Howard Zane That same type of regressive thinking...This kind anti-whateverisim...with some good old fashioned progressive thinking...
That same type of regressive thinking...This kind anti-whateverisim...with some good old fashioned progressive thinking...
And it's this same type of labeling that makes dialoguing about this sort of topic fruitless after a while. If you really aren't interested in what people's thoughts are (contrary to the last sentence in your original post), I would suggest that you don't ask the question. Pretty simple.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Guys,Here is a excellent reason to stay with DCC or convert to DCC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyvYTxGOaUQ
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Howard,If the point of this thread is to try and sell model railroading to the masses who have a fear of wiring by using battery power, then someone should build a 4x8 demo layout with simple DCC wiring to attract the newbies. Personally, I think it's a waste of time. I have found that few are inspired by the simple & easy things; they want to do the great things. They look at your layout, or Tony Koester's, or Rod Stewart's, and think, wow, I want to do that!
I highly doubt battery power will inspire newbies to the hobby. Especially considering that one has to be pretty skilled just to attempt it. There are many professional DCC installers who get paid good money to wire in a tiny little decoder. For a battery system, it's all that plus finding a way to install a battery.
RailPro is a far superior system for inspiration. A modern, touchscreen interface with direct radio control is more likely to get techie newbies into the hobby (and to stay) than using batteries.
Alright youse (I'm from Jersey) guys, I give up...........I just wanted to see what others thought due to the rather heated conversation I happened to fall into this weekend with other rail nuts. Personally if I were just getting into the hobby, I would look further into "dead rail" if it were available as I'm driven by the simplest and most efficient way from point A to point B. On the record, I'm a devoted fan of DCC and the NCE system I currently have.
Thanks for replies and interest. For a so-called well beaten subject, I saw many comments.
HZ
Paul3 Howard,If the point of this thread is to try and sell model railroading to the masses who have a fear of wiring by using battery power, then someone should build a 4x8 demo layout with simple DCC wiring to attract the newbies. Personally, I think it's a waste of time. I have found that few are inspired by the simple & easy things; they want to do the great things. They look at your layout, or Tony Koester's, or Rod Stewart's, and think, wow, I want to do that! I highly doubt battery power will inspire newbies to the hobby. Especially considering that one has to be pretty skilled just to attempt it. There are many professional DCC installers who get paid good money to wire in a tiny little decoder. For a battery system, it's all that plus finding a way to install a battery. RailPro is a far superior system for inspiration. A modern, touchscreen interface with direct radio control is more likely to get techie newbies into the hobby (and to stay) than using batteries.
Did I not say that earlier, that direct radio provides the best promise of simplified layout infrastructure...........
As for attracting new people, I'm not good at figuring out what others want, need or are attracted to, so I will leave that to the "social" types.
Sheldon
BRAKIE Guys,Here is a excellent reason to stay with DCC or convert to DCC. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyvYTxGOaUQ
No thanks, too big, to clunky, takes two hands to operate.
ATLANTIC CENTRALNo thanks, too big, to clunky, takes two hands to operate. Sheldon
Sheldon,That's cool but,when they are release I'm buying one. I seldom fall for the latest gimmick or fad but,for me that's a dream come true.
I won't use it as a hand held throttle because like you say its a tad to large and since I use magnets for uncoupling I will mount it.
BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL No thanks, too big, to clunky, takes two hands to operate. Sheldon Sheldon,That's cool but,when they are release I'm buying one. I seldom fall for the latest gimmick or fad but,for me that's a dream come true. I won't use it as a hand held throttle because like you say its a tad to large and since I use magnets for uncoupling I will mount it.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL No thanks, too big, to clunky, takes two hands to operate. Sheldon
Once again it just proves what I have been saying on here for years about control systems, "one size does NOT fit all".
I could not do switching from a fixed throttle on my layout, my industrial turnouts are ground throws and the industrial areas are too large for a fixed control location. And I don't use magnets for uncoupling......
