rgmichel

O.S. Nock's book "GWR Stars, Castles & Kings, Part 2, 1930-1965" David and Charles Locomotive Monographs 1970, ISBN 0715347438 has a chapter 7 "Last work of the Stars".  O.S.Nock records his footplate runs of the last work, but there are none further west than Exeter.  There are quite a few pictures of Stars hauling "blood and custard" in that chapter.  Wonderful book.

That's rather the problem with praising any Bluetooth or R/C control system, this early. So far they are only trying to emulate the "same old" manual control we have presently. Nothing actually advancing the general modelling of trains at all.

This is very true, and I could not possibly disagree, and as the one who started this thread I was interested in the potential of Bluetooth to open up advances in the modelling of trains. Often, if something is made easier, then it advances modelling because other things can be done that we gave up after hitting a brick wall somewhere.  If dcc can be made easier through bluetooth control, making CV reading easier, locomotive control easier, etc, then we can move on to other things.  One thing that comes to mind is easier or more realistic control of train operations, signaling, and so on.  I am sure others might think of other issues that need attention that would advance our modelling.

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.

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...

I believe that we should say as a group that we do not need or want a dcc-incompatible system.  The discussion here has not thrown up any reason to scrap the dcc protocols, while acknowledging the open-source nature of Bluetooth and its ready availability on iOS systems. 

This is a comment I made, to which davepallant replied:

"Down with that sort of thing!".

 

What do you mean 'we'?! I don't want to say any such thing! I am just finishing DCCing my N gauge layout and even after spending that money and expecting to pay much more in DCC chipping another 50 or so locos over the next year I say 'bring it on'! It really doesnt matter what the messages over the Bluetooth link are and they might even be open source (which it sounds like Bachmann/Bluerail will do) the important thing is that for people who just want to run two or more locos at the same time on their home layout this is going to be easier and probably cheaper than putting together a DCC system. .

Dave, are you misinterpreting the double negative in my suggestion that it would be a good thing to have a dcc-compatible system?  It seems to me that its wonderful to have both the Bluetooth addressable locos already developed by Bachmann, together with Bluetooth addressable dcc-sound locos that appear to be under development.  Such goodies are likely to encompasses anything that any of us are likely to want to do.

Two points about the Bachmann vid.  First, it is "very easy" to control an existing dcc locomotive according to the Bachmann vid, and it will be done in the future.  Second the CV control is in the iOS.   I am happy.  This means a lot of flexibility in the future.

I don't see the need for anyone to do any such thing "as a group" - Bachmann have a good business selling DCC and DCC compatible products, and haven't given the slightest suggestion that they intend to "swap" or cease producing stuff for DCC.

 

IOS for DCC is already widely available, so i'm not sure that Bachmann need to go and invent it, and anyway that would defeat the object for them of this being cheaply included in train sets...

I think that your comments are muddling up the iOS, Bluetooth and dcc concepts; notwithstanding that I agree there is little likelihood that Bachmann would decimate its dcc market.  I don't believe I suggested that that that might be the case, although there was tinges of such a feeling in the ongoing discussion. There was also a feeling that Bluetooth may replace dcc, which is not the case, because it is a wireless communication protocol, not a protocol that controls model locomotives.  When I said "as a group" I was merely trying to pull the discussion together, to prevent it wandering off into blind alleys.  The fact is, there is room for a different communication protocol, as long as it maintains the ability to control our existing dcc locomotives.   Some of the discussion implied that we would lose the dcc protocol, and I disagree this might happen.  When I say "as a group" I am merely trying to elicit some response that Bluetooth as a protocol applied to model railways does not necessarily imply the demise of dcc.  I think your comments, despite their face value, agree.  So, "as a group", if we agree on this we have achieved something through discussing it in the first place.

I agree with Ravenser, above, as he is saying roughly the same thing as I said in the immediate prior post, but in a bit more detail.   I believe that we should say as a group that we do not need or want a dcc-incompatible system.  The discussion here has not thrown up any reason to scrap the dcc protocols, while acknowledging the open-source nature of Bluetooth and its ready availability on iOS systems.  This means that we trust that Bachmann is likely making a step towards use of the latter, with a view to ongoing compatibility with the dcc protocol.  The iOS approach should allow for more software variability and choices for control of dcc layouts; hopefully with easier programming of locomotives, and more intuitive control of layouts.

