maxman You would think they would state something on their website. Maybe didn't get the roundtoit yet.
You would think they would state something on their website. Maybe didn't get the roundtoit yet.
An easy google search would have gotten it for them...
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Pete Steinmetz 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 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..... Sheldon 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.
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.
Rich
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.....
Sheldon
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.
Pete, respectfully, why is my premise flawed? Because it does not match up with how you want to run trains?
I don't want three, or four, or five, different kinds of control devices on my layout.
I don't want anything with a touch screen.
My mainline has detection and signaling and operates under CTC control, I don't just drive trains around willynilly like a Sunday drive in the country.
I can run eight trains at once, if I have eight operators..........or.........I have display operation designed into the layout for 4 trains.
I currently use Aristo Craft 10 channel Train Engineer radio throttles - they work great.
With a dispatcher on duty, the engineers do not have to do anything but run their loco - and obey the signals.........or, without a dispatcher, cabs are assigned to track sections by pushbuttons (not toggle or rotary switches) at tower panels as operators walk around with their trains.
Signaling, cab control, one button turnout routing, CTC and ATC are fully intergrated into one system with radio throttles.
Yes - Automatic Train Control - if you run a red signal, your train just stops - you will not, can not, be picked up by someone else's throttle.
And did I mention the interlockings that actually lock out turnout operation while trains are in the interlocking - just like the prototype?
What is flawed is that everyone talking about this thinks they know how others want to run their trains........
Sheldon:
It sounds like you have a well designed and well thought out layout. I bet is is very much fun to operate.
The flawed part I was refering to was thinking that people are going to convert from their current systems to these new systems, like BlueRail and others..
These new systems are really designed as an add on or addition to an operators current system.
I run a mix of DCC and battery power, although I run the battery power more often.
If someone is building a layout from scratch, then they should consider these new systems. I know quite a few guys building new layouts that are going Dead Rail. No one brand is dominating. Each brand has features that appeal to groups of modelers.
I know a guy that is firmly committed to NCE DCC that is building a new and. large layout. He will have one dead rail loco that will pull a cleaning train. HO Scale.
I know another guy that is building an On30 layout. He is powering a few trunouts in hard to reach locations. His structures will be lit, possibly with battery power. All his locos run on battery power.
Lots of ways of running trains.
Pete
I was waiting fo a nasty reply.
First, we are the Dead Rail Society. That means no power to the rails. There are people that successfully charge through the rails. I charge other ways.
If you powered your track so you could charge while running, why do you need a battery? A battery would smooth out the power like the Current Keepers do.
Our Dead Rail Society is there as an information source for Dead Rail systems and accessories. We hope it enables people to compare various systems. We try not to favor one over the other because there are so many different sutuations. There is a Facebook Group and a Yahoo Group where there is a lot of experience. New people are encouraged to ask questions.
We don't have a monopoly on anything. We are just the guys that put in the work to create a web site and groups where people interested in Dead Rail can get information.
As I have said before, Dead Rail is not for everybody. It is a growing segment of the hobby, but it will not replace DC or DCC or whatever other systems are out there. Think of it as an addition to existing systems.
Kudos to you, Pete, for a very informative and balanced reply.
Alton Junction
Pete Steinmetz Sheldon: It sounds like you have a well designed and well thought out layout. I bet is is very much fun to operate. The flawed part I was refering to was thinking that people are going to convert from their current systems to these new systems, like BlueRail and others.. These new systems are really designed as an add on or addition to an operators current system. I run a mix of DCC and battery power, although I run the battery power more often. If someone is building a layout from scratch, then they should consider these new systems. I know quite a few guys building new layouts that are going Dead Rail. No one brand is dominating. Each brand has features that appeal to groups of modelers. I know a guy that is firmly committed to NCE DCC that is building a new and. large layout. He will have one dead rail loco that will pull a cleaning train. HO Scale. I know another guy that is building an On30 layout. He is powering a few trunouts in hard to reach locations. His structures will be lit, possibly with battery power. All his locos run on battery power. Lots of ways of running trains. Pete
Pete, again respectfully, It seems to me you have not followed this whole discussion, or you would know I have no expectations of others converting from existing systems - you should read the whole thread - or at least all of my posts.....