Most of the thinking here (relating to OP's dead rail theme) involves trying to extend life and capacity of existing forms of batteries; trying to squeeze a few little round cell phone or hearing aid batteries into a very limited space.
When I pop the shell of my locomotives, it appears that about 60% of the space is a big lump of zinc and/or lead and/or bismuth and/or something. It is there mainly for stiffness and for weight. Just a big lump of mass. Why not use that mass for something? Rather than carving out space for a series of uniform little round metalic buttons, why not carve out a big block of cheese and install a rectangular prism battery that can hold a meaningful charge?
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
BRAKIEGuys,Here is a excellent reason to stay with DCC or convert to DCC. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyvYTxGOaUQ
Larry,
I have to agree it looks really neat.
I think it also illustrates an important decision we all make. And that is how low level do we a want to be in operating the trains. Personally, I'm not interested in simulating hooking up air hoses, testing the air, etc. needed to start the train. I prefer to operate on a more abstract level where the train moves and switches cars without all the nitty gritty that prototype railroaders must go through. It's why I also turn off the momentum and the sound most of the time.
Paul
Mighty interesting. It is big. But so are my "big" Digitrax and NCE throttles.
A few months ago, a guy let me run his big articulated. The throttle was some sort of "regular" throttle, but it had been configured to operate the loco pretty much like a real steam engine (he's a former railroader). So neat! It would drift when you shut the throttle down. Meaning, also, the sound "drifted". Open the throttle--loud exhaust. The brake worked nicely, too. It pretty much acted like and sounded like a simplified version of a real one. And it was fun to operate.
Having that experience, I AM interested in the throttle, above. Not committed, but interested.
Back on topic: I see no benefit for me in dead rail.
Ed
Most of today's youth, the potential sustainment of our hobby (if that's a desired outcome at all for them or for us still in it) are not builders. They're social objectors and affirmers who want items on shelves for purchase. They'll stand in line, with sleeping bag, all weekend long to be among the first with the latest iPhone. They don't really want to build things. Having to acquire all that is currently necessary for a model train experience is very costly, and well out of reach for 80% of them. That sobering thought severely limits the pool of newcomers. Of those, a very few will have the time and interest to design and build a model train layout. If it were more plug 'n play, I think it would greatly increase the pool...from 1/1000 to maybe 2/1000. With so many of us unwilling to convert what we have, with so few able to fund those who might bring to market these new and nifty devices, and with interest and support of modern rail dropping as it is, it will take one or more very motivated people to bring such things to market at a price many of us can afford.
Yet, if I were starting out today, and had such a system available, I'm pretty sure the choice would be easy. Pay $500 for a wireless/dead rail system and learn how to use it, or wire up rails in a satisfying system and learn how to use that. We all understand the limitations of DCC as it is currently done with powered rails. Whether or not it is strictly operator error or negligence or ignorance, the fact is that DCC is not fully satisfying or satisfactory to a lot of users because it relies on powered rails.
Robert,The problem with trying to use batteries to replace chassis mass is that batteries are mass produced by a 3rd party and always will be; they will not be custom created to conform to loco dimensions and model manufacturers are not going to tool up to make batteries just so they can get them to fit in locos...which come in all sizes and arrangements.
This means that one has to pick commercially available batteries that will fit around certain required things...like the motor, gear towers, and drive train. Not to mention the cab space. Yes, perhaps 60% of interior shell space is weight, but that weight is not uniform thickness. It has shaft galleys for the drive, holes for the trucks to rotate in, a large gap in the middle for the motor, shaved at the top for the electronics, a square cut out for the cab interior, and some kind of speaker enclosure in there, too.
It is possible that the fuel tank area on a typical diesel may be a place for a battery but that's about the only place.
No one will make custom batteries for a train set, but custom battery PACKS are made all the time. Standard cells are configured together to fit a phone or a electric razor or a power tool.
I don't think the idea is to bring out the product and expect the Tony Koesters of the world to convert their huge layouts. But it is coming up on Xmas. Remember the Tyco train sets? A loco, caboose, a few cars and a circle of track with a power pack. A young father buys that for his 8 year old for Christmas. He isn't thinking system compatibility and all the other caveats. He thinks: in this box is all I need to set up a train for little Billy to enjoy.
