Junctionmad Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 The reply came back that LRC 130/135 are at this time still under development. As quite a few already indicated, I'll have to pass RailCom for now. Polling for the speed and direction don't require any hardware and has been successfully been employed by JMRI too. The only issue with polling is momentum will cause actual speed to differ from commanded speed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailCom_Fan Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 Just took a look at both DCC4PC and Tams. The most promising looks to be DCC4PC, as they clearly state they support multiple decoders in the same section, which I'm after. They also state that they report back the actual load, provided the decoder will send this information, of course. 1x RailCom Reader + 1x Computer Interface are about 300 euros. I think you missed a really important piece of information from the DCC4PC website! - They haven't updated it for at least 4 years! You might regret spending any money on DCC4PC hardware or software, because they haven't provided any timetable for when then might actually finish anything. However, they do seem to have new tasks, that seem to distract them from finishing any of the current things. It might be fair to say that only God knows when DCC4PC is going to release anything new, or finish what they have now. And, as you discovered from Lenz, they can't even build a RailCom Detector (The LRC130 & LRC135)! All over the world, Lenz Retailers show the LRC130 & LRC135 as not available yet. As for getting information back from a Mobile Decoder with RailCom, there are some things that don't seem to have been set out in Black & White in this thread yet: 1 - NMRA Standard 9.3.2 says in Section 5.1 (Pages 20 & 21) that you can read a Single CV, or a Group of 4 CVs, and get the data back via RailCom in Channel 2. 2 - RailCom has some 'RailCom CVs' that contain interesting things, that change dynamically (See section 5.3 on pages 24 & 25). 3 - There is a slew of CVs that are reserved for RailCom use in the future. Unfortunately, none of this seems to be the Load on the Decoder's electric motor that you are seeking. However, there is a Decoder Load value. But, that Value might not be what you are actually expecting. It might actually be the Current passing through the Decoder, to run everything. This might include current for any Sound or Smoke systems, which would not let you determine what Load the Loco's electric motor is actually experiencing on the layout. It would seem that you are at a bit of a disadvantage not being able to build hardware. With established Manufacturers not currently providing what you want, the DIY approach might be the only way you will even get close to what you want. I think you might need to read a lot more information (Which you might have done during the 16 Months since the above thread was last updated). Only then might you be able to understand exactly what you want/need to do, and what currently exists to help you achieve your goals. Just don't rely on Manufacturers, because they are letting everyone down! Sorry I can't be any more helpful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 Just don't rely on Manufacturers, because they are letting everyone down! The view from a manufacturer: I looked and decided it just wasn't worth it, especially as those manufacturers that do (or have attempted to) produce hardware disagree on what is required. It seems to me (I may be wrong) that Railcom Plus is not an open standard. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who have asked for Railcom on a SPROG used as a command station. Andrew Crosland http://www.sprog-dcc.co.uk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailCom_Fan Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 The view from a manufacturer: ... I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who have asked for Railcom on a SPROG used as a command station. Andrew Crosland http://www.sprog-dcc.co.uk @Crosland, you have my sincerest apologies if I have offended all Manufacturers. That was certainly not my intention. My issue was with Manufacturers that make promises, then don't honour them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 @Crosland, you have my sincerest apologies if I have offended all Manufacturers. No offence taken. I am not, after all, a Railcom manufacturer It was more an explanation of why I am not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.