raymw

wrt post #806 http://www.android.com/kitkat/index.html http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/give-me-break-next-version-android-kitkat-8C11067717 (friendlier resolution than apple and beatles) Best wishes, Ray

Well, they wouldn't realise there is a market, until folk asked. In the last year or so, there has been the promises, and at least an actual release of small locos, at a more reasonable cost cf other rtr 7mm locos. This has definitely sparked an interest in folk to buy rtr instead of having to kit build. Simple pre-set track makes it easy to lay track on the floor or wherever you can find a bit of flat space for a few hours, so there is a new market developing quite quickly. Before the end of 2014, with any luck, there could be half a dozen small locos, and maybe a couple of dozen wagon choices, all rtr on clip together track and small radius point, so if the market wasn't there when Peco/whoever al last looked, the market will be here quite soon. Best wishes, Ray

It's 16 for a full circle, and at a discount price of £84 from Blackpool Best wishes, Ray

GETTING OLD HAS ITS ADVANTAGES…..WE JUST GOTTA BE SMART LIKE THIS GRANDPA The IRS decides to audit Grandpa, and summons him to the IRS office. The IRS auditor was not surprised when Grandpa showed up with his attorney. The auditor said, 'Well, sir, you have an extravagant lifestyle and no full-time employment, which you explain by saying that you win money gambling. I'm not sure the IRS finds that believable?' 'I'm a great gambler, and I can prove it,' says Grandpa. 'How about a demonstration?' The auditor thinks for a moment and said, 'Okay, Go ahead.' Grandpa says, 'I'll bet you a thousand dollars that I can bite my own eye.' The auditor thinks a moment and says, 'It's a bet.' Grandpa removes his glass eye and bites it. The auditor's jaw drops. Grandpa says, 'Now, I'll bet you two thousand dollars that I can bite my other eye.' Now the auditor can tell Grandpa isn't blind, so he takes the bet. Grandpa removes his dentures and bites his good eye. The stunned auditor now realizes he has wagered and lost three grand, with Grandpa's attorney as a witness. He starts to get nervous. 'Want to go double or nothing?' Grandpa asks, 'I'll bet you six thousand dollars that I can stand on one side of your desk, and pee into that waste-basket on the other side, and never get a drop anywhere in between.' The auditor, twice burned, is cautious now, but he looks carefully and decides there's no way this old guy could possibly manage that stunt, so he agrees again. Grandpa stands beside the desk and unzips his pants, but although he strains mightily, he can't make the stream reach the waste basket on the other side, so he pretty much urinates all over the auditor's desk. The auditor leaps with joy, realizing that he has just turned a major loss into a huge win. But Grandpa's own attorney moans and puts his head in his hands. 'Are you okay?' the auditor asks. 'Not really,' says the attorney. 'This morning, when Grandpa told me he'd been summoned for an audit, he bet me twenty-five thousand dollars that he could come in here and pee all over your desk and that you'd be happy about it!'

not local

Hi Pete, you mean nicky - tams http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nicky-tam Posh folk used leather straps no leg pulling Best wishes, Ray

Hi Stuart, SOIC refers to the ic packaging (pin spacing, etc.) Here's a link to give the idea of the space saving obtained http://www.skpang.co.uk/catalog/soic-to-dip-adapter-8pin-p-491.html hth Best wishes, Ray