Now in the near future, what if dad sees a box of the new Tech-o wireless train sets. Has a loco, a caboose, a few cars, a circle of track, and a hand held remote. No wiring to figure out, just connect the track, put the wheels on it, and hit GO.
Just as my 027 Lionel inspired a love of model trains in me close to 70 years ago, this Xmas gift will do the same today for some kid. I went from 027 to HO, from three rail to two, from Plasticville and tin plate to scale modelling. They are not thinking of compatibility any more than my 027 set was forward compatible. If battery catches on, great, if not oh well.
Horn hook couplers used to be a standard, solved the problem of various couplers used by the model makers. How many horn hookers are sold today? Standards come and go, industry trends come and go.
Paul3 Robert,The problem with trying to use batteries to replace chassis mass is that batteries are mass produced by a 3rd party and always will be . . .
Robert,The problem with trying to use batteries to replace chassis mass is that batteries are mass produced by a 3rd party and always will be . . .
Hey Paul
Yeah, maybe. Maybe not. I never use the phrase 'think out of the box', but I am suggesting to not be constrained by conventional wisdom. Personally, I'd jump over batteries entirely and go right to hydrogen fuel cells. The technology is already available and small enough and light enough for toy drones. I see no reason something can't be rigged up for a $600 loco.
Enzoamps Now in the near future, what if dad sees a box of the new Tech-o wireless train sets...No wiring to figure out, just connect the track, put the wheels on it, and hit GO.
Now in the near future, what if dad sees a box of the new Tech-o wireless train sets...No wiring to figure out, just connect the track, put the wheels on it, and hit GO.
It's hard to believe that a young father can't figure out how to connect two wires from the power pack to the track. Maybe he should ask his kid for help.
Have you seen what passes for science education these days? Seems in some palces, schools are liek the army, they place people where they want them, not based on their skills. My ex is a teacher, she has a double degree in science (biology and chemistry) but do they have her teaching science? Oh no, she teaches reading and social studies. In their paired arranagement, her partner teacher (who has a degree in English!) teaches the math and science. Insane.
It does boggle my mind that someone who can follow 36 steps of directions and assemble a piece of furniture draws a complete blank when staring at a picture showing 2 wires from a power pack to the track. Maybe I should go back to school for a psychology degree so I can try to understand this.
As for previous comments - there's another more technical issue with makign the frame of the loco a battery (besides the fact that a li-po pack the same size as that big zinc casting will weigh a lot less) - there are limited charge cycles. Measured in the low 100's for some of the latest technology. Eventually, and sooner rather than later for a favorite often used loco, that battery will need to be replaced. So someone who has problems with one pair of wires is going to completely disassemble their loco to replace the 'frame'?
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
So, in a sense, having to connect two wires is sort of a filter--it keeps extremely stupid people out of our chosen field.
Another nail in the coffin of dead rail.
BMMECNYC rrebell It is very doable now and will be even better in future. No company is going to take the risk to make a specific battery for this application. You have a finite number of customers, say 200k world wide (there are other model railroaders, but they are going to stay with DC, DCC, AC, or DCC-direct radio/blutooth etc. They are going to buy at the most 3-5 locomotives a year (probably more like 1 or 2). Many of them have a fixed income. If a company manages to make a battery that has a very long cyclic life, and is capable of several hours of at capacity discharge, and recharges quickly, there will be little to NO sales of replacements. Its already a small market that is subdivided into many different control systems. There is a specific amount of energy that you can fit into the finite space that HO and smaller scales have.. you mentioned Moore's law.... Google Moore's law and you will find that within 10 years the ability to cool the transistors in an integrated circuit will reqire more energy than can flow through said tranisitors. Kind of like there is a limited number of times you can fold a piece of paper. rrebell (why do you think they built the gigafactory, it was not built to build todays car batteries even though a small portion is being used for that now) Tax break... rrebell Running time is about 2hr max but in reality, how long do most of us run a single engine 4-8 hrs a day for 3 days straight, under full load conditions, electricity in building is shut off at night. rrebell remember that battery tecnoligy is ever changing and will jump at some point. And model railroading is a huge industry that will see millions a year in battery sales... yeah probably not... so we will have to wait until someone puts an off the shelf battery into a locomotive. And I still wont buy it. Because the battery (likely) wont exceed the life of the LEDs in the locomotive, so I will still have to take the thing apart. For HO scale model trains...its a solution in search of a problem.
