were the ones who wanted to charge from the track. Obviously somebody is doing it since plans have been published by the guy that did it. The point was that IF YOU'RE GOING TO CHARGE THROUGH THE RAILS, why not set up the loco so you have the option of charging while running?
What a surprise that a founder of "the dead rail society" doesn't want to put power on the rails.
Why do you assume that your "society" holds a monopoly on batteries in trains?
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.
I have been 'spot' reading this thread and I find it very interesting.
But if you want direct radio control, consisting, sound, and be able to run on any layout, DCC or DC, you should check out RailPro. It will work with DeadRail too.
The RailPro decoder plugs into the standard 9 pin connector. Does that make it backwards compatable?
I have an NCE Power Pro 5 amp DCC system to run my layout. But I have started using RailPro for some of my permanent consist. Consisting With RailPro is unbelievable. No speed matching. For the first time I can run three engines at the front of the train and have two helpers about two thirds of the way back. There is no pushing the cars together in the middle of the train, no pulling the train apart, no cars being pulled over when going around curves, it just works.
And, there are no CVs to fool with.
[ I am not affiliated with RailPro in anyway, shape or form ]
Peter, since you have been around a long time with dead rail, what do you think of BlueRails plug-n-play battery setup?
But I can see the convenence of charging stations via the track, could be an isolated peice at the site of fuel, could have more than one if you wanted. Keeping a less than 2' peice of track clean is a lot better than a whole layout. But you are right about the other charging methods being better and will be practical with the next wave of new batterys.
Being one of the founders of the Dead Rail society, I will answer your questions.
1. The best way is to be able to remove the batteries from the loco, tender. That way you can use small batteries and replace a depleted one with a charged one.
Another way is to put a charging jack in a hidden place on the loco.
Yet another way is to put batteries and possibly other electronics in a trailing car. Switch out the car for a charged one.
The last, and least desirable to me is charging through the track. this complicates matters and unless careful will not give a full charge. Track must be very clean along with the wheels and pickups.
2. Yes charging can be convienient. How convienient is cleaning track?
3. You need a battery charger. preferable off line.
4 See #1 above. Charging jack if not removing the battery pack.
5 This can be a whole thread. I highly recommend batteries with a protection circuit. This eliminates all RC batteries as they do not have protection. Expect to pay $35 - $45 or so for a 11.1V high quality battery with protection.
rrinker Sort of makes me want to experiment a bit with this on my own. --Randy
Sort of makes me want to experiment a bit with this on my own.
--Randy
Rich
Alton Junction
Agreed, Randy. It's the prototype realism possibilities that catch my eye the most with the BT technology rather than the newness of the interface itself.
Can you imagine being forced to take your steamer into the roundhouse for a "designated period of time" because you overheated the boiler and now it has to pass an inspection before it can return to the mainline to bring in revenue again?
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
All you have to do is feed the input to the battery charger with a bridge rectifier. Then the loco would work on DC powered rails, AC powered rails, or DCC powered rails, and it wouldn't make any difference if the DC polarity were reversed.
It's really not that complicated - even the battery feedback. Most any drone already can do that (except for the really tiny ones like the one I have). Monitoring the battery charge is also fairly trivial, again a very tiny SMD IC with a couple of passives, and if the Bluetooth radio in the loco is already doing 2-way communications it should not be a big deal to add the battery level info to the feedback. Hopefully the protocol they are designing for this allows for additional "message types" in the data stream so they can add additional features like the battery feedback, and motor load information.
I can see this particularly in steam locos (which are the easiest to add battery power since there is typically room in the tender for this stuff) - 'charging tracks' at water stops, and a "water gauge" (battery level) meter on the throttle. Can you make it to the next water tank, or must you take on "water" at this one? Add a fire cracker to the boiler for a realistic "boiler explosion"
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
BuckscoHere is a Bluerail board install in an S gauge loco with charging through the track:
I think what folks want is the ability to have the loco batteries charging while it is running - like your cellphone lets you talk while the battery charges. I'm sure one of the electronics dudes on here could whip up such a circuit for you.
Here is a Bluerail board install in an S gauge loco with charging through the track:
http://bluerailtrains.com/2016/07/11/user-showcase-darby-marriott/
richhotrain Speaking for myself, I have found both of these "blue" threads interesting in that they have prompted me to research the issues in greater detail regarding dead rail, Bluerail, and Bluetooth. The only issue with this thread is that it appears that few if any modelers are using Bluetooth technology exclusively to run their layouts. Or, at least, few of the replies are from modelers using Bluetooth technology exclusively to run their layouts. So, it is difficult to get a good perspective on Bluetooth technology for running trains. My current layout is fully wired and operational using an NCE DCC 5 amp system, so I have no compelling reason to adopt Bluetooth technology on my current layout. However, if I build a new layout, I would relish the opportunity to build it without wiring. If battery power can be improved to the point that dead rail is flawless, I am all for that. I don't own an iPhone or iPad, so when the day comes, I hope that a manufacturer will provide an NCE-like throttle as the interface. Rich
Speaking for myself, I have found both of these "blue" threads interesting in that they have prompted me to research the issues in greater detail regarding dead rail, Bluerail, and Bluetooth.
