MRJ 256

[Zero Gravitas]

And people used to complain that we were off-topic when we talking about if the actual magazine had been published yet...

[pete_mcfarlane]

I never quite get the objections to the various contraptions that come out of MERG (or DCC itself). I think we have to bear in mind that electronics is also a hobby, and there are people out there with joint interests in electronics and railway modelling. If they decide to get their enjoyment from designing and building slightly over complicated electronic control systems for their railways then that's entirely their prerogative and good luck to them. It's not like they are coming round our houses and forcing us to give up on 24v DC stud contact or clockwork.

 

Personally I still use 12v DC as I spend all day trying to get computer system A from vendor X to interface with system B from Vendor Z, so I don't want to spend my evenings doing the same. But that's my choice based on my circumstances. 

 

As for obsolescence, this isn't going to be an issue with any modular system designed to use a set of non-proprietary communication protocols, like DCC. The physical hardware becomes obsolete and/or dies, but you just replace it with new stuff that talks using the same standards. 

 

Having now got round to reading the whole of the magazine, I really liked those 2mm buildings. In fact the whole issue was really good. 

[Porcy Mane]

This is rather going odd topic now as this is not in MRJ.

No railway topic is to odd for MRJ.

 

"The 1988 BMW 8 Series was the first production vehicle to feature a CAN-based multiplex wiring system." (Wikipedia)

 

Does that mean I could now drive a car from a DCC controller, or run my layout from a car?   

Way way off topic but yes it would be feasible but there would need to be some mean interfaces thought out and designed.    

I think there are a few that would dispute BMW being the first to use can bus in an automotive commercial capacity. When it was first mooted one of its supposed benefits was the reduction in use of precious metals by much simplifying car wiring looms despite the projected large increase in, and dependency on, automotive electronics.

If you compare a wiring loom from one of today's cars with that of an equivalent model from the early eighties you soon see they were way of the mark with that prediction.

 

Back to railways. I know of one large model railway that was to use Merge CAN bus to control accessories and locos. The electrics were assembled by some very knowledgeable people with the main control unit being something any NASA or aeronautics engineer would be proud of. Eventually it was decided to go down the route of DCC for Loco control with the Can bus being used for everything else.

 

P

Edited August 11, 2017 by Porcy Mane

[pete55]

No railway topic is to odd for MRJ.

 

Way way off topic but yes it would be feasible but there would need to be some mean interfaces thought out and designed.  

I think there are a few that would dispute BMW being the first to use can bus in an automotive commercial capacity. When it was first mooted one of its supposed benefits was the reduction in use of precious metals by much simplifying car wiring looms despite the projected large increase in, and dependency on, automotive electronics.

If you compare a wiring loom from one of today's cars with that of an equivalent model from the early eighties you soon see they were way of the mark with that prediction.

 

Back to railways. I know of one large model railway that was to use Merge CAN bus to control accessories and locos. The electrics were assembled by some very knowledgeable people with the main control unit being something any NASA or aeronautics engineer would be proud of. Eventually it was decided to go down the route of DCC for Loco control with the Can bus being used for everything else.

 

P

 

And if I had had my way, it would have been wired conventional DC from the outset.....!!

[Porcy Mane]

And if I had had my way, it would have been wired conventional DC from the outset.....!!

 

You technophobe. I'm surprised you didn't say, "wired for clockwork".  You'll get used to the technology and the sequencing.

 

Remember the FW11B that blistered hands when changing the six speed manual. So much easier now with the press of button. (So I'm told).

 

"Move" with the times.  

 

P  (Who hasn't even got a mobile phone.)

[queensquare]

And people used to complain that we were off-topic when we talking about if the actual magazine had been published yet...

The whole point of the editorial was to open up the debate on the use of new technologies which I'm pleased to see it's done.

 

The same tired comments issue after issue were just plain boring and driving those who had something interesting to say away from MRJ threads.

 

Jerry

[meil]

No railway topic is to odd for MRJ.

 

Way way off topic but yes it would be feasible but there would need to be some mean interfaces thought out and designed.  

I think there are a few that would dispute BMW being the first to use can bus in an automotive commercial capacity. When it was first mooted one of its supposed benefits was the reduction in use of precious metals by much simplifying car wiring looms despite the projected large increase in, and dependency on, automotive electronics.

If you compare a wiring loom from one of today's cars with that of an equivalent model from the early eighties you soon see they were way of the mark with that prediction.

 

Back to railways. I know of one large model railway that was to use Merge CAN bus to control accessories and locos. The electrics were assembled by some very knowledgeable people with the main control unit being something any NASA or aeronautics engineer would be proud of. Eventually it was decided to go down the route of DCC for Loco control with the Can bus being used for everything else.