rrebell It is very doable now and will be even better in future.
No company is going to take the risk to make a specific battery for this application. You have a finite number of customers, say 200k world wide (there are other model railroaders, but they are going to stay with DC, DCC, AC, or DCC-direct radio/blutooth etc. They are going to buy at the most 3-5 locomotives a year (probably more like 1 or 2). Many of them have a fixed income.
If a company manages to make a battery that has a very long cyclic life, and is capable of several hours of at capacity discharge, and recharges quickly, there will be little to NO sales of replacements. Its already a small market that is subdivided into many different control systems.
There is a specific amount of energy that you can fit into the finite space that HO and smaller scales have.. you mentioned Moore's law....
Google Moore's law and you will find that within 10 years the ability to cool the transistors in an integrated circuit will reqire more energy than can flow through said tranisitors. Kind of like there is a limited number of times you can fold a piece of paper.
rrebell (why do you think they built the gigafactory, it was not built to build todays car batteries even though a small portion is being used for that now)
Tax break...
rrebell Running time is about 2hr max but in reality, how long do most of us run a single engine
4-8 hrs a day for 3 days straight, under full load conditions, electricity in building is shut off at night.
rrebell remember that battery tecnoligy is ever changing and will jump at some point.
And model railroading is a huge industry that will see millions a year in battery sales... yeah probably not... so we will have to wait until someone puts an off the shelf battery into a locomotive.
And I still wont buy it. Because the battery (likely) wont exceed the life of the LEDs in the locomotive, so I will still have to take the thing apart.
For HO scale model trains...its a solution in search of a problem.
Second point, tax break, since when dose a company that loses money need a tax break?
Third, most people don't use a single engine that much in a day.
rrebellFirst point, dou you think that the batteries used today are for the hobby?
No...
rrebellSecond point, tax break, since when dose a company that loses money need a tax break?
Building puts losses on books, plus Im sure there was a tax break involved with initial contruction (job creation, local tax breaks to build factory)...
rrebellThird, most people don't use a single engine that much in a day.
Maybe you dont, but I know several hundred modelers who fit into the 4hrs+ for 2/3days category (granted this is a few times a year).
I typically run 5-6 that much...
A carryover loss is only valid for 7 years, 3 + years are used up.
7j43kSo, in a sense, having to connect two wires is sort of a filter--it keeps extremely stupid people out of our chosen field.
Ed,Not so fast..Recall there are instructional drawings that shows how to hook up track wire that any kid can follow.
BRAKIE 7j43k So, in a sense, having to connect two wires is sort of a filter--it keeps extremely stupid people out of our chosen field. Ed,Not so fast..Recall there are instructional drawings that shows how to hook up track wire that any kid can follow.
7j43k So, in a sense, having to connect two wires is sort of a filter--it keeps extremely stupid people out of our chosen field.
Bachmann train sets come with a wire with plugs, just like plugging in a cell phone charger......
This is what I would consider amazing:
.
The title of this thread is “future”, so this is not what I want, nor what I would ever do, but hopefully where the hobby will be in 20-30 years.
I think “Dead Rail” is too much, but on board batteries are definitely the way to go. I believe the track should be wired, and have constant power, say 12 volts DC all the time. This would be used to keep the on board batteries constantly charging as the train is running. The on board batteries would be the power source. No more jerky action, stalls, etc.