Hi, There is little difference in the picaxe basic or the arduino version of c (or most other small microprocessor languages), other than the syntax. The major difference here in the 'appearance' of the servo programs that you have both shown is the arduino has numerous comments, and the real servo control is hidden away in the Servo.h file. I'll try and find my old c version of a similar thing, not that it was any better, but maybe different. It was written using the ccs c compiler (for the pic). You have to buy that, but is optimising, and interesting in a 'geeky?' way to see how it produces the assembler code. The free Pic c compiler is not optimising, nor is the free arduino. I expect both programs could be made smaller and quicker in operation, but if it works, that is probably good enough. I've not shown any of the setting up of the particular chip that is required if using a 'raw pic' as opposed to one with boot loader and in-built libraries. Also, of course, I've defined the pin numbers as more meaningful names, and there has to be a fair bit of understanding on how to set up interrupts and other trickery in the raw pics (similar with Atmel and others, too) but I don't see that much difference between this version of 'C' or 'Basic' (fwiw, 15 years or so ago I used something horrible, called 'PicBasic', iirc. It was very, very flaky.) The following is from January 2005 main() { init(); getspeed(); highsw=false; stepi=1;step4=1;kk=stepi; highp=254;lowp=2; loop: output_high(spare); if(!input(swit)) goto swlow; swhigh: //<<<<<<< counterclockwise hard over if(!input(speed)) setspeed(); //!!!!! if (highsw==false)goto changeup; output_low(relay1); step4=highp; highsw=true; goto loop; swlow: //>>>>>>>> clockwise hard over if(!input(speed)) setspeed(); //!!!!! if (highsw==true)goto changedown; output_low(relay0); //relay0 closed step4=lowp; highsw=false; goto loop; changedown: // move from clockwise to ccw output_high(relay0); output_high(relay1); output_low(spare); delay_ms(dell); step4=step4-kk; if(!input(speed)) setspeed(); //!!!!! if (step4>lowp) goto changedown; highsw=false; goto loop; changeup: //move from ccw to clockwise output_high(relay0); output_high(relay1); output_low(spare); delay_ms(dell); step4=step4+kk; if(!input(speed)) setspeed(); //!!!!! if (step4<highp) goto changeup; highsw=true; goto loop; the full program works with an ordinary servo, the pot connected to an ad converter within the pic. In tests I could get full swing in less than three seconds (I think it was well under that, can't remember,) or over 24 hrs (but I never stared at it that long.) it also switched a couple of relays). Somewhere I have the built version - I need to make some more when I get around to wanting to operate my track. Now, completely off topic - 45 years ago I was programming an IBM 1130 (took an air conditioned room, cost over a hundred grand, punched cards, etc.) It had 8K of memory. The language was Fortran. In that version of Fortan, variable names had to be less than four characters, and integers were variables beginning with letters 'I' through 'N' - hence my 'KK' counter! Old habits, and so on. Best wishes, Ray

Hi Robin, I read your post, but I was replying to Stuart. Best wishes, Ray

Hi Stuart, This looks useful - http://www.picaxe.com/Hardware/Project-Kits/XBee-Connect-Starter-Kit/ maybe a bit expensive, but I expect you would learn something. They have cheaper radio , too. The Picaxe is programed in a version of basic, Arduino is in a version of 'C'. I had a freeware ide that worked with both Arduino and PICs (in 'C') My opinion is that the Arduino is ok for development, but the predefined layout, board size, etc. is not what I would necessarily want to build into a final system - I think the PIcaxe may give a 'neater' result. There iwas a guy supplying the bits for an Arduino type circuit for very little money - http://cefn.com/blog/tag_arduino.html but I can not discern from his blog if he is still doing this - maybe you'd want to email him. You will then not be restricted by the arduino layout, but still be able to program it in the normal way. There will be little difference, apart from the syntax, in programming in 'C' or Picaxe basic both can get to the bits. If you really want to get to grips with the PIC, instead of being restricted to the few Picaxe chips, then microchip have a free ide, and also a fee 'C' compiler, but maybe you should try the Pic assembler. However, you will need, in most cases, to acquire a programmer - for some PIC's that is easy to build. It depends how far you want to be diverted from 'trains' What makes the Arduino and Picaxe easy is that they have been pre-programmed with a boot loader, but this wastes memory space in the final product. hth, Best wishes, Ray

as a DIYer, you shouldn't be able to get hold of creosote - http://www.wood-protection.org/newpubs/files/Creosote_guidance_02_2010.pdf Barrettine now sell 'creocote' for DIY use - not the same. If you want some rot proof timber, get it 'tanalised' that's impregnated with nastier stuff than coal tar products. Tanalised treated timbers are used to reinforce steep earth banks, and is guaranteed not to rot, for at least 40 years, but it makes the wood hard to cut and brittle.