A DCC's biggest drawback is that it is a proprietary system of hardware. Software control is essentially secondary to the  hardware.

• I am not sure about this statement.   Proprietary implies closed and secret standards from one company, while the standards required for a dcc layout are open to everyone, internationally, to allow all the manufacturers to make things that will drive any locomotive made under these standards.  Its the whole reason I can buy British outline OO locomotives, and buy dcc equipment in the USA that works with them.
• We should not accept Bluetooth as competing with dcc.  Bluetooth is a wireless networking, communications, protocol that governs how devices talk to each other.  Of course, it does not contain dcc protocols, but it could be interfaced to devices that do use dcc protocols.
• I am assuming Bachmann is presently using Bluetooth outside the dcc standards in their new product, but I do not know this.  When I talked to their rep he seemed to imply that Bluetooth control of dcc locomotives is being worked on at Bachmann.   If Bachmann is building something that is proprietary then this is a play to cut out dcc.  This is not a good thing.  If the Bluetooth technology is not used ultimately to control dcc locomotives, then it is likely a non-starter for me.  We would have the long drawn out dc/dcc thing written again, as I said above.
• The software aspect and iOS control is a point of discussion because iOS devices have Bluetooth built in already, and has nothing do do with existing software that controls our dcc locomotives.  Sure iOS software could replace our existing software for dcc control of locomotives, but this is not related directly to the Bluetooth protocol nor the dcc protocol.  Its not really a core part of the present discussion.

While I see the possible benefits in control, for a lot of people one of the major things  with DCC is sound that moves with the loco. 

Until they produce this system with onboard sound it will not replace DCC for those people because I don't think they would be happy with the airplay solution.

I have previously tried using stereo  speakers on a PC under a layout and was not impressed. The sound of the loco coming from one or two places when its actually 12 feet away is pointless.  Static systems need lots of small speakers around the layout with sensors to detect loco position and move the sound accordingly. The Pricom system can do this. ( I think the  Soundtraxx as well)

I'm not anti airplay I use it to four rooms in my house.

I agree with everything said by 10000.  I just worry that such a bluetooth sound locomotive cannot be made out of a dcc sound locomotive at reasonable cost, even though I can imagine lots of ways of doing it.  Is the market for such modified locomotives big enough to design and sell conversion parts, sort of like we can convert a dc locomotive to dcc sound now?  We know that present dcc sound has been expensive enough to justify the introduction of the abominable TTS sound!  I think the market for such conversions is there.

Maybe I will not survive this world long enough to see the demise of dcc sound, so it does not really matter!  Now there is a way out...

 

What is interesting about the BlueRail offering is that it is quite happy to run on your DCC layout (although not under DCC control). So not requiring a full changeover between systems. How many people put off the transition between DC and DCC because of the steep adoption price

I note that the cost of dcc on my side of the Atlantic is up to a factor of 2 lower, as I don't pay VAT at 20% and prices are generally lower here.   It sounds as though there is potential for Bluetooth control to provide significant competition to dcc, which might lower prices for dcc, or obsolete dcc control over time.

You can (most likely) have iOS control of your DCC layout already - so why would you replace all that to get something that does the same thing?

Exactly.  So, what is the point of bluetooth?

But why would you need to? Surely you just need to keep using your existing DCC equipment, but put a bluetooth chip instead of a DCC one in any new ones if you wanted to go that way. No need to scrap anything, the bluetooth loco will work perfectly well on the track powered by DCC.

Actually, I want the Bluetooth to control the dcc locomotive.  If the loco has sound, a significant investment, then it would be important to be able to control the sound functions, and also to reprogram the loco, or be able to control all the functions you would want to control.  We can control many functions now with dcc, but with arcane difficulty compared to iOS control.  Its not just a matter of running a bluetooth loco on a dcc layout.  Also, why would you want to have both dcc and bluetooth control on the same layout?  One would want to replace all the  old-dcc control with Bluetooth surely?  What's the point of Bluetooth if you don't do this?

The track can now power the loco by DCC, a constant DC power supply or even a standard DC track controller turned up full. You would be able to take your Bluetooth loco which might cost £10 more than the DC loco and run it on pretty much anyones layout controlling it with your phone or tablet. 