This solves all kinds of headaches. Switch points & frogs can be dead. Reverse loop sections can be dead. The charger input could be hooked to a rectifier so reversing polarity through reversing sections has no effect. Wiring a two rail system for constant DC with no concern for reverse loops, power routing, or frog juicing would be a very simple task.
Control would come through the air, maybe blue tooth, maybe something else. A decoder in the locomotive would take over from there.
Programming needs to be easier than with DCC. As close to “plug and play” as possible. Of course, EVERYTHING needs to be 100% reliable in operation right out of the box. The next generation of model railroaders will not be craftsmen and they will not want to fix anything. “Good Enough” will be good enough for them as long as it works all the time.
This would need a manufacturer that sells in the USA to just step up and say they have a better system, they are producing a whole new product, and it will not be compatible with anyone else. If they do it in a different scale, just say 1/72 for discussion’s sake, there will be no issue with compatibility. This manufacturer could market this “new” scale as a whole new hobby experience. This is great for newcomers to the hobby with new money. All of us old timers will still be supported by the old manufacturers in our current weird array of scales.
This new scale would need to be marketed as being more “fun” than what people are already doing. Fun is what attracts people to leisure time pursuits, not a huge list of strict rules to make an overly complicated miniature economic system run in a prototypical manner. Fun sells to newcomers. No current model railroaders would adopt or switch to this new system.
1/72 is already a common modelling scale, so compatible products already exist in the marketplace. Other manufacturers of buildings and accessories could “cross-market” between model railroading, scale modelers, and military modelers with a single product. That would be a blessing.
Then in 2067 Model Railroader would feature an article remembering when this new dominant scale with its amazing control system came to market 40 years earlier.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
SeeYou190 This is what I would consider amazing: . The title of this thread is “future”, so this is not what I want, nor what I would ever do, but hopefully where the hobby will be in 20-30 years. . I think “Dead Rail” is too much, but on board batteries are definitely the way to go. I believe the track should be wired, and have constant power, say 12 volts DC all the time. This would be used to keep the on board batteries constantly charging as the train is running. The on board batteries would be the power source. No more jerky action, stalls, etc. . This solves all kinds of headaches. Switch points & frogs can be dead. Reverse loop sections can be dead. The charger input could be hooked to a rectifier so reversing polarity through reversing sections has no effect. Wiring a two rail system for constant DC with no concern for reverse loops, power routing, or frog juicing would be a very simple task. . Control would come through the air, maybe blue tooth, maybe something else. A decoder in the locomotive would take over from there. . Programming needs to be easier than with DCC. As close to “plug and play” as possible. Of course, EVERYTHING needs to be 100% reliable in operation right out of the box. The next generation of model railroaders will not be craftsmen and they will not want to fix anything. “Good Enough” will be good enough for them as long as it works all the time. . This would need a manufacturer that sells in the USA to just step up and say they have a better system, they are producing a whole new product, and it will not be compatible with anyone else. If they do it in a different scale, just say 1/72 for discussion’s sake, there will be no issue with compatibility. This manufacturer could market this “new” scale as a whole new hobby experience. This is great for newcomers to the hobby with new money. All of us old timers will still be supported by the old manufacturers in our current weird array of scales. . This new scale would need to be marketed as being more “fun” than what people are already doing. Fun is what attracts people to leisure time pursuits, not a huge list of strict rules to make an overly complicated miniature economic system run in a prototypical manner. Fun sells to newcomers. No current model railroaders would adopt or switch to this new system. . 1/72 is already a common modelling scale, so compatible products already exist in the marketplace. Other manufacturers of buildings and accessories could “cross-market” between model railroading, scale modelers, and military modelers with a single product. That would be a blessing. . Then in 2067 Model Railroader would feature an article remembering when this new dominant scale with its amazing control system came to market 40 years earlier. . -Kevin . Kevin, This is almost what I had in mind when I wrote this post except for the different scale bit. It would take decades to come up with enough rolling stock, locos, structures, and accessories, for a new scale. I do like the idea of constant power to track for charging batteries, but would this again be a deterant for the newbie? I really do not know, but it is possible since there has been so much change since my entry into HO in 1962. Why not more change? Part of the discussion this past weekend was of a really large firm in this hobby seriously considering developing dead rail. I doubt that anyone well into DCC would consider this system, unless overwhelmed with problems beyond their capabilities. As mentioned, this would be great for newbies and could bring many more into the hobby. HZ
SeeYou190The next generation of model railroaders will not be craftsmen and they will not want to fix anything. “Good Enough” will be good enough for them as long as it works all the time.