Some more experiments in battery power and radio control here http://railwayherald.com/uknews/bombardier-shows-off-its-last-mile-power-with-class-187

It is the dcc communications protocol that is useful. it doesn't matter whether it is communicated through the track, radio, infra red, ultra sound, or whatever. It is a standard that is the most popular, and has been fairly widely adopted. At the moment, as far as I know, the radio systems do not implement this, they use their own proprietary methods, which appear to be limited in functionality. If we want to talk diy, then rough retail pricing of rf receiver £5.00, transmitter £20.00, ir receiver 25pence, transmitter (but you need a few - 10pence) - these piggy backed onto existing dcc control gear. It would not be difficult to then run rf/ir and track all on the same layouts while the changeover was commenced. Now, afaik, the Deltang, and the like does not have such a rich protocol as dcc, and it may mean an all or nothing change. It depends also, on the scale of the model - 2, 4, 7mm or larger, as to the ease of fitting batteries, etc. For an individual, whether any of it is worthwhile depends on their personal wishes, capabilities, and disposable income. My previous post was about the model manufacturer's perspective - Hornby, Bachman and the like. Their manufacturing requirements are nothing like the DIY approach, they have to keep it simple since they have no control over the capabilities of the purchaser. I'm not saying which system is better dc or dcc protocol, since it will depend on personal choices. When I was young clockwork was fine - and it still has advantages today Best wises, Ray (btw I wish there were more 'sensible?' emoticons here)

I would guess the major manufacturers have a fairly good idea of where they make there money. I expect currently there is little interest in their customers to pay for radio control/battery powered locos. I think for most purchasers of electrical items, they only tolerate batteries where they have no choice. At the moment, it is relatively easy to add in dcc as an afterthought, there is a sort of standard. As yet, afaik, there is no such standard for the radio gear, and then you have to add in a battery. Folk are complaining about the price of rtr locos, and adding batteries and rc is unlikely to reduce that price. Personally, I think if any manufacturer of rtr was to dabble in rc they could immediately lose money, so it would pay them to be cautious. It is one thing for a small company or a few individuals to make something (a kit, if you like) and make a small profit, and it is quite another to ramp it up to completely fitted/tested rtr units for a more mass market.

Hi Chaz, I spent a few minutes poking around on the railway herald galleries - http://railwayherald.com/imagingcentre/ I guess there would be suitable photos there. The amount of dirt would possibly depend on speed/frequency of the steam loco's. I think it may pay to possibly try and photoshop the smoke stains, etc. on some of your photos, before actually attacking the model - at least it may get you into the right ball park, appearance wise. Best wishes, Ray

Hi, A couple of Items that I wrote over a decade ago, but possibly still relevant wrt batteries (although concerned with a/v applications, the same problems are present in powering models). http://yertiz.com/rwc/lithium.htm and http://yertiz.com/rwc/batart.htm wrt battery chemistry, the new kid on the block is Lithium-sulphur - a higher ptw ratio than Li-ion, and is inherently safer and will be cheaper (at least to make). The technology is still under development, but looks impressive, so far - http://www.newelectronics.co.uk/electronics-technology/lithium-sulphur-cells-set-to-change-the-battery-landscape/50314/ Best wishes, Ray

Interesting points of view here. One thing you can never be sure of is colour. However, heavy rust or china clay dust on the relevant wagons, will take your eye from any errors. No point in looking at preserved items. For example, some current preserved locos are painted in colours unlike any they had pre preservation, and in a few years time folk will be referencing images of these, if we are not careful. Basically, the best you can do is whatever you're happy with, unless your intention is to build a museum piece.

Hi Jon, I've just come across this thread. Thank you so much for documenting in detail your processes. It will be a valuable resource for when I actually get round to signalling - at my present rate of progress in about 30 years time Best wishes, Ray