In the beginning of this discussion I pointed out repeatedly that it is unlkely that most folks would convert from sytems that currently meet their needs.
I was refering ONLY to myself, and what I might do, or what would cause me to consider "adding" some sort of command control system to my existing system.
Having a number of friends in large scale, and using Aristo throttles in HO, I am very familiar with "dead rail", just not personally interested in it for HO, no plans to have to seperately charge 135 locos, thank you.
Again, I have no interest in a cobbled up mix of control systems on my layout.
So my thinking is not flawed at all, even by your standard, I too don't expect people to "convert". Had you read the whole thread before making assumptions you would have known that.
But even at that, I don't see where in the post you qouted that I suggested that other people would "change over" - I was clearly only refering to my situation, and my layout, and my goals and needs, and what I might do.
I do think direct radio is the future of command control - dead rail or otherwise.
Pete Steinmetz If you powered your track so you could charge while running, why do you need a battery? A battery would smooth out the power like the Current Keepers do. Pete
Other than the keep alive feature, this is a question I've been asking myself. My layout has a 35 foot long bus wire, a few feeders, and 2 parking stubs with toggle switches to kill the power. Very simple wiring. No advantage to operating on dead rail (or DCC for that matter, other than sound).
I model a short line, where I run ops like it does, and I don't even have to compress train length. Simple ops, simple wiring, but highly detailed models that I would want to charge through the rails, if I used battery. I would never pop off the shell of a highly detailed model to remove and charge the battery, nor would I want an ugly charging recepticle messing up the accuracy of the model. Personally, I would charge the locos on the layout prior to operating...but as you point out...why bother having battery power, if the layout wiring is so simple to begin with.
For many others with more complex operations, simple wiring to the layout to charge the battery through the rails might eliminate some of the complexity they currently have now, blocks, power districts, reverse loops, etc. While not purely dead rails, their layout would operate the same as dead rail. That might be an advantage for them. But for a simple layout, I don't see a clear advantage for dead rail considering I would want to run some sort of wiring to the layout tracks to charge the battery. And "some sort of wiring" is basically all I need to run the layout now on good ol' DC.
Keep in mind, many modelers never touch their models after removing them from the box and placing them on the layout. The idea of having to frequently handle locos to remove or charge a battery would be a deal-killer for them, IMO.
- Douglas
Yes, constantly handling equipment is deal killer for me.......times 135........
As is trailing cars deticated to batteries, etc.
Now in O scale or larger, battery power would have my attention. But l still like the idea of simply pulling tne train into a charging area and charging through the rails, it need not be all or most of the trackage.
As for dirty track, I've been at this since the days of brass rail, even then dirty was not a big problem. But then again, all my recent layouts have been build in well controlled, clean environments.........
Through the rail charging elminates most of the issues on both sides of the dead rail argument - no constant touching smalls cale delicate locos and/or removing shells, and no difficult wiring. You simply leave off the wiring in places that would be complex, like reverse loops. And no worrying about running wires to power turnout frogs. No need for multiple blocks, all the powered sections can be drivien from one single fixed power supply. S simple keep alive capacitor is not enough foor all that (dead frogs maybe, but not for pulling a train around a complete reverse loop). It gets a little bit dirty, so what? There's plenty of track. But I will add that I NEVER clean my track, nor do I have to, and my trains always run fine. I don't own a cleaning car of any brand, and I don't have a 'cleaning train' that needs to run. Even the club modular layout - most of the time someone calls for the "cleaning train" to be run it's not the mainline rails that are dirty, it's that the older sections still use short fitter track pieces to bridge the gaps and those joiners are worn and there are 2-3" dead sections between one module and the next - which is why everyone runs at least 2 powered units on diesl trains, even when 1 can easily pull the train. That is the one real annoying aspect remaining witht he layout - the poor contact and the fact that no 2 fitter sections are the same, so they have to always be bundled and marked after each show.
