Ron Ron Ron

......but Mk3's weren't around in the 1960's ??????

It was meant to be a joke David. However, if as you say, there's a potential H0 market out there for this bullhead rail, then that is all to the good and hopefully might encourage Peco to press on with padding out the range with turnouts etc. One lives in hope. regards Ron .

I suspect they're probably sticking to the joint 00/H0 label, so as not to queer the patch for the pre-existing 00/H0 labelled lines. On the other hand, maybe they're now trying to pull the wool over H0 modeller's eyes, just like they've been doing for 00 modellers over the years. p.s. Unifrog seems to be gradually being applied on more turnouts too. . .

Also fitted with a TTS sound decoder. Sound effects include.... F5 - "Leave it arrrt" F6 - "RICKY !" F7 - "You Slag !!" The Eastenders set will also regularly derail, causing a disaster crash scenario, with some additional murder, wife beating, ######, extra-marital affairs, double-crossing and family feuds. All good clean family fun for the kiddies to enjoy with Mum and Dad. .

For most of the UK, you can't "just pop out" for a length of Peco either. Very few people will have a stockist on their doorstep.

With C&L going over to mostly the thicker sleepers, this is one direct competitor to the new Peco Bullhead track..... http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=346_375_377_379&product_id=12267

Of course Peco will never release a Code 75 Bullhead track range in 00. They would only be competing with their other range of Code 75 Streamline. It will never happen. There's no demand........Blah Blah Blah !! A bulk order for edible hats please........ .

Kendo, credit to you for flagging up the issue with the Dynamis, v.v. Cobalt ip motors. It may be of benefit to anyone who may have also walked into this trap. However, there is no fault on DCC Concepts part as far as I can see. The Dynamis has an unusually limited capability as far as the range of accessory addresses goes, when compared to most other in-production DCC systems. For example, even the Roco/Fleischmann MultiMaus can handle 1024 accessory addresses. However, as another example, if I'm not mistaken, the train-set market Hornby Select, only allows 38 accessory addresses. Starter systems and those aimed at a less demanding audience, generally have lower specifications or capability in one or two areas, as in this example. I can imagine that some of the comments above, suggesting should should have done your homework, have irritated or annoyed you; but I shouldn't worry about that. You should be able to return the products to Hattons as suggested and choose a more appropriate point motor that will work with the Dynamis. Personally, if it was me, I'd be cheesed off that I'd made the wrong purchase too. .

All three H0 start sets (train sets) that include the SmartControl, have been on sale since before Christmas. The SmartControl system (on its own) is now available, but not all retailers appear to have it in stock, or their websites haven't been updated from "reservation" to "order" yet? Dealers splitting the SmartControl from the start sets and selling them separately (e.g. via eBay), is already happening in a limited way, but prices are far too high at the moment. One UK dealer is currently offering the system for £299.95, but ordering from certain established German model shops should mean paying between £265 and £290. Modellbahn-Lippe have raised their price from €339.99 to €347.99, but are still only showing "reservation" (pre-order) at the moment I'm hoping that once the initial interest and demand has died down, if there's a similar pattern to MultiMaus sales, eBay prices for split-from-start-set SmartControl systems will reduce to around the £200 mark. Anyone who's prepared to buy a start set and split it for sale, should be able to obtain the SmartControl for well less than £200, if they can successfully sell the other contents (LokSound fitted loco's, rolling stock etc,). Conversely, anyone interested in keeping the LokSound fitted locos, will get them extremely cheaply if they manage to sell the SmartControl and rolling stock for a modest price. .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JXWWcIBRzs

I'm curious about this. If I may ask Dave, has your involvement with Bluetooth development included work on Bluetooth Smart (aka Bluetooth LE)? I was under the impression that this latest iteration of Bluetooth, with its different system architecture, could handle multiple connections simultaneously? In one of the BlueRail Trains' videos, they operate 3 locos in very rapid succession. I'm interested in what the actual limitations are with BLE, as I've also read elsewhere that multi-connections can run simultaneously. I wonder if you could give us some insight into this? .

Yep! Equilibrium, as in Ying and Yang. Like replacing the Ying Ying of Class 66's with the Ying and Yang of Bi-modes. Mmmm..... I'm not sure what will happen when everything ends up all-electric? Yang Yang will be all out of balance again. OK Scrap that theory...... .