 

I think this statement is clear from the Bachmann wording in their publicity.  However, do you know whether or not it is likely to be practical/inexpensive to piggyback a bluetooth chipset to control a regular dcc loco, or a dcc loco with sound?  If this can be done, is it likely to be impractical in some way or other?  The only reason I ask this question is whether or not bluetooth control could be implemented on an existing dcc layout without obsoleting the locos and track configurations.

I think if you have a wonder round your average toy shop these days there's plenty of toys designed to work with mobile devices...

I agree.  As I watch my 2-5 year-old grandchildren competently control a smartphone, whatever they are doing on there, I have no fears about Bluetooth control of toy trains in the future.  Parents these days are not parking their kids in front of the TV all the time, they also park an iOS device in their hands.

I am not sure where we are in this discussion.  In this thread, there has been a trend of various objections to various suggestions as to the significance of the Bachmann Bluetooth approach, but do we have a preferred direction?  Is it best to think that computer control of dcc is preferable, like Hornby's system or various similar systems that have iOS devices hooked up?  Do we merely think that Bluetooth is for the toy market and has nothing for the modellers' market?  Does Bluetooth allow an interface between the toy market and the modellers market that may well benefit both?  Is there an upgrade path from Bluetooth Toy trains to dcc modellers' trains?

Hardly surprising that DCC hasn't made the bite into the "Toy train" market that the Bachmann rep spoke of. Its an expensive solution to a relatively straight forward problem and when placed against currently available tech and also public expectation and acceptance of current technologies, DCC really doesn't stack up well for anyone whose interest in model trains is approached more from a recreational play pursuit. To my mind it would be a bit of a shame if the most flexible and potential filled format became the preserve of "Toy Train" market while the hobbyist market was dominated by what is old hat technology.

I agree.  Indeed, it remains a problem that there is a significant installed base of dcc.  However, we can take heart in the almost infinite variety of possibilities.  Hopefully, the manufacturers and hobbyists between them can come up with something useful.

Nile, as far as I can see, the BlueRail Trains system is not offering Bluetooth sound.

Sound files will be contained within the app on your control device and playable on that device.

They also say that sound can be transmitted via AirPlay to remote speakers.

The sounds are generic sound files, but they have plans to support loco specific sound files (i.e. not being delivered at the launch of the product).

The BlueRail Trains decoder/Bluetooth module will not store or play sounds.

They "have ambitions" to use their system to trigger on-board sound modules within locos sometime in the future (i.e. they haven't got that yet and it's currently just on a wish list).

I talked to the Bachmann rep at the Amherst show, and he said essentially the same things.  The interpretation I understood was that the Bluetooth approach is for the "toy train" market for now.  This takes advantage of iOS technology, and removes the obstacles of dcc technology which has not taken off for "toy trains".

 All the sounds required by all of your layouts loco's are stored on the hard drive of your controlling laptop, desktop, tablet or smartphone. If using a laptop or desktop computer then your storage capacity has the potential to be pretty extensive. These sounds are then transmitted via Bluetooth communication to the loco's on-board control chip and emitted from the installed speaker.......... if that is your preferred choice of course. There is no reason why the software can not send an output from the computers sound card or indeed sound cards. Even that humble P4 computer you have stashed away in the corner would be more than capable of sending the sound of sixteen individual loco's simultaneously via it's headphone socket to a single, pair or array of local speakers.

 

Its a big advantage to do it this way, and its not limited to Bluetooth, as I am sure we all clear about, but I know from others' reactions to this approach in the past, putting a layout in the middle of a surround system is daunting for some.  I think the problem is that if it is not done right, it will not sound right, whereas built-in locomotive sound intrinsically follows the locomotive about!!

 

Oh and sound. Well firstly you can't model and scale sound....... so personally I'm not all that fussed, but as someone is going to ask the question here are my thoughts. Why piggy back a sound chip on to the back of your DCC control chip, when with Bluetooth. Your layouts controlling hardware and software can have access to a whole library of sounds transmitted to any loco on your layout. Implement RFID technology alongside Bluetooth communication, coupled with software control that uses principles already available. then you have the potential to change the tonality of the the transmitted loco sound dependent on its position on the layout........ Although you are still never going to be able to create authentic doppler shift.

