jimikelly Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Is it possible to run 2 different makes of controller on the same layout IE { a dynamis and a Hornby select }.why you say??? ---Im just asking Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadlyduck Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Yes you could but i think the wiring would be a problem as 1 controller would have to be isolated from the other.But i think you have answered the question yourself David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oakydoke Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 No. Firstly, they are not "controllers". They are systems. You can only have one system connected to the same layout at the same time. It is possible to have two different systems attached, each to a completely isolated part of a layout, but the isolation must be total, with no possibility of any stock or other electrically conducting item, ever being able to bridge between either set of tracks, even accidentally (e.g. a derailment). In practical terms that is rather difficult to achieve and such a risk that it would be inadvisable to try it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil S Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 IF BOTH handsets you had chosen used the SAME Control BUS then this would have been possible .... for example Expressnet® from Lenz is used by Roco, ZTC, Hornby-ELITE, Select## and the original Bachmann EZ controller and several others... even though they may use different plugs, there are adapters available or wiring diagrams to allow you to interconnect them. You can have upto 32 controllers on Expressnet, but some Central (System) Units may be more limited in the number of locos they can run at one time! (1 loco, 8, 16, 32 or 64 Active locos with some of mine, subject also to TOTAL current limits) Other examples are Loconet and CANBus. SOME Master/Central Controllers are 'Multiprotocol' and understand some of the different Control Busses eg RocoZ21. (Some, usually those from 'independant' manufacturers, perhaps also made 'badged' models for Model Railway makers (eg Fleischmann), and these may ALSO be able to work in different TRACK Protocol modes too eg ESU, Uhlenbruch... such as both NMRA DCC and Selectrix, or FMZ, or Marklin MfX, -- some of these can even be used 'simultaneously'. These are usually models from 'Continental' manufacturers, where the tradition of Digital Control continued on from Zero-1, without the 'gap' that developed in the UK; and their manufacturrers tend to retain support for legacy systems. The old ZTC511 could be switched over to Zero-1 mode or Analogue, instead of NMRA DCC. Some of the Current 'Continental' market leaders include 'Sniffer' ports - which can read the 'TRACK' signal from earlier/ other current systems, and automatically re-code and 'pass on' the commands to the current NMRAdcc Track output (or Marklin Standard in some cases) . The ESU ECoS was an early example, and the current model continues to be so. As well as Expressnet and Loconet CONTROL busses, the Z21 (black cased model) from ROCO can have the track output of another system (eg a NMRA dcc Roco MultiCentralePro, which supported their wireless handsets) plugged in and 'sniffed'... as the interim method they offer for backwards compatibilty for those handsets - although the cabled Expressnet Handsets (Red from Roco, Grey from Fleischmann, or other Expressnet Handsets, can be plugged in directly. ##Select; Although I would not recommend this as a 'standalone controller' because of its output signal compliance (or lack of) - when used as an extra Expressnet Handset into another Master Unit, this is a different matter ... but still admittedly not my preference (which is unashamably Roco Multimaus) Alternatively, of course, if the 2 systems are kept completely separate electrically, then both can be used independantly, but without the benefit of choice of controller: perhaps 1 system for Narrow Gauge or Trams, and the other for Standard Track ??? We used a Trix Multiprotocol Handset for a while on a totally separate High-level loop, as it was very easy to use for programming in dcc mode. Keeping one system for your 'test bench' may be a useful use of your resources. As you can see; there is not always a simple 'Yes/No' answer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Is it possible to run 2 different makes of controller on the same layout IE { a dynamis and a Hornby select }.why you say??? ---Im just asking Not connected to the track at the same time, no. At worst, you will let the magic smoke out of one or the other. Some systems have a "sniffer" port to which you can connect the DCC signal from another system. This allows you keep using your old system and its handsets if you upgrade to a different, incompatible, make, for example. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oakydoke Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Phil S - post 4. Sorry to say this Phil, but do you think your convoluted answer is going to help the OP? Not only that, I'm also sorry to say that again your incorrect use of DCC terminology may only serve to confuse some people trying to get an understanding of the concept of DCC. For example, what you describe as a "Control Bus" is totally wrong! A Control Bus is a different element of a DCC system (Command Station to Booster link) not what you would plug handsets into. "Master Controllers"? - I take it you mean Command Station? I don't intend to have a dig at what are probably your well meant advice, but if the terminology is a odds with almost everything that is written elsewhere, including the NMRA DCC standards, I can only think it will confuse the unwary and appear to add to the mire of jargon and perceived techno speak and put people off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 A Control Bus is a different element of a DCC system (Command Station to Booster link) not what you would plug handsets into. "Master Controllers"? - I take it you mean Command Station? ...if the terminology is a odds with almost everything that is written elsewhere, including the NMRA DCC standards, ... The Command station to booster interface is defined by the NMRA in S-9.1.2 as the "Power Station Interface". it has never, to my knowledge, been referred to as a control bus. Phil's description of a control bus is spot on. Loconet, XpressNet, and others, allow handsets to be connected. Historically NMRA specs have covered only the basic DCC communications through the track, they did not cover control busses at all so I don't see how any such description can be at odds with the NMRA. This has changed recently with the adoption of OpenLCB as S-9.7.x Layout Command Control (LCC). Central controller seems to be a European term and can be found in documentation from Uhlenbrock, for example. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oakydoke Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Andrew, you are indeed correct that the correct term is Power Station Interface, but it is colloquially known as the Control Bus, by a few DCC manufacturers, NCE and Lenz amongst them. The term has similarly been used by at least one author of a well known guide to DCC. As far as I'm aware there is no official term for the bus that throttle/cabs/handsets etc, are connected to, variously being described as Cab Bus, communication bus and data bus by manufacturers, or by using their own proprietary or industry standard description of the type of network employed; e.g. XpressNet, Loconet, CAN Bus etc. Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall such a bus being called a Control Bus by any DCC manufacturer, the NMRA or described as such in any book title on the subject. I can't check on the latter at the moment, as I'm away on the other side of the world and my books are at home. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I accept what you say but in your earlier post you very specifically said "including the NMRA DCC standards" to which my reply was addressed. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadlyduck Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Are you still replying to the initial question or are these replies is it taking us to a differend point ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.