So my question to the dead rail people is, why would I want to constantly picking up my models and moving them off-layout to charge up or replace the battery? As someone who is planning protypical operations, having a specific car that must always be coupled behind the loco is also completely out. Until that magic battery that both fits along with the electronics in any HO loco like you can with a DCC decoder AND can run continuously for say 8 hours, small scale dead rail is almost a non-starter. Large scale - I do have plans to do some outdoor G gauge at some point, and I'm not even considering trying to power the rails and keep them clean. Battery and direct R/C all the way. At the opposite end of the scale - while there are products today that do fit in HO scale, what about N and Z? For full freedom of operation it's either a complex DC system to get away from constant toggling to assign cabs, or DCC, which is small enough to fit in even Z scale locos.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Doughless Pete Steinmetz If you powered your track so you could charge while running, why do you need a battery? A battery would smooth out the power like the Current Keepers do. Pete (Keep in mind, many modelers never touch their models after removing them from the box and placing them on the layout. The idea of having to frequently handling locos to remove or charge a battery would be a deal-killer for them, IMO)
(Keep in mind, many modelers never touch their models after removing them from the box and placing them on the layout. The idea of having to frequently handling locos to remove or charge a battery would be a deal-killer for them, IMO)
Exactly. I would liken it to having to dismantling my Winbook tablet in order to remove the battery every time I wanted to charge it up. And, while it does have a charging port, I don't see that as a viable option for a nicely detailed HO steamer or diesel unit.
Like a cradle for a cell phone - a charging track is the only way I would consider dead rail for my HO-scale layout. The battery size and price would also have to shrink considerably.
Tom
ATLANTIC CENTRALYes, constantly handling equipment is deal killer for me.......times 135........
This is the point that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet - "times 135". An operating session on my layout, which is not at all large, will consist of running at least 10 trains. All of them will have at least 2 locomotives, many will have 3. All the trains originate and terminate on hidden staging tracks.
I cannot imagine how off-layout charging would be even almost tolerable for me with 25 or so locos involved in an operating session. Even in the scenario where you have the locomotive fueling facility (which I don't have on my layout) as a charging station, 30 minutes for each of 25 locos, which we now hear is not a realistic estimate, would not be reasonable. With 135 locomotives, there is no chance this could be successful.
Randy's suggestion of charging while running over most of the layout is the only way this could work for a modeler running multi-train operating sessions.
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.
Pete Steinmetz Blue Rail will run many locos at the same time with different controllers.
But, as mentioned, currently does not support consists.
Pete SteinmetzYou can't get much easier or cost effective than the system from BlueRail trains.
At $75 per locomotive, for more than few it is not cost effective.
carl425 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes, constantly handling equipment is deal killer for me.......times 135........ This is the point that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet - "times 135". An operating session on my layout, which is not at all large, will consist of running at least 10 trains. All of them will have at least 2 locomotives, many will have 3. All the trains originate and terminate on hidden staging tracks. I cannot imagine how off-layout charging would be even almost tolerable for me with 25 or so locos involved in an operating session. Even in the scenario where you have the locomotive fueling facility (which I don't have on my layout) as a charging station, 30 minutes for each of 25 locos, which we now hear is not a realistic estimate, would not be reasonable. With 135 locomotives, there is no chance this could be successful. Randy's suggestion of charging while running over most of the layout is the only way this could work for a modeler running multi-train operating sessions.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Yes, constantly handling equipment is deal killer for me.......times 135........
Carl,
In a case like yours the most logical solution would be for the hidden staging tracks to become the charging area.
That said, what kind of current draw would we be talking about if you had 25 locomotives all charging simultaneously? Is that feasible and safe? Or, would you need to have a limit of how many locomotives could be charged at the same time? Perhaps it would require dedicated charging "blocks"?
tstageIn a case like yours the most logical solution would be for the hidden staging tracks to become the charging area.
That could be a reasonable minimum, but I'd still prefer Randy's idea of charging off all the track that's convenient to provide power to.
tstageThat said, what kind of current draw would we be talking about if you had 25 locomotives all charging simultaneously?
I assume that question is for the more electronically skilled than me, but as I understand it, the current required depends on how long you are willing to wait for the batteries to charge.
Guys:
It seems like there is a majority of people that are telling us why something doesn't work or finding fault.
I wonder how many of these modelers have ever tried Dead Rail?
