BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL BlueRail will continue to attract small layout guys, new tech heads, etc, and that is good. But until a full featured, well tested, more affordable system is in place, it will remain a niche product, in a niche hobby. Sheldon,I would love to try BlueRail on a test layout and see what the fuss is all about but, as far as replacing my Tech 6 with BlueRail that's not going to happen because the majority of my engines is DC but, still I would like some hands on experience with BlueRail technology just to fill my curiosity .
ATLANTIC CENTRAL BlueRail will continue to attract small layout guys, new tech heads, etc, and that is good. But until a full featured, well tested, more affordable system is in place, it will remain a niche product, in a niche hobby.
Sheldon,I would love to try BlueRail on a test layout and see what the fuss is all about but, as far as replacing my Tech 6 with BlueRail that's not going to happen because the majority of my engines is DC but, still I would like some hands on experience with BlueRail technology just to fill my curiosity .
I understand, some guys like to "dabble". I got all that out of my system at a young age because I worked in the hobby shop were you could "play" with everything new as it came along.
Now I know what I want to accomplish and I am focused on that.
I still believe some form of direct radio would be better than DCC, elimiating most of the under layout infrastructure and not sending the control signal through the rails. But unless that architecture is somehow DCC compatible, and NMRA supported, it is not likely to have much impact.
Sheldon
Some people tend to forget, that providing power to the track is only part of the game of wiring a layout. Illuminating buildings and billboards, streetlights and last but not least providing power to switch motors require more wiring effort than necessary to wire a layout for DCC.
The only downside is one still has to clean the track, but gleaming helps to cut down on that as well.
I had a flip phone, very compact and not something I had to worry about anyone stealing. It had an acceptable camera and it made phone calls. I didn't have to worry about "using data" or any other smart phone issues.
But, the provider "upgraded" their system and gave me a smart phone anyway, because they had "obsoleted" the old phone, which was still perfectly serviceable. TurboTax has done the same thing - no longer supporting their full product for my Windows XP computer.
I would hate to invest in something to control my trains, knowing that forces beyond my control are already working to make part of the system obsolete.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
MisterBeasleyI would hate to invest in something to control my trains, knowing that forces beyond my control are already working to make part of the system obsolete.
Sir Madog Some people tend to forget, that providing power to the track is only part of the game of wiring a layout. Illuminating buildings and billboards, streetlights and last but not least providing power to switch motors require more wiring effort than necessary to wire a layout for DCC. The only downside is one still has to clean the track, but gleaming helps to cut down on that as well.
Ulrich, I'm not refering the activity of wiring the layout, I'm refering to the expense of base stations, wireless base unit receivers, boosters, circuit breakers, multiple power supplies and reversers that are required for large or medium sized layouts.
With track powered direct radio, rather than all that stuff, large layouts could be powered by multiple, simple regulated power supplies, possibly with reversers built in. A considerable reduction in both wiring and expense. Small layouts would only need a simple power supply.
mbinsewi I've been following this enless thread since it started, and I have a question. I have a long stretch of track that is totally hidden under scenery, foam, and cardboard. Will blue rail "find" my loco in there? Mike.
I've been following this enless thread since it started, and I have a question. I have a long stretch of track that is totally hidden under scenery, foam, and cardboard. Will blue rail "find" my loco in there?
Mike.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Sir Madog Some people tend to forget, that providing power to the track is only part of the game of wiring a layout. Illuminating buildings and billboards, streetlights and last but not least providing power to switch motors require more wiring effort than necessary to wire a layout for DCC. The only downside is one still has to clean the track, but gleaming helps to cut down on that as well. Ulrich, I'm not refering the activity of wiring the layout, I'm refering to the expense of base stations, wireless base unit receivers, boosters, circuit breakers, multiple power supplies and reversers that are required for large or medium sized layouts. With track powered direct radio, rather than all that stuff, large layouts could be powered by multiple, simple regulated power supplies, possibly with reversers built in. A considerable reduction in both wiring and expense. Small layouts would only need a simple power supply. Sheldon
MisterBeasley I had a flip phone, very compact and not something I had to worry about anyone stealing. It had an acceptable camera and it made phone calls. I didn't have to worry about "using data" or any other smart phone issues. But, the provider "upgraded" their system and gave me a smart phone anyway, because they had "obsoleted" the old phone, which was still perfectly serviceable. TurboTax has done the same thing - no longer supporting their full product for my Windows XP computer. I would hate to invest in something to control my trains, knowing that forces beyond my control are already working to make part of the system obsolete.
