Glorious NSE Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 And as soon as you get to that point, you might as well have stayed with DCC at this point in time...because, real engineers, doing real engineering, have decided that RFID, or optical (AEI), or axle counters...are not reliable enough. Point of order - Axle counters are now pretty much standard kit on real railways (including impressively busy ones) in the UK... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 if there is a killer app for Bluetooth against DCC it is its potential simplicity to the user. This forum particularly, is littered with discussions about DCC cv's and what for many is a venerable minefield. Not every modeller is tech savvy and I've met quite a few who are inspired by the potential of DCC but find the realities of it intimidating. Any system with similar capabilities to DCC is going to require configuration, call it CVs, or whatever. Tuning loco speeds, setting up consists, setting function behaviour, etc,... If all it really requires is a better user interface then there is no real obstacle to achieving that with DCC? How do you see Bluetooth on its own providing user simplicity, other than to the simplest use cases bu the simplest user? It doesn't, it's just a communications medium. You need to decouple bluetooth as a technology from what the system provides or is capable of. There's nothing magical about bluetooth that couldn't be achieved in other ways. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 The advantage of bluetooth is it would be a much simpler communication chain: Control software = bluetooth encoding = bluetooth transmission = bluetooth decoding = accessory/ loco control compared to the current communication chain: Control software = computer interface = ExpressNet bus = DCC encoding = DCC bus transmission = DCC decoder = accessory/loco control. Or, fill in the missing pieces, remove the unneccessary pieces and spin the other way Control software = bluetooth software stack = bluetooth transmitter = bluetooth transmission = bluetooth receiver = bluetooth software stack = accessory/ loco control As against Control software = computer interface = DCC bus transmission = DCC decoder = accessory/loco control. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
megatoad Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I just stumbled accross this whole subject. Very interesting. The major point I have not noted folk discuss in the posts is that with bluetooth you should be able to reliably transmit control packets much more efficiently to a loco instead of relying on poor connectivity as the wheels trundle along the track. I get frustrated in how often my locos ignore commands and merrily carry on full steam ahead to crash into whatever obstruction you are trying to avoid! One of the other trends in posters initial comments was the idea that the settings would all be stored in a phones app. Well with bluetooth I see no reason why they should not be stored in the decoder itself, then when a handset pairs it would pull down the required settings as and when required. Indeed as for sound I see no reason why the controller could not simply stream audio to the relevent lococs, after all I tend to store my music on my phone and stream it either to my in car audio or blutooth speakers nowadays, gone are all those silly CDs. However just like DCC I find once you have more than a few locos on a layout that trying to toggle them all is a nightmare. I have made a few abortive attempts to write my own software to drive my Lenz based system to no avail. All I would like on my computer screen is a grid of several cabs so I can quickly control 8 locos. That said I have just dismantled my Leviathan of a layout and boxed it all up for the forseeable future (including my Garrett). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 SNIP However just like DCC I find once you have more than a few locos on a layout that trying to toggle them all is a nightmare. I have made a few abortive attempts to write my own software to drive my Lenz based system to no avail. All I would like on my computer screen is a grid of several cabs so I can quickly control 8 locos. That said I have just dismantled my Leviathan of a layout and boxed it all up for the forseeable future (including my Garrett). Check out JMRI. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold NoggintheNog Posted February 25, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 25, 2015 Any system with similar capabilities to DCC is going to require configuration, call it CVs, or whatever. Tuning loco speeds, setting up consists, setting function behaviour, etc,... If all it really requires is a better user interface then there is no real obstacle to achieving that with DCC? The best I have seen so far is the TCS WoW sound decoder, it has a verbal interface to set everything right on the mainline, even chuff rates for steamers to match wheel revolutions. no 'programming' needed at all There are videos on youtube showing it in action I think, to me that is a step forward for the average user. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Any system with similar capabilities to DCC is going to require configuration, call it CVs, or whatever. Tuning loco speeds, setting up consists, setting function behaviour, etc,... If all it really requires is a better user interface then there is no real obstacle to achieving that with DCC? As mentioned previously Where DCC starts to find it's limit is in what can be sent back to the operator, or should I say the ease with which information can be sent back to the operator. Bluetooth as a communication platform is a fully Bi-directional system and this is where some of the more interesting potential of Bluetooth lies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 One of the other trends in posters initial comments was the idea that the settings would all be stored in a phones app. Well with bluetooth I see no reason why they should not be stored in the decoder