 

P

MERG CAN bus does not control Locos so the layout could not have been built that way. To have CBus control the infra-structure and DCC to control the locos is exactly how CBus works and was meant to work. The locos could have equally been controlled by DC.

[Pteremy]

A bit of a tangent but - the angst earlier in this thread made me wonder about 'curation' - military modellers are rather good at generating 'out of the box reviews' and 'build reviews' which bring together a kits strengths and weaknesses in one place. So that you can decide on the level of compromise, or effort,  that you are prepared to accept - or not - as the case may be.

 

There is so much similar wisdom on RMWeb - but smeared iteratively through long threads. Has anyone given any thought to curating this information? That is, distilling the insight about a RTR or kit release into a reference set of pros and cons? 

[Zero Gravitas]

The whole point of the editorial was to open up the debate on the use of new technologies which I'm pleased to see it's done.

The same tired comments issue after issue were just plain boring and driving those who had something interesting to say away from MRJ threads.

Jerry

Some people did notice that my comment was intended as tongue-in-cheek.

 

However... one the main arguments presented by the good and the great about the less serious MRJ thread was that it would skew the google search results and that people searching for MRJ content weren't finding it. Presumably people now searching for MRJ content are now going to find this debate that is not really related to the contents of the magazine. Surely this discussion (which is itself very interesting) should have been moved to the appropriate section of RMWeb?

 

Edited for predictive text errors.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Zero Gravitas

[Tricky]

Following on from my post #167 and Jerry's call to discuss new technologies it struck me that an Ethernet based system using Internet Protocol could offer new possibilities. Leaving aside the question of power distribution, this would give multidirectional data flow with broadcast (all node) reception and point to point (single node) reception.

Point controllers can have feed back to prove route setting. Track circuiting could be implemented. Control would be by tablets acting as multifunctional terminals. Interlocking could be implemented along with route setting. The track plan would be implemented by an App. Arbitration as to which operator has control of a particular route and loco can be implemented.

The interface modules to the track, points and lighting would have an industry standard RJ45 socket, so that commercial Ethernet patch cables are used to connect up the modules. Low cost Ethernet switches distribute the data. Couple in a router with WiFi and the tablets join the network; password protected of course. As it's a true local area network not connected to the www, then virus protection is achieved by isolation.

It's just an extension of the 'internet of things ' where your heating etc is controlled from your smart phone.

My original concept would envisage a 12V two wire power bus delivering power to the modules. The whole thing connected up by RJ45 patch cables with a 2 wire power distribution patch cable standard.

Perhaps I should develop a business plan!

I don't understand a word of that. I'm a simple soul!

[t-b-g]

Following on from my post #167 and Jerry's call to discuss new technologies it struck me that an Ethernet based system using Internet Protocol could offer new possibilities. Leaving aside the question of power distribution, this would give multidirectional data flow with broadcast (all node) reception and point to point (single node) reception.

Point controllers can have feed back to prove route setting. Track circuiting could be implemented. Control would be by tablets acting as multifunctional terminals. Interlocking could be implemented along with route setting. The track plan would be implemented by an App. Arbitration as to which operator has control of a particular route and loco can be implemented.

The interface modules to the track, points and lighting would have an industry standard RJ45 socket, so that commercial Ethernet patch cables are used to connect up the modules. Low cost Ethernet switches distribute the data. Couple in a router with WiFi and the tablets join the network; password protected of course. As it's a true local area network not connected to the www, then virus protection is achieved by isolation.

It's just an extension of the 'internet of things ' where your heating etc is controlled from your smart phone.

My original concept would envisage a 12V two wire power bus delivering power to the modules. The whole thing connected up by RJ45 patch cables with a 2 wire power distribution patch cable standard.

Perhaps I should develop a business plan!

That all sounds very impressive. The next stage would to link it all to thought waves so that you only have to think about which point to change and it would happen.

 

Of course, in our quest to build model railways that are as near to the real thing as possible, we could always have a lever and a few metal rods and do it that way.

 

One of the very best things about the hobby is the diversity of approaches that we can adopt. Nobody can say which approach is right or wrong as long as, in the end, the point changes and the train goes along the right track.

 

At the recent Missenden Abbey weekend there were a few people working on various circuit boards, to create electrical interlocking. I was quite impressed by what they are doing but we also visited Princes Risborough signal box and the real railways did the same with far fewer components.

 

As always, it is a case of each of us following the hobby the way we choose to.

[Bernard Lamb]

The bridge over the stream. No that's wrong. Whatever it is who cares.

Down to the nitty gritty. A good issue covering many topics.