Completely agreed, that's why I built my own. And the parts that do come from a "manufacturer" can be subsituted with something from someone else without change to the rest of the system should it become not serviceable.
As for turbotax, no thank you. For years now I have been using "Free Fillable Forms" an IRS service where all the forms are electronic. BUT, you have to actually know how to do your taxes........it does not walk you through it.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI understand, some guys like to "dabble". I got all that out of my system at a young age because I worked in the hobby shop were you could "play" with everything new as it came along.
Actually we live in a very fascinating modeling era as far as electronic wizardry.
I can recall trying a DigiTraxx Genesis DCC system at a DCC seminar. While I was highly impress with the UT-2 throttle the idea of having to add decoders turn me off back then. I settled for a MRC CM 20.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
rrebell I would say yes, they have operated at a 100' distance through 3 walls with no loss of signal.
I would say yes, they have operated at a 100' distance through 3 walls with no loss of signal.
Sorry, there is loss. There just isn't enough loss to stop it from operating correctly.
If the overlying scenery contains metal screen, or any other form of metal, the signal loss will be higher.
In a dead rail situation, the Bluetooth will increase battery draw in an effort to maintain signal through increased transmit power. You can see this on your smart phone as it tries to maintain a Bluetooth connection with your car once you get outside the car.
Fred W
The situation I have, and why I asked the original question, the hidden area is all covered with foam board, plastic and cardboard buildings, and the typical scenery stuff, like trees, ground foam, etc., no metal screening or metal of any kind. It's a stretch of about 9', completely covered.
Of course I'm not tearing out anything I have to run something I don't know anything about, and I don't have a tablet or smart phone (flip phone), and I was just curious if bluetooth would work, with any situation where the track (and loco) is completely hidden in long tunnels, and hidden staging areas.
My You Tube
BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL I understand, some guys like to "dabble". I got all that out of my system at a young age because I worked in the hobby shop were you could "play" with everything new as it came along. Actually we live in a very fascinating modeling era as far as electronic wizardry. I can recall trying a DigiTraxx Genesis DCC system at a DCC seminar. While I was highly impress with the UT-2 throttle the idea of having to add decoders turn me off back then. I settled for a MRC CM 20.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I understand, some guys like to "dabble". I got all that out of my system at a young age because I worked in the hobby shop were you could "play" with everything new as it came along.
Larry, I get it, but its just not my thing. I have this image in my head, and these drawings on paper, and parts of it already built, of how I want my complete layout to be.
I am on a single purpose mission to that end, and that end alone.
I understand that others do not see the fun in that. But for me it is great fun.
Sheldon,You don't need circuit breakers with DCC. You don't always need boosters. You don't always need multiple power supplies or automatic reversers. My 25' x 50' layout didn't need any of that, and I ran with up to 5 operators. My entire wiring plan was a pair of 14AWG wires 200' long and a 6-cond. Loconet cable with a Digitrax Zephyr, a UR91 radio receiver and a wireless throttle. It doesn't get much simpler than that.
The real expense in any onboard control system really isn't in the layout hardware, it's in the locos. My above control system cost less than $600 (Zephyr/receiver/wireless throttle); I've spent twice that in decoders (at least).
There were those that still argue Apple computers are better than PCs. Some like DCS better than DCC. Old videophiles preferred Beta to VHS.
But all of these "better" systems made the same mistake. They made their systems proprietary. They were at the same time more expensive and less open to innovation by third-party vendors. No, DCC will remain the digital control system of the future. It will continue to improve, perhaps even incorporating a standard for smart phone control that lets us use existing decoders. (Don't we have that already?)
Paul3 Sheldon,You don't need circuit breakers with DCC. You don't always need boosters. You don't always need multiple power supplies or automatic reversers. My 25' x 50' layout didn't need any of that, and I ran with up to 5 operators. My entire wiring plan was a pair of 14AWG wires 200' long and a 6-cond. Loconet cable with a Digitrax Zephyr, a UR91 radio receiver and a wireless throttle. It doesn't get much simpler than that. The real expense in any onboard control system really isn't in the layout hardware, it's in the locos. My above control system cost less than $600 (Zephyr/receiver/wireless throttle); I've spent twice that in decoders (at least).
Paul, I can only go by the infrastructure that I have seen on a number of large DCC layouts. I realize there are a lot of factors and that sometimes that stuff is overdone.
And I agree, the cost problem with ANY command control system is decoders/receivers.
My layout is the perfect example. Even at $20 per decoder for no sound, I would be looking at $2600. And realisticly, $20 decoders are likely not the best choice for all of my motive power, so that cost could quickly double.