Charging through the track is certainly a way to charge batteries. It is more complicated than plugging in a loco, but it will charge the batteries. I just choose not to charge this way. Personal preference.
At this point I'm going to remove myself from this discussion. There have been very few questions asked that I can answer. I came on here to hopefully answer questions, but instead of asking, many posts were telling me how to do it or how not to do it..
For those that are interested in Dead Rail, you are welcome to visit the following sites.
www.bluerailtrains.com
www.deadrailsociety.com
deadrailsociety-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Facebook Dead Rail Society
There is much information and questions are answered.
I will say, there is zero tollerance for nastyness or negative attacks. Nobody wants to know why it won't work, because for most it is working fine for them or they are trying to determine if Dead Rail is they way they should go.
There are people that charge through the rails and they will offer advice and their experience in a positive manner.
Peace, Out
Something not brought up yet about dead rail is battery life and continuing expense. How long do they last? Not just in usage, but just sitting on the shelf? I still own locomotives I bought 25 years ago (Atlas, brass, etc.). I still have my first DCC decoder that was installed in 2000. In 15 or 25 years (or more), will a battery from today still take a charge? I rather doubt it.
When it comes time to replace it, will one be able to replace like for like? Even Digitrax and Soundtraxx had to cancel existing product lines and quickly replace them because basic components were no longer available. If one has designed a battery installation to fit the confines of a loco (like in a fuel tank or small tender) and that form factor (at the same electrical ratings) is no longer around, then what?
How much do they cost? If one has 50 engines with batteries, and they need replacing every 5 or 10 years, that will add up pretty quickly even at $5 ea.
Paul A. Cutler III
Threads about control systems are always touchy.
Just like choosing to model the NYC instead of the PRR, or a one-horse shortline over a busy Class I, the choice to use one control system over another is often a matter of choice. Its not logic, its a personal want.
Bluetooth is fine. Battery powered dead rail is fine. As is DCC and DC. If a person makes a top priority out of having the rails absolutely dead, then they will make other choices about the hobby in a way that satisfies that priority. If they want to make using their current smartphone as a throttle a top priority, then they will make other choices in a way that satisfies that priority. Same for DCC and DC. Same for signaling. Same for modeling the NYC. Same for modeling a one-horse shortline. Some "wants" are more important than others, and decisions about lesser priorities are made in a way that satisfies the top priorities.
In that vain, I understand the point of the thread. Its for those who "want" to use BlueTooth and want to discuss it. Or, "want" to use dead rail.
But understand, when advancements in technology are presented as being a more logical way of controlling trains, others will be quick to point out why it makes no sense for them.
Consider the possibility that adopting new technology and new ways of doing things doesn't make a person more logical, more open-minded, or more progressive than those who don't. Some people like to mess with new technology because they find it fun. I like to model a one-horse shortline because its fun, and I wouldn't present my choice as being anything else other than that.
Pete Steinmetz Guys: It seems like there is a majority of people that are telling us why something doesn't work or finding fault. I wonder how many of these modelers have ever tried Dead Rail? Charging through the track is certainly a way to charge batteries. It is more complicated than plugging in a loco, but it will charge the batteries. I just choose not to charge this way. Personal preference. At this point I'm going to remove myself from this discussion. There have been very few questions asked that I can answer. I came on here to hopefully answer questions, but instead of asking, many posts were telling me how to do it or how not to do it.. For those that are interested in Dead Rail, you are welcome to visit the following sites. www.bluerailtrains.com www.deadrailsociety.com deadrailsociety-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Facebook Dead Rail Society There is much information and questions are answered. I will say, there is zero tollerance for nastyness or negative attacks. Nobody wants to know why it won't work, because for most it is working fine for them or they are trying to determine if Dead Rail is they way they should go. There are people that charge through the rails and they will offer advice and their experience in a positive manner. Peace, Out Pete
I know exactly how you feel Pete!