The only issue with this thread is that it appears that few if any modelers are using Bluetooth technology exclusively to run their layouts. Or, at least, few of the replies are from modelers using Bluetooth technology exclusively to run their layouts. So, it is difficult to get a good perspective on Bluetooth technology for running trains.
My current layout is fully wired and operational using an NCE DCC 5 amp system, so I have no compelling reason to adopt Bluetooth technology on my current layout. However, if I build a new layout, I would relish the opportunity to build it without wiring. If battery power can be improved to the point that dead rail is flawless, I am all for that. I don't own an iPhone or iPad, so when the day comes, I hope that a manufacturer will provide an NCE-like throttle as the interface.
And like Rich, I have a working system that serves my needs. In my case it is DC and it integrates advanced cab control with radio throttles, CTC and single button route turnout control.
But it is designed in a way that would allow the current wireless DC layout based throttles to be replaced with any sort of command control, including DCC, or bluetooth, or some other direct radio solution. I could literally just move eight pairs of wires to a different set of terminals and have a system with eight power districts of 13.8 constant filtered DC voltage for a system like this. All my other features would still work.
But I am only interested in doing that if a system (or improved DCC interface) comes along that really makes it easy and cost effective.
So as it stands, DCC costs too much, adds too much complexity, and has poor user interfaces.
But a direct radio system with the right features might be just the ticket - the benefits of individual control without the things I don't care for about DCC would be of interest.
When Crest gets their HO version of the Train Engineer Revolution farther along, I will take another look there as well. But so far, none of these systems are designed to handle large layouts, or large numbers of locos, and consisting, like DCC or a custom DC system like mine.
All of them, Crest, Bluerail, S-Cab, have limitations on numbers of locos, MU consisting, etc, which seems to me the first features I would have planned for.
It makes all these products only suited for someone with a small layout or who is only "dabling" with a few locos. That is not where I am at in the hobby........
As for all this talk about technology always changing and so forth, maybe some of you have simply accepted all this planned obsolesence, and for some things it is reality, and that is fine.
But except for those of you just "dabling" with a few trains, many in this hobby make a decade long commitment to construct a working layout "system".
"Obsolesence" is mostly in peoples heads if they own a working system they can maintain themselves - like my Advance Cab Control. It is only obsolete when I decide it no longer meets my needs.
The only other form of true obsolesence comes when I can no longer aquire service parts for a system that otherwise still meets my needs.
Some of you may like the constant change of "new stuff". Personally I find most of it wasteful and pointless - until something truely does something that has not been done and that ability truely provides a benefit.
I don't like spending money to constantly replace things that are, or should be, still working fine. But more importantly, on the 1000 sq ft, 8 scales miles of track, 8 trains running at once layout, I don't like spending time doing things over again - regardless of money.
So it may not seem like a big deal to some of you to replace three or four DCC decoders with Bluerail decoders in the locos you drag to the club or dable with on your 4x8, but before I put decoders/recievers in 135 locos, I'm going to be sure it will be a system that will last a couple decades at minimum.....
Your premise is flawed. Dead Rail and Blue Rail are not designed to replace existing DC or DCC. They are designed to add to your existing systems. Both can be run at the same time as DC or DCC without any interfearance.
How many locos do you need to operate at the same time. Blue Rail will run many locos at the same time with different controllers.
Bluetooth devices are easy to pick up on E Bay. Cell phones that don't work as cell phones can still work as a bluetooth device. They are pretty cheap. Cheap tablets are out there too.
Bluetooth will continue to be backwards compatible.
You can't get much easier or cost effective than the system from BlueRail trains. Wether using track power or battery power it is a pretty easy and efficient way to get into controlling trains.
Dead Rail and Blue Rail are not for everybody. Many will still use DC or DCC.
Now about cleaning track. I have a friend that is building a big DCC layout. He will have one Dead Rail loco that will pull a cleaning train. Good idea.
There are two schools of thought on charging batteries. One is through the rail, but this complicates things. The other is to have a removable battery. If you do that, you can use a much smaller battery and simply switch it out when the charge runs down. The other is to put a charging jack somewhere on the loco. Just plug in to charge.
Personally, I don't support charging through the rails.
If you use the entire layout to charge the battery, why do you need a battery? Battery power is designed to replace track power
If you charge through the rails, it is no longer Dead Rail. There is no need to take a shell off a loco.
I do Dead Rail Installs and simply put a charging jack that is hidden but easily accessable. Plug in the charger and hit start.
DoughlessNo, it won't cause a short in the traditional sense, but since the wheels will now be picking up the current from the opposite sides, won't that impact the battery? You can't charge a battery when the negative side is receiving positive current can you?