But I don't really have a dog in this fight, my pulse width modulated Aristo Train Engineer wireless radio throttles are all working just fine........its not broke, don't fix it.
I barely have $4,000 in 8 wireless throttles, CTC, signaling, redundant tower controls, single button turnout route control, working interlockings, ATC and more. DCC would only replace the wireless throttles, not provide any of those other features, cost more and add complexity - I have enough complexity....
How would it add complexity? Consisting for one. Right now I just couple them together and they run. No inputing long sequences of information to get a train moving.
Right now, look at train, pick up throttle, note single digit number on throttle, note location of train relative to track diagram, push one button on control panel, hold button on throttle, train moves.
I can't even remenber all those Digitrax button sequences, it makes me crazy.....I know, there are better DCC systems then Digitrax......
One question? A wireless throttle? How did the other 4 operators run their trains?
Wireless throttles, system can handle up to 99 if I remember right.
MisterBeasleyIt will continue to improve, perhaps even incorporating a standard for smart phone control that lets us use existing decoders. (Don't we have that already?)
Yes, we have!
Roco´s Z21 command station already includes a bluetooth interface which let´s you control your layout with your smart phone or tablet PC.
rrebell Wireless throttles, system can handle up to 99 if I remember right.
That is correct..Each locomotive has its own address except when consisted.
I punch in address 1025 for the GP9 assigned to the local while the yard master uses address 42 for the Alco S2 assigned to the yard.
The addresses is nothing more then the engine number on the cab and each throttle can use up to 99 addresses.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI am on a single purpose mission to that end, and that end alone. I understand that others do not see the fun in that. But for me it is great fun. Sheldon
Sheldon,That's my goal whenever I decide to build a new ISL even though it may be 1' x 12' or 1' x 8'.
Truth be told I use the DC mode on my Tech 6 far more then the DCC mode.
Yes, but you can only control two at a time with one Ditgarax throttle. 5 operators implies 5 trains moving at once. Five operatos requires five throttles.
Please remember people, I actually have considerable throttle time on the DCC layouts of my friends.......
And 5 operaters in ANY control system needs 5 throttles. I fail to see why that is a sticking point. DCC for YEARS now has been able to use smartphones as throttles, for those so inclined. YOU may not use a smartphone at all, but a lot of people do, that makes it essentially a free throttle, becuase the person with a smartphone is going to have the smartphone if they run trains or not.
The simpler engineer throttles are cost equivalent to other system walkaround wireless throttles, so it's not a price issue to get a throttle with real knobs and a direction switch, if smartphones aren't for you.
It's unclear to me how a device which incorporates decoder functions PLUS adds BT or some radio transceiver can EVER be cheaper than a device which is just a decoder. The incremental cost of fitting a large fleet of locos is going to exceed the cost of adding a booster or two to a DCC layout. Boosters are cheap, they're literally just 90-100 watt audio amplifiers. The expensive ones are always expensive because they add more features. The command station is where the brains and the IP of the controlling software is. That's the only expensive component and you only need 1 of those no matter how big a layout you have.
None of this direct radio or bluetooth stuff solves the most complex issue - fitting the decoder. Again I postulate it indeed may make it more difficult - the device you are installing needs to do what the decoder does PLUS have a radio. At BEST you may be able to get the same physical package microcontroller with BT built in, making it the same size, but typically the extra circuitry makes the device bigger. Like the early days of DCC, and pre-DCC command control systems where the boards were hard to fit to some locos due to space requirements. We now have sound decoders small enough to fit in a Grandt Line 23-ton boxcab. Do ANY of the direct radio systems even have a motor-only decoder that will fit in such a small loco? Let alone one with sound. Sure - EVENTUALLY they will get smaller. There are some physical limitations no mater how small the actual circuitry is though - direct radio at 2.4GHz, or 900 Mhz (even worse) requires at least a certain trace length to be used for an antenna.
Frankly, none of this is going anywhere until either the NMRA sets standards or the manufacturers agree amongst themselves to a de-facto standard. Until then, this is like the 70's and 80's command control - dozens of options, none that work with each other. No interchange of locos unless everyone onvolved uses the same system. Like it or not, DCC is a standard and I can take my locos to anyone's layout reardless of what brand system they use, and they will work. Just like back in the DC days.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
rrinkerFrankly, none of this is going anywhere until either the NMRA sets standards or the manufacturers agree amongst themselves to a de-facto standard.
And that's why Blue Rail may become a niche market. I don't think the hobby is ready to embrace R/C quite yet..
They already make tiny recievers that would probably work in a 25 tonner.