Nor build anything; nor discover anything. Personally, Kevin, I see the above "utopia" as the devolution of the hobby rather than evolution of it.
tstage SeeYou190 The next generation of model railroaders will not be craftsmen and they will not want to fix anything. “Good Enough” will be good enough for them as long as it works all the time. Nor build anything; nor discover anything. Personally, Kevin, I see the above "utopia" as the devolution of the hobby rather than evolution of it. Tom
SeeYou190 The next generation of model railroaders will not be craftsmen and they will not want to fix anything. “Good Enough” will be good enough for them as long as it works all the time.
Ditto......
If I wanted to just buy stuff and "play", we already have that, it's called Marklin.......
Why do most of those predictions remind of a gipsy fortune teller looking into a crystal ball?
or, as Doris Day once sang "the future is not ours to tell". Most of those views are based on what may happen in the US market, but model railroading is an international market, with a number of big international players and the US market is not one of the bigger ones in that game. I have my doubts that any of the big players are willing to venture into a technology which they deem to be a niche technology or even go to the length of migrating into a new scale. The capital ninvestments into that would be sky high, with very little return. Not to forget, that model railroaders are a very conservative bunch of people who do not easily adopt new scales or technolgies. Just look at the market share N scale has over 50 years after its introduction, or the market share DCC is enjoying after 30+ years!
If that big name is MRC that'd be the LAST thing I'd switch to, MRC has not had a great track record in adopting new technology - it took them how many iterations of DCC systems to finally get to one where you can start with a basic system and upgrade it as your needs and capabilities grow, without throwing out all the stuff you originally bought - something the major other vendors like NCE and Digitrax realized from day 1.
Which brings up my other point oon the whoole dead rail thing - until and unless there is a standard set, either by de facto agreement or a standard set by the NMRA, it's a complete non-starter. This is like the early days of command control when you have all those different systems, none compatible with the other. Unless you had the same brand system as your buddy, he couldn't bring his locos oover and run them on your layout, or vice versa. With DCC, I can bring my locos to your layout and they will run just fine, despite the fact that I use Digitrax and you use NCE.
Dead rail I think is further off in the future - HO is maybe about as small as you can go today and then not in just any loco, and certainly not anywhere NEAR as easy as installing a DCC decoder. Dead rail in large scales is nothing new - the outdoor people have been using battery power for many many years, but there is a ton of room in those large models, and there is the added incentive of track outdoors being far more likely to have power issues than track on an indoor layout.
Direct radio with the power still being pulled maninly from the rails may be more short term. Still a bit too big for the smaller scales, but there still is the same problem - no one vendor's system is compatible with another's.
For dead rail to work for the modeler who wants signals and a CTC system - there is a LOT that needs to happen besides getting the system to fit inside the locos. The TT&TO guys would have no problem, but those that currently use block detection systems relying on track current will need a new way, yet to be developed. What we have now is basically two systems, one for beginners, where there is no wiring, no worries about reverse loops, even with 2 rail track, etc. Just turn the loco on, put it on the rails, and go. But this system falls flat when more advanced aspects of the hobby are involved, and the system is unsuitable for that purpose.
Well, we should see how close we are now to that checklist of things needed. First off there are a few running with batteries that charge off the track, so this is doable. Next there are a few systems that will run on anybodys layout like Bluerail and others but these have not paired to track charging yet. The two could come together easily in O scale but in HO it is harder to get it all into the engine but that could be done but this dose not seem to be a priority for most manufactures. There are other ditection ways out there for those that need signals but again, in real life, very few modelers have working signals though many say they want that.