Robin2

I would say it is next to impossible because you cannot guarantee the latency of any wireless system - lost packets are common. Much better to send data - for example a number representing the speed - and have the receiver generate the DCC signal based on that data. Also keep in mind that "normal" DCC modules expect the "signal" to carry power as well as information. Another consideration is that the DCC information in the tracks will be for several locomotives. It would make more sense only to send by wireless the data for the locomotive with the receiver. ...R

For small size I sawed the PCB antenna from an nRF24L01+ and soldered on a short piece of flexible wire about 35mm long. (I think I used the same length as Deltangs use). It has worked fine for the short ranges that I use. I have not tested its ultimate range. This may give you some flexibility - however @Giles' experience is reassuring. Some years ago I had a Deltang receiver in a metal bodied Graham Farish large prairie. I think I ensured that the antenna wire poked out through the window. ...R

And with battery power if you need more adhesion you can put some matt paint on the track - works very well. ...R

I don't agree, but if that is your opinion you should report the abuse to the Moderator. I note that the OP has not complained about anything that has been directed at him. Maybe another way of looking at is if it's not appropriate for a report to the Moderator then it isn't abuse. Abuse is a serious term that should not be used lightly. ...R

Could perhaps be classified as "a robust exchange of views" I agree that most of it is pointless (on both sides), and perhaps not as polite as it might be, but I wouldn't classify it as abuse. ...R

Perhaps you would be good enough to post links to some examples. I can see that there are different points of view, but I can't say I have seen any abusive comments. Much of the discussion has degenerated into the "it's a biscuit, no, don't be silly, it's a bar" category. If there really are abusive comments the correct thing is to report them to the Moderator. ...R

Mud has been thrown in both directions - all of it pointless. ...R

I think everyone is aware that you are not proposing a commercial product. Nevertheless, if you want to attract new people to become users of your product then it needs to be "marketed". It is my own view that you are not sufficiently aware of that and that you are not presenting your product in an effective way for take-up by railway modellers. And I think that is well illustrated by the types of comment you have been receiving. I also have the impression that you have not been absorbing the messages that those people have been presenting. Every comment has been met with a strenuous rebuttal rather than a "I hear what you say, that's very interesting. My system is / is not/ intended to do that / will be adapted to take account of that" It is utterly pointless talking about the technical superiority of one chip or another - that is for a discussion between computer nerds. The only thing that matters to a model railway nerd is "what can I do with it". At this stage most people know what they can (and can't) do with traditional DC track control and what they can do with DCC. Never mind the internal technology - what can people do with your product? ...R

I'm trying to be on your side. But don't expect people to start by looking at code. Railway modellers generally aren't interested in code unless they are first convinced that there is a system that might be useful to them - and maybe not even then. I find this confusing. A DCC decoder is mounted inside a locomotive. Wireless controllers for DCC systems are now commonplace - they send wireless commands to the DCC master control unit. As far as I can tell your module is located on the baseboard and it is a wireless control system for DC track power and if multiple trains are to operate the traditional cab-control track section wiring will be needed. (I am trying to use language that model railway folk will be familiar with). ...R

Sorry about the repeated Posts - the original seemed to get lost and I don't know why there are now so many. I can't see an option to delete the excess. ...R EDIT - I have now hidden the duplicates as suggested by @dhjgreen (thanks for the tip)

I did consider the ESP8266 - it can be built into a small package but it consumes too much energy and I want it always on. The Wemos boards would be far too big. That seems to be the story of my life. ...R

You are quite correct. I did not look at the Github pages. Github is for programmers. I was trying to look at your stuff through the eyes of a railway modeller. IMHO you need to consider carefully who your target "market" is. On the one hand it might be programmers who could be tempted to try model railways. On the other hand it might be model railway folks who could be tempted to try programming. Also (IMHO) the subset which is already both competent with programming and interested in model railways (like me) is {A} a very small proportion of railway modellers and {B} unlikely to need your product. Breaking a new market is not easy. Look how long it took DCC to get where it is. And I suspect the largest part of its current attraction is sound. I am a firm believer in the Open Source ethos but the evidence all around us is that most people feel more comfortable with commercial products. I know it seems like heresy but I suspect you might actually get more market penetration if you commercialized your product - similar to Megapoints. Of course that does require the time and commitment to make a commercial product work. My own interest is in battery powered radio control for my trains. The number of railway modellers interested in that is also tiny. And the most frequent objection to it is the demand for sound - which does not interest me at all. In case it is of any interest I am using Infineon TLE5206 h-bridge chips in the wireless DC system I am building for a club layout. They have a capacity of 5 amps with short circuit protection and error feedback. ...R