itself, then when a handset pairs it would pull down the required settings as and when required. I think it was Ron Ron Ron who posted a reply he had received from BlueRail Trains that all Loco settings are stored on the Loco chip rather than in the controller. This will mean that moving between layouts or change of control device will not mean having to set up the Loco's performance dynamics again. Hope this helps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) How about shunning the prevalent forum mentality of looking for the hidden conspiracy and seeing the video clip for what it is. A demonstration of A.) wireless control being emphasised by the fact that there are no wires to the track and therefore no "hidden" control or B.) A demonstration of wireless control of a loco powered by an onboard battery as may be applicable to someone running for example a garden railway where on board power is required. Anyone in product management position at Bachmann would be very remiss if they were not long ago calculating the drop in material cost of an oval of sectional track for a boxed train set, for when they are able to injection mould it completely instead. Currently Nickel Silver code 82 drawn rail cost is about UKP 20.00 per Lb. And that weight equates to only about 40 metres, and an 18" radius oval requires around 8 metres of rail. That's UKP 4.00 savings in material costs alone. The speculation is not whether, or even when, but rather how far up market into the true "model railway" market can they sell the idea of all plastic E-Z track. Andy Edited February 25, 2015 by Andy Reichert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmichel Posted February 26, 2015 Author Share Posted February 26, 2015 Anyone in product management position at Bachmann would be very remiss if they were not long ago calculating the drop in material cost of an oval of sectional track for a boxed train set, for when they are able to injection mould (sic) it completely instead. I agree. It would be great if Bachmann could sell trains cheaper to the very youngest end of our hobby. Unfortunately, if the track is plastic, it would not only wear out faster, then it would also be incompatible with dcc..... Does not sound like an upgrade path to me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 I think it was Ron Ron Ron who posted a reply he had received from BlueRail Trains that all Loco settings are stored on the Loco chip rather than in the controller. This will mean that moving between layouts or change of control device will not mean having to set up the Loco's performance dynamics again. Hope this helps. Nile, it certainly wasn't me who posted that information. In fact it was you...... In what turned out to be a bit of a surprise I posted a message to BlueRail via their Facebook page today, asking about one of the concerns people have about Loco variables being stored on the controlling smartphone rather than onboard the Loco's chip. They got back to me with a reply in 15 minutes!!!!! And it's Sunday!!! Their reply was this. "Our current plan is to store data in a chip in the loco. ........ That reply is a surprise, as they've said the opposite elsewhere. i.e. settings will be stored in the app. It would be good news if the reply you received was the more up-to-date, or accurate. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 .....It would be great if Bachmann could sell trains cheaper to the very youngest end of our hobby. It isn't "the very youngest end of our hobby" at all. It's the children's toy market and very little to do with the hobby at all. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 (edited) It isn't "the very youngest end of our hobby" at all. It's the children's toy market and very little to do with the hobby at all. . The widespread use of the NMRA Standards has led to the chassis and track of the toys and the adopted chassis and track of model railroads to be one and the same. Unfortunately (IMHO) the NMRA changed it's slogan in 2009 to "Scale model Railroads" and is proceeding ASAP to have a section of the California State Railroad Museum so labelled, with lots of displays of scientifically incorrect "non-scale, toy standard" model railroads exhibited as "scale models" by their definition. Edited February 26, 2015 by Andy Reichert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmichel Posted February 26, 2015 Author Share Posted February 26, 2015 It isn't "the very youngest end of our hobby" at all. It's the children's toy market and very little to do with the hobby at all. Hmm.. Not many 2 year old children in your family circle, Ron? I can name quite a few 2-4 year olds who are quite firmly in the toy market and very enthusiastic about trains.... whether it is Thomas or Dinosaur Train. Its quite something to see a 2 year old slide together Bachmann's ez-track. It starts young and is the foundation of our hobby. I have heard this idea before; trying to separate the toy market from the adult end. Its just not possible. Its like saying that learning to read and write at age 4 is not the same as the great novelist at age 30! Whatever Bachmann can do at the young end is seminal for our hobby no matter which way you look at it. Oh yes, and I still have my Thomas books from the 1950s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Nile, it certainly wasn't me who posted that information. In fact it was you...... That reply is a surprise, as they've said the opposite elsewhere. i.e. settings will be stored in the app. It would be good news if the reply you received was the more up-to-date, or accurate. . Hi Ron Ron Ron! Sorry about that....... Yes you were right it was me............ or at least my secret alter ego that comes out in the hours of twilight. I've attached a screen grab of the Facebook conversation I had with BlueTrains highlighting the question of where the loco settings are to be stored. Hope this helps Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 My mobile Faraday Cages and I will retain our cynicism for the time being. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 My mobile Faraday Cages and I will retain our cynicism for the time being. Andy Hi Andy! Take a look at this YouTube link. About 3 mins in. They have a chip fitted to a brass bodied loco and test the Bluetooth link at 50 feet. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BoD Posted March 1, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 1, 2015 Does that mean you have to run your trains with your phone held aloft? Must start to hurt after a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Hi Andy! Take a look at this YouTube link. About 3 mins in. They have a chip fitted to a brass bodied loco and test the Bluetooth link at 50 feet. Regards This would be a more practical test instead of an "open field" demo.. BTW These aren't body "shells". All the floors are brass too. So true "cages". And lots of of them surrounded in depth. BTW, Note the trucks on the diesel were black. They didn't actually show if the loco was all brass or just a brass shell on a plastic RTR mechanism. As you can see, my hobby is modelling and running interurban cars, not operating wireless systems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Friedman Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 This would be a more practical test instead of an "open field" demo.. BTW These aren't body "shells". All the floors are brass too. So true "cages". And lots of of them surrounded in depth. BTW, Note the trucks on the diesel were black. They didn't actually show if the loco was all brass or just a brass shell on a plastic RTR mechanism. As you can see, my hobby is modelling and running interurban cars, not operating wireless systems. Andy, there is no problem. There is no commercially available bluetooth control system. If and when it arrives, if it offers no advantage to you, don't use it. There are some who still run clockwork layouts and have great fun doing so; no one is suggesting they should adopt any other form of control or traction. You use what you are happy with. End of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Andy, there is no problem. There is no commercially available bluetooth control system. If and when it arrives, if it offers no advantage to you, don't use it. There are some who still run clockwork layouts and have great fun doing so; no one is suggesting they should adopt any other form of control or traction. You use what you are happy with. End of. Except that one day I might have to over pay for and then rip it out of a nice RTR model that I like, because it doesn't get manufactured any other way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiptonian Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Except that one day I might have to over pay for and then rip it out of a nice RTR model that I like, because it doesn't get manufactured any other way. .Why should that happen? The DC guys once said something similar about DCC, but here we are many years later still able to buy DC locos, "chip ready" with a blanking plug. Just buy a decoder of your chosen system, a few minutes to fit it and away you go. With the exception of a few ready-fitted Junior and Starter sets, I see no reason for this to change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 .Why should that happen? The DC guys once said something similar about DCC, but here we are many years later still able to buy DC locos, "chip ready" with a blanking plug. Just buy a decoder of your chosen system, a few minutes to fit it and away you go. With the exception of a few ready-fitted Junior and Starter sets, I see no reason for this to change. Bachman's Peter Witt type HO streetcar only comes DCC fitted for example. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobbyhorse Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 I'm looking forward to progress within the hobby that this new step forward is going to bring. When you listen to the folk that are developing this technology on Model Rail Radio, you will then see the significance of it. One thing that Backman are doing is bringing it to the toy market cheaply, those that develop it, not Backman will bring us this lots of new products. Backman will bring the younger generation into the hobby, as phones, tablets and other devices are what the youngsters connect with. Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 This would be a more practical test instead of an "open field" demo.. BTW These aren't body "shells". All the floors are brass too. So true "cages". And lots of of them surrounded in depth. BTW, Note the trucks on the diesel were black. They didn't actually show if the loco was all brass or just a brass shell on a plastic RTR mechanism. As you can see, my hobby is modelling and running interurban cars, not operating wireless systems. Hi. Well if you are looking for a more definitive test than either the link I posted to Bachmann's demo or your own layout, then I can suggest a few more rigorous ones. However the object of posting the video's link was to offer up something a little more than the usual forum rhetoric. I am pretty certain the guys at BlueRail Trains would hope their video would be received in the spirit of the hobby rather than being appraised as some form of "Gold Standard" definition. As for your concern that future models may not be released in a format suitable for your modelling needs provides a choice that is for you to make. Manufacturers aren't charities and although it is reasonable to expect a healthy level of regard for their customers on their part. They still have an obligation to develop their business in a profitable manner. Should that further development include within it the introduction of new manufacturing techniques or technologies then that has to be a good thing overall as it presents the hobby'ist with choice. What to my mind is not so welcome, are those that "Do Down" novel materials, techniques or technologies in an attempt to preserve their own niche. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now