Simple on-board circuitry can do the conversions for DC or AC. DCC on the rails would be a simple and obvious choice. (Only the DCC waveform for power, you obviously wouldn't need the DCC commands if all the locos had batteries and direct radio such as Bluetooth, WiFi, or 900 MHz.)
Edit: Bluerail's and others' boards already contain the logic to internally switch DC polarity (although not in the right location for recharging) since they allow engines to run in forward and reverse no matter what the DC polarity is beneath them.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
cuyama Doughless If you used the entire layout for charging the battery, wouldn't reversing loops still pose a polarity issue? The train would be traversing the layout in the opposite direction. Reverse loops (and frogs) can be unpowered in dead rail -- if the rest of the layout is powered, the batteries will have plenty of opportunity to recharge. It’s a shame that the dead rail suppliers generally aren't addressing this to date, it makes much more sense than disassembling the loco.
Doughless If you used the entire layout for charging the battery, wouldn't reversing loops still pose a polarity issue? The train would be traversing the layout in the opposite direction.
Reverse loops (and frogs) can be unpowered in dead rail -- if the rest of the layout is powered, the batteries will have plenty of opportunity to recharge.
It’s a shame that the dead rail suppliers generally aren't addressing this to date, it makes much more sense than disassembling the loco.
Not the reverse loop per se, I mean the loco will be heading in the opposite direction on the track heading/exiting the reverse loop. No, it won't cause a short in the traditional sense, but since the wheels will now be picking up the current from the opposite sides, won't that impact the battery? You can't charge a battery when the negative side is receiving positive current can you?
It seems to me you still have to dpdt or autoreverse the track in order to keep charging a battery over an entire layout if it has reverse loops, or to prevent ruining a battery.
DoughlessIf you used the entire layout for charging the battery, wouldn't reversing loops still pose a polarity issue? The train would be traversing the layout in the opposite direction.
passenger1955 rrebell Bluerail is not compatable with on board battery charging though the rails and it is not high on their list it seems. It could be done but would take even more space than the dead rail setup takes now, so I don't see that happening anytime soon. Here is a page on the BlueRail site showing an implementation of an S scale loco with a BlueRail board that operates Dead Rail and charges through the rails: http://bluerailtrains.com/2016/07/11/user-showcase-darby-marriott/ The page contains a diagram showing how to wire it up. Pretty straight forward.
rrebell Bluerail is not compatable with on board battery charging though the rails and it is not high on their list it seems. It could be done but would take even more space than the dead rail setup takes now, so I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Bluerail is not compatable with on board battery charging though the rails and it is not high on their list it seems. It could be done but would take even more space than the dead rail setup takes now, so I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Here is a page on the BlueRail site showing an implementation of an S scale loco with a BlueRail board that operates Dead Rail and charges through the rails:
The page contains a diagram showing how to wire it up. Pretty straight forward.
If you used the entire layout for charging the battery, wouldn't reversing loops still pose a polarity issue? The train would be traversing the layout in the opposite direction.
tstage Correct. Having to remove the shell each time you recharged the batteries would not be particularly appealing to me. I do like the powered terminal track idea posed by Randy. Refueling...just like the prototype. Tom
Correct. Having to remove the shell each time you recharged the batteries would not be particularly appealing to me. I do like the powered terminal track idea posed by Randy. Refueling...just like the prototype.
tstage So that would answer my prior question (posted waaaaaay back when on the other thread and was never answered) about how conveniently the batteries would be recharged. Thanks, Sheldon. Tom
So that would answer my prior question (posted waaaaaay back when on the other thread and was never answered) about how conveniently the batteries would be recharged. Thanks, Sheldon.
Duh, you need something to charge the batteries. Maybe what is needed is a charging station for the locomotives. Otherwise, you will be needing to constantly open up the locomotive to remove the battery for charging.
Did I get that right?
Thanks, Randy. That's quite helpful. And I like the idea of having it at the terminal tracks. That makes an op session more realistic.
Along those line I would expect - like a tablet or laptop - that battery power levels could be easily monitored with a smart phone or BT throttle...
Usually with a plug and socket, like some small RC aircraft. Unplug the battery from the receiver and plug it in to the charger.
The NWSL Stanton system lists a charger circuit, and I beleive Tam Valley's DRS has that as an option as well, which allows charging from the rails. Will it fit in HO? It's certainly possibly, given that Li-ion battery packs have (or should have) some regualion corcuitry in them to begin with. The charger circuit is a single 8 pin surface mount IC the size of a speck plus a few discrete components to adjust the settings. No reason this can't fit in HO and larger. Like I mentioned before, with such a system you just power the 'easy' parts of the track, and fully insulate 'problem' areas like reverse loops and don't worry about frog power. Engine terminal parking tracks are an ideal place to have powered for recharging. Theoretically you could op til you drop without the batteries going dead.
Okay, then I'll ask the question again:
And I'm being both positive and negative here. You can't talk about batteries without being both. Seriously, I am interested in learning about the advantages.