This may be interesting but having read quickly through the OORail web page I'm still not clear what a railway modeller would need to do to use your system and what exactly it is currently capable of. It is not the first time I have come across an introductory website that has lots of praise for itself but little concrete information. (By the way the video stopped working a short distance in and I could not get it going again - that could be the fault of my slow internet connection) I think (and correct me if I am wrong) that you are using an ESP32 WiFi module to receive instructions from a phone or tablet and via an L298 H-bridge it controls the DC power in the track so that normal DC locomotives can use it. And I believe your system does not have any microchip in the locomotive. I am a little surprised that you have combined a very modern WiFi chip with such an old-tech motor driver - there is such a thing as taking cheapness too far. IMHO a driver that can comfortably deal with short circuits is a must. I have built a system for wireless hand-controllers for a club DC layout using nRF24L01+ wireless transceivers and it has been well received so I can see that users could be interested in your system. On the other hand, I have also been building an Arduino based system for turnout control and, because there has been no interest among club members to learn Arduino programming we have concluded that the future of the layout will be more secure if it is based on a commerical system - in this case Megapoints. In retrospect the lack of interest in Arduinos is understandable - it's a model railway club and not a computer club. I suspect you may face the same problem. It seems to me most railway modellers have more money to spend than I have and just want to see their latest Bachmann, or Hornby or ... running as soon as possible. ...R

Maybe something like this keyfob wireless device I suspect similar things are widely available on EBay. ...R

IIRC St Simon works for the real railway. ...R

If @woodys wants sound then he will be limited to wireless systems designed to interface with DCC chips. I am not interested in sound myself so I don't know which are suitable - maybe Bluerail or Protocab ...R

I converted an N Gauge Graham Farish Large Prairie to BPRC using a Deltang receiver, a new DIY chassis and small motor. The gap seems to be on the demand side. There are a few suppliers providing wireless conversion systems but there seems to be little interest. Buyers appear to be in thrall to DCC sound which does not impress me at all. One problem is at the club level where members want to be able to run their trains on a shared layout - that means the shared layout must be either DC or DCC (or convertible). And having gone to the trouble of building a complex layout with powered track it is harder to justify spending extra to convert locos for non-powered track. There is also the psychological resistance to abandoning the acquired skills to install cab-control or DCC. One of the reasons I like BPRC is because I am too lazy to clean the track and I am not all that interested in actually running trains so the track does not get used regularly. On the other hand, I want to be able to run a train "now" rather than 30 minutes later after I have cleaned the track. Having said that I am impressed by how reliably trains run on many exhibition layouts - they seem to be so reliable that it is hard to see BPRC adding any improvement. ...R

Me too. But this Thread is not the place for this discussion. By all means start your own Thread in this Radio Control section. ...R

Indeed. But @Raipassion is interested in doing away with track power ...R

Perhaps. This Thread is specifically about RC Layout not RC Loco yet your interest seems to be in RC Locos with battery power ...R

Agreed. If power is arriving through wires or rails it is hard to see the need for wireless control. ...R

When one considers the marginal cost of a piece of software the action of the developer seems more bloodymindedness than anything else. ...R

This nearby Thread has a lot of info about Railcom ...R

Nobody would have died if none of that had been done. Just like it would be perfectly feasible for all shops to stay shut on Sundays (or pick whatever day of the week that you prefer). ...R

Of course not. I am retired so I am not all that conscious of public holidays In fact I would not expect any work on the Forum to be necessary over a holiday period. I am not religious, but it was rather nice when there actually was a rest day in every week. ...R