I found the mobile crane article fascinating as a piece of modelling that incorporated novel methods to get the thing to actually work.

In a publication that in the early days went further then Historic England would go in the use of East Anglian vernacular, I found the dumbing down of engineering terms a step too far. Does land have to be in quotation marks or draw filing need an explanation? Or do I assume too much of the average MRJ reader these days? With regard to the article on buildings. The table on page 184 is worth it's weight in gold for a general synopsis of materials. The work on bashing a Beetle to fit resonates as I have just been doing such an exercise to cram one into a Planet. Not in my case adding the complicated mods to fit motion parts. The HR vans while not being of direct interest make an entertaining read and remind me of Perspex modelling from around 1960 when I saw a modeller of a GWR railcar carved from this material. Back to the old comment re Smiffs. Sales to local casual punters appear to be good in the Hemel shop. All in all a vote of support from me as the best issue for some time.

Bernard

[Hroth]

Following on from my post #167 and Jerry's call to discuss new technologies it struck me that an Ethernet based system using Internet Protocol could offer new possibilities. Leaving aside the question of power distribution, this would give multidirectional data flow with broadcast (all node) reception and point to point (single node) reception.

 

Point controllers can have feed back to prove route setting. Track circuiting could be implemented. Control would be by tablets acting as multifunctional terminals. Interlocking could be implemented along with route setting. The track plan would be implemented by an App. Arbitration as to which operator has control of a particular route and loco can be implemented.

 

The interface modules to the track, points and lighting would have an industry standard RJ45 socket, so that commercial Ethernet patch cables are used to connect up the modules. Low cost Ethernet switches distribute the data. Couple in a router with WiFi and the tablets join the network; password protected of course. As it's a true local area network not connected to the www, then virus protection is achieved by isolation.

 

It's just an extension of the 'internet of things ' where your heating etc is controlled from your smart phone.

 

My original concept would envisage a 12V two wire power bus delivering power to the modules. The whole thing connected up by RJ45 patch cables with a 2 wire power distribution patch cable standard.

 

Perhaps I should develop a business plan!

Marvellous!

 

People already complain about wiring, an ethernet scheme would end up with patchbays rivalling a data centre for even a moderate sized layout.....

 

Better type up a RFC, sounds like it'll give IP over carrier pigeon (IPoAC, RFC 1149, RFC 2549, RFC 6214) a run for its money!

 

Wikipedia covers this rather well...  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers

 

edit for clarity..... 

Edited August 12, 2017 by Hroth

[Giles]

I'm glad some people enjoyed the mobile crane article. Here's a video of it working, for anyone who hasn't seen it.

 

 

 

[MickRalph]

This issue arrived while I was in France, but tonight I have taken the opportunity of an evening shift in Kingscote signal box on the Bluebell Railway to read just over half of it.  I found much of interest in every article, and glancing through the rest, it looks as if that will continue to be the case.  An excellent issue.

 

Mick

[JohnBS]

Jerry,

Though I say it myself, congratulations on an exceptional edition (maybe I would say that!)

The front cover photo was superb (Gordon Gravett? - if so, give me more).

The Nettlebridge Valley layout is a delightful and a very convincing piece of modelling. The prototype is very familiar - just down the road from Frome, though not quite in the current era!

Giles Favell's radio-controlled mobile crane is most impressive, albeit on a model engineering scale - it reminds me somewhat of trying to get Lego Technic models to work - often an exercise of getting a quart into a pint pot. My version of the Lego crane has six motors and IR controllers, two battery boxes and whole loads of gear trains.

Getting down to a more familiar scale, Tim's article on workshop techniques is invaluable - the voice of the master. More please.

The finish of Chris Klein's "Victoria" is superb, thanks in part due to the use of T-Cut, and Graham Tierney's Taff Vale Railmotor is lovely. John Aldrick's 2mm coach article, particularly the bit on corridor connections, and your article with tips again on using T-Cut were very useful - I look forward to trying them out.

Finally, back to the larger scales, I very much liked the scratch built Highland vans.

Interested to read the rules of the Cameo Competition - I guess that Ashburton may just about comply with the criteria, perhaps with the exception of the lighting. We shall see.

I was delighted to see the positive comments on my buildings article.

All in all, a brilliant edition and I look forward to your next editorial foray.

Kind regards,

John

[dajt]

The issue finally made it down under. S scale and scratchbuilding got me to buy it for the first time in a while.

 

Those HR brakevans are very nice. Great inventiveness on the crane too, that was cool. The article at the back with the big tender mounted motor looks good as well, but I haven't read it properly yet. I like a bit of railway modelling history.

 

Good issue, thanks editor and contributors!