In a sense, it has always been a bit of anachronism that we put the speaker and sound chip in every loco.  The alternative, brought up by Nile_Griffith, is exemplified by the "soundtraxx" system, which puts the sound into surround sound speakers that can track a locomotive around the layout.   I have never worked with such a system or seen it demonstrated, but it would allow bigger speakers to access the low notes of locomotives, as well as the library of sounds mentioned by Nile.  On the other hand, to have each loco be self-contained sound-wise is conceptually easier, and avoids the need to be a A/V expert to apply the sound system.  Now, if I could put my layout in exactly the right position w.r.t. my home theater speakers.... not sure the wife would want my layout in living room ... nix that idea.   Well, its an exciting world... l luv the possibilities..

Sorry Ron,

 

But my experience in dealing with folks who have Apple products tells me otherwise. Items forwarded to me from iPads do not come through with the attachments. I can see the file names, but not the files. Items written in Apple's "Pages" format cannot be opened by any Windows compatible program that I can find. If the "walled garden" is so great then why are there programs around like Jailbreak? There are no Apple clones, if you want iOS you have to buy Apple, and that's disproportionately expensive for what you get. If you want a program for an Apple device you have to go through iTunes and Apple takes its cut again. Sadly Android and Windows are going the same way just to compete. Apple and its iOS are not for me, and never will be.

 

Back OT, the Bluetooth concept is theoretically sound, but what's its killer advantage over DCC through the rails? I can't see one at the moment. Locos are still going to need power and I can't see batteries becoming sufficiently small for 4mm and smaller gauges to replace power through the rails for some time to come. For it to succeed it needs to be able to demonstrate a clear advantage over DCC through the rails either in terms of a significantly lower price and/or reliability and/or functionality.

I am sorry to hear you have so much trouble with your computer.  It is possible to find an Apple Clone, which will run the Apple OS, but Apple does not support the software.   What fun commercial companies have competing with each other...!

 I agree with you on Bluetooth but it has the advantage that it has so much software support across platforms, and with a large number of developers.  This focus of minds on one thing tends to benefit the technology.   Whether this will benefit Railway Modelling is yet to be seen.  I have been very surprised at how Bluetooth underwent an resurgence in recent years, although I think it started with smartphone earphones.  As someone else said, it might make more sense to go with TCP/IP wireless technology, although that tends to be glitchy too.

(suppose it doesn't help that this is under dcc topics when it's not dcc tech!)

Its a question of how you see the future of the Bluetooth technology.  It could be in conjunction with or even in competition with dcc.  It could go either way, or just fizzle out.  I don't really think the Bluetooth discussion should be in isolation from dcc unless it becomes a real competitor.  Its early days for that just now.

As an aside, I've read that at last weekend's Amherst RailRoad Hobby Show (one of, if not the world's biggest show), there were problems with so many thousands of Bluetooth and HiFi users in close proximity.  Some demos of various systems using BlueTooth and WiFi, were said to have encountered problems with interference; Bachmann demo'ing their EZ app included !!

I was at the Amherst show, and saw the Bachmann demonstration.  It was not having problems during the few minutes I was watching.  I did not use my phone to try and disrupt their demo!  Its a disappointing show, with more vendors, and fewer layouts than I would have liked to see.  No British modelling presence at all.

I can see all sorts of issues, both pro and anti on the bluetooth devices inside locos.  

 

The Bluetooth issues are fundamentally different to smartphones used as DCC throttles.  Smartphones as DCC throttles are already available from Roco, Hornby, Lenz, ESU, and just about every other command station if you stick a PC in the loop. 

 

I agree with this.  To me the key is ease of use, but I always worry about new less expensive approaches losing me the features I had before.  The market can be cruel.

I already get frustrated when Apps cease to work and you must upgrade the App, yet cannot upgrade the App because the old smartphone isn't capable of running the latest version of Android or iOS.  It would be seriously annoying if a model train stopped working and I needed a new phone to run my train !

I agree with this.  I am fed up to the back teeth with the lack of  backward compatibility as upgrades progress.  So, this is a likely problem.   One answer frequently offered of course is to not do the upgrades.  This means that the iphone you buy for your layout, or laptop or whatever should not have its OS upgraded unless you know your app will work.  I have managed to keep one of my Apple computers going without upgrading for seven years, but it cannot be used for anything now, except the app I need!  Makes me feel like a dinosaur, but it is proudly running in my cupboard.