I'm going to try to make this short.
Paul remarked about the low cost and simplicity of his DCC infrastructure, (which has not been the experiance of my friends with large layouts). He noted 5 operators but only one throttle?
That's all I was asking?
The infrastructures of many LARGE DCC layouts I have seen are pretty involved, seems to me direct radio, once evolved to smaller and less expensive receivers, would have an advantage there. I could be wrong.
A great Engineer at GM/EMD once said - "parts left out cost nothing and cause no service problems".
But since I'm not really interested in suffing decoders or receivers of any kind in my locos at this point, I will shut up now.
BRAKIE rrinker Frankly, none of this is going anywhere until either the NMRA sets standards or the manufacturers agree amongst themselves to a de-facto standard. And that's why Blue Rail may become a niche market. I don't think the hobby is ready to embrace R/C quite yet.. They already make tiny recievers that would probably work in a 25 tonner.
rrinker Frankly, none of this is going anywhere until either the NMRA sets standards or the manufacturers agree amongst themselves to a de-facto standard.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL rrebell Wireless throttles, system can handle up to 99 if I remember right. Yes, but you can only control two at a time with one Ditgarax throttle. 5 operators implies 5 trains moving at once. Five operatos requires five throttles. Please remember people, I actually have considerable throttle time on the DCC layouts of my friends....... Sheldon
rrebell ATLANTIC CENTRAL rrebell Wireless throttles, system can handle up to 99 if I remember right. Yes, but you can only control two at a time with one Ditgarax throttle. 5 operators implies 5 trains moving at once. Five operatos requires five throttles. Please remember people, I actually have considerable throttle time on the DCC layouts of my friends....... Sheldon I was talking Train Engineer (which I currantly use), not ditgarax.
I was talking Train Engineer (which I currantly use), not ditgarax.
I use the Train Engineer as well, but I leave each throttle assigned to the same base station all the time. I have never used Aristos onboard Train Engineer. I have eight throttles and eight base stations, works great that way.
Yes, it is set up for 10 sub channels on ten channels, 10 x 10 = 100 actually.
But only the 10 primary channels work simultaneously, that's why I just use 8 base stations on different primary channels.
Sir MadogIf my ailing and failing memory is not playing tricks on m again, I think that´s exactly what I said 100+ posts ago.
You more then likely did and I forgot. My Short term memory is poor but,my long term seems to be holding up quite well. I can even remember the day and extact time I got married.
BRAKIE Sir Madog If my ailing and failing memory is not playing tricks on m again, I think that´s exactly what I said 100+ posts ago. You more then likely did and I forgot. My Short term memory is poor but,my long term seems to be holding up quite well. I can even remember the day and extact time I got married.
Sir Madog If my ailing and failing memory is not playing tricks on m again, I think that´s exactly what I said 100+ posts ago.
Sheldon,Let me put it this way; saying that DCC requires all these things you mentioned (breakers, boosters, etc.) is like saying that a DC layout control system like yours needs 100-amp relays. Will it work? Yep; but a tad overkill.
I think you're overestimating the cost of decoders. The $20 is pretty standard; for an 8-pin plug, add $3.00: http://www.digitrax.com/products/mobile-decoders/dh126ps/ For most board-replacement decoders, it's only $27: http://www.digitrax.com/products/mobile-decoders/dh165a0/ I know you're an steam-era guy, so it's not like you need ditchlights (IOW, extra functions). I don't know where you're getting the "double" cost from?
And yes, MU'ing does add more button pushing; however, the advantage is that engines can actually run together when they wouldn't in DC. Just try running a PA-1 with a DL-109 (something the NH did every day in the 1950's) on straight DC, both made by LL-Proto in HO. Top speed of the DL model is around 140 smph; the PA will coast like few other locos I've ever seen. With DCC, I can make these two very different running locos run together perfectly. With DC...not so much.
You don't always have to MU, BTW: with Digitrax, you can run your own pusher independantly of the head end. Twin throttles = twin control.
How did my other operators run? They brought their own throttles. We're all members of the same club, which also uses Digitrax. Also, the Zephyr is a throttle all by itself that was used in a yard situation. Generally, I had two freight yard operators, two local freight operators, and 1 passenger operator, but sometimes it was just two of us. With DCC, it can vary easily. Want more operators? Plug in another throttle. With DC, you have to get out the soldering iron.
If you really want to add more money to my inexpensive DCC system, then by all means do so. Say another three wireless DT400R throttles at $200 ea. My $575 system would have been $1175. I didn't actually spend that, and my layout didn't actually require it. But it could accomodate it.