Bucksco Pete Steinmetz Guys: It seems like there is a majority of people that are telling us why something doesn't work or finding fault. I wonder how many of these modelers have ever tried Dead Rail? Charging through the track is certainly a way to charge batteries. It is more complicated than plugging in a loco, but it will charge the batteries. I just choose not to charge this way. Personal preference. At this point I'm going to remove myself from this discussion. There have been very few questions asked that I can answer. I came on here to hopefully answer questions, but instead of asking, many posts were telling me how to do it or how not to do it.. For those that are interested in Dead Rail, you are welcome to visit the following sites. www.bluerailtrains.com www.deadrailsociety.com deadrailsociety-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Facebook Dead Rail Society There is much information and questions are answered. I will say, there is zero tollerance for nastyness or negative attacks. Nobody wants to know why it won't work, because for most it is working fine for them or they are trying to determine if Dead Rail is they way they should go. There are people that charge through the rails and they will offer advice and their experience in a positive manner. Peace, Out Pete I know exactly how you feel Pete!
But of course it was OK for him to tell me what was "wrong" with my thinking.......even when he obviously had not read the whole thread.
No offense but the thread was originally started to discuss the positive aspects of bluetooth control and has gone south like a previous thread. Instead of discussing how it CAN work the thread keeps being diverted to why it CAN'T. The gentleman who just left is a good example of someone trying to infuse some practical knowledge (gained by use of Bluetooth and battery power) being turned off by folks who have never used either telling him why it can't possibly work well. It is a shame .....
If he can't take constructive criticism then I guess it is better for him to go back to a heavily moderated forum where no one can disagree instead of posting here. No one is saying it can't or won't work. Personal preference, but I'm reasonably certain there are more modelers who would rather NOT handle their locos excessively, certainly not every few hours when the batteries need a recharge.
All other command control systems, all the way back to the very first ASTRAC, developed from a desire for more realistic operation. Not for how gee whiz it all was, but to operate more like the real thing without artificial limits imposed by electric power requirements. Later developments created straight DC systems that could do practically anything without modifications to the locos and without operators having to perform unrealistic functions like switch block toggles. For any new system to make decent inroads, these issues have to be addressed. Otherwise it will be stuck (for smaller scales) with the 'round and round' types.
Look, if you have a better moustrap, I'm all for it. Having to pick up every loco to plug it in to a charger or swap a battery pack is a deal breaker. $75 per locomotive and it doesn't even include sound (on board - choo choo sounds coming from my throttle sounds like one of those battery operated toys, even if the sound is high quality) is a deal breaker. Not being able to MU is a deal breaker. No one is saying it can't be done or is impossible, these are just things that need to change to broaden the appeal of the product.
Bucksco No offense but the thread was originally started to discuss the positive aspects of bluetooth control and has gone south like a previous thread. Instead of discussing how it CAN work the thread keeps being diverted to why it CAN'T. The gentleman who just left is a good example of someone trying to infuse some practical knowledge (gained by use of Bluetooth and battery power) being turned off by folks who have never used either telling him why it can't possibly work well. It is a shame .....
Jack, I will say it again, it does work, but its limitations make it not useful to me.
My position all along is that if they fix the limitations, I might be interested.
But I will repeat, no consisting, limited number of locos, these are non starters for me.
But again, I am very interested in the development of direct radio command control - bluetooth or otherwise.
Bucksco Instead of discussing how it CAN work the thread keeps being diverted to why it CAN'T.
Instead of discussing how it CAN work the thread keeps being diverted to why it CAN'T.
rrinker No one is saying it can't or won't work...
No one is saying it can't or won't work...
Randy,
This conversation reminds me of the following Far Side cartoon:
It doesn't matter how many times you try reiterating your point above ad nauseum, all a few posters will ever hear you saying is "can't work" and "won't work". That's the real shame of this thread...
tstage rrinker No one is saying it can't or won't work... It doesn't matter how many times you try reiterating your point above ad nauseum, all a few posters will ever hear you saying is "can't work" and "won't work". That's the real shame of this thread...
I don't know why, but system of train control seems to be an emotional thing really. Its like there is a huge investment made and people need to be validated about their choice. All control systems work. Depending upon preferences and tolerances, some work better than others.
That is what discussion is about, to examine in what circumstances one might work better than others. In a public forum, there are going to be questions about what happens when this circumstance or that circumstance prevails.
But to have to carry a belief that one system works better than all others in all circumstances seems to involve a level of misplaced devotion towards something that really doesn't matter, IMO.
rrinkerIf he can't take constructive criticism then I guess it is better for him to go back to a heavily moderated forum where no one can disagree instead of posting here.
I'm sorry, Randy, but this one time I must disagree with you. The title of this thread was "for those ... who use it and would like to discuss it". From what I can see the majority of the posters here are not using the system. There is already another thread where the non-users or potential users can ask questions and/or debate the various merits or shortcomings of BlueRail. I don't see why we can't show some respect for the OP.
So far as I'm concerned the moderator(s) should go through and delete any of the posts in this thread from a non-user or move them to the other thread. If that shrinks the posts from five pages down to one, so be it.
BuckscoNo offense but the thread was originally started to discuss the positive aspects of bluetooth control and has gone south like a previous thread.
Maybe you'd get a better reception over in the garden railroading forum where it's large scale, they generally have smaller loco fleets and don't mind handling the equipment.
maxmanSo far as I'm concerned the moderator(s) should go through and delete any of the posts in this thread from a non-user or move them to the other thread.
The moderator has already commented on your suggestion.
Steven Otte Folks, let's make something clear. The purpose of the Forums is to discuss topics concerning model trains. "Discuss" means "to exchange ideas and opinions back and forth." Even if those opinions are in opposition to each other. As long as people remain civil and on-topic, this thread will remain open. Stop reporting posts as "abuse" just because they disagree with you. [Addendum: Anyone attempting to get this thread shut down by deliberately going off-topic or goading others will be dealt with. Harshly.]
Folks, let's make something clear.
The purpose of the Forums is to discuss topics concerning model trains. "Discuss" means "to exchange ideas and opinions back and forth." Even if those opinions are in opposition to each other.
As long as people remain civil and on-topic, this thread will remain open.
Stop reporting posts as "abuse" just because they disagree with you.
[Addendum: Anyone attempting to get this thread shut down by deliberately going off-topic or goading others will be dealt with. Harshly.]
maxman The title of this thread was "for those ... who use it and would like to discuss it". From what I can see the majority of the posters here are not using the system. There is already another thread where the non-users or potential users can ask questions and/or debate the various merits or shortcomings of BlueRail. I don't see why we can't show some respect for the OP.
The title of this thread was "for those ... who use it and would like to discuss it". From what I can see the majority of the posters here are not using the system. There is already another thread where the non-users or potential users can ask questions and/or debate the various merits or shortcomings of BlueRail. I don't see why we can't show some respect for the OP.
I don't disagree that respect should be shown to the OP, and that users of Bluetooth should be the primary posters here. But I asked some simple questions in the hopes that users would help me understand things about Bluetooth..and later dead rail. And the answers were actually positive towards Bluetooth and dead rail.
Sometimes questions brings out the positive. And we don't know if the answer will shed positive or negative light onto the subject until we ask the question.
The thread would not have turned if it wasn't for objective questions and comments about the usefulness of new technology in certain applications being treated as heresy, which I find all too common in the tech arena, BTW. Its taken a bit too seriously for my taste.
Fairly early on in this "discussion", I asked the question how many (participating in this forum, not all over the world) are actually using BlueRail or intend to use it. The question remained unanswered. From the contributions I could make out that only the OP is using it and a few may have an academic interest in it. Dead rail operation drew more attention, but a real discussion was as much not welcomed as with the topic of Bluetooth operation. In fact, the way the thread was started, was already a clear sign that anyone having a different opinion should better stay away.
What an utterly arrogant attitude! No wonder this thread went down south, like the previous one!
Here is my comment on BlueRail and Dead Rail!
BlueRail is fantastic and if you don´t like it and see its potential, you are a fool and are rightfully excluded from this discussion!
Dead Rail is fantastic and if you don´t like it and see its potential, you are a fool and are rightfully excluded from this discussion!
Oh yeah? I don´t think both technologies stand a chance against conventional DC/DCC with power and signals supplied through the rails. They will remain a niche.
To the OP - better move to a forum where your ideas will always get the applause you are looking for! In this forum, we still discuss in the true meaning of the word, but always come to an agreement, if only to disagree!