So where will the extra on train equipment be accommodated and how is the additional cost of fitting the whole fleet with DC gear to be justified, just for a mile or two of "environmentally-sensitive" line. By shortened ones, do you mean the NoL sets, which are foreign owned, situated overseas and now withdrawn from use and in the scrapyard? .

Roco always refer to use of X-Bus, of which XpressNet is a later subset (v3 onwards or something?). I've never worked out if the Roco MultiMaus and Z21 are using XpressNet (V3?) or an earlier version of X-Bus? Does anyone know the answer to this? .

I agree with Nile, that Dave (Junctionmad) makes some very good points and observations, many of which I quite agree with. Just a note to Dave. I did not say that DCC was a legacy technology. I might have worded it better, but I simply gave my opinion that many of the currently available DCC systems are legacy products, some of which have been in production for 15 to 20 years in pretty much the same form as when they were first released, albeit with minor revisions and occasional firmware upgrades along the way. As such most don't lend themselves very well to some of the more recent developments in DCC such as RailCom for example and in some respects are positively archaic in terms of technology. That's not a failing of DCC, but rather a failing, or a lack of willingness, or simply a lack of resources on the part of the particular manufacturers involved. I'm personally very pro-DCC, but like Nile I see potential in direct wireless technology for model train control. If something like the Bachmann/BlueRail Trains Bluetooth based system is able to offer a suitable level of functionality and usability, it has the potential to be a very easy way into Command Control for new entrants and converter's. For many modellers, it's all they would ever need. I'm reminded of that adage, "DCC can be as simple or as complex as you want it to be"? Many users of DCC currently don't venture beyond the more basic operational aspects of driving trains and operating loco functions. . .

IIRC, Lenz said that the patents on RailCom were taken out as protection against potential claims that it infringed on other patents. That sounds like, get your flag in the sand before anyone else does and sues you. They have given the licences over to the NMRA for free though, for that body to issue licences as they see fit. There's an NMRA reference to licensing of the original (basic) RailCom in S-9.3.2 The enhanced RailCom Plus is another matter though. .

Thanks for that information Ian. Hopefully the firmware update to provide latching or momentary selection of functions is not too long in being delivered. Without it, it will just be another on the long list of badly designed or executed DCC systems in this particular department, like so many of the well known and leading sellers. I read your reply to say that the function naming will be there from day one? Hopefully so, as trying to remember what function is which, when confronted by 28 anonomous looking buttons is not ideal and from the manufacturer, not the best way to go about designing things. I can imagine the scenario.... "now where is that coupling sound?" "is it F14, or F21...or was it F9?" Then trying to find the correct button out of a page full of them, with no helpful visual clues whatsoever. Worst still, you might have to turn the function on.....and then turn it off again, when that particular type of sound function should be accessed by a clearly labelled button requiring a one hit, fire and forget command. Hopefully Fraser can get it nailed fairly quickly? It must be a monumental task trying to get this to market in a fit for purpose state. p.s. I hope I don't sound like I'm in knocking mode, or trying to put this project down, but the speed buttons...."DEC" & "INC" ...they don't look right at all IMHO, particularly in that orientation.. I know it's the same symbology as NCE use, but at least they are in an understandable orientation on their handsets. Then again it could just be me. Personally I'd rather see something more familiar or generic and therefore intuitive. Maybe the + & - symbols, up/down arrows or similar. .

RailCom is a platform that should allow DCC developers to make good use of it. The fact that they don't is due to a number of likely reasons, mostly down to the fact that most DCC systems currently available are effectively dated, legacy technology, tied to their own system architectures and cannot be readily adapted to new features. For those modern systems (software based) that have the theoretical capability, it remains for imaginative minds to exploit the potential. You are missing out one huge advantage that the Bluetooth, or any direct wireless system has. No need for costly system hardware. Seriously Dave, what fraction of 0.000x% are going to, or are capable of, building their own DCC system? Particularly one that encompasses the more advanced features that are attainable with the latest commercial systems available today? Agreed. There are a couple of other DCC fitted point motors, beside the Cobalt. Although not a techie, I do realise other wireless protocols offer more potential, but I think you have to look at where the Bluetooth idea is coming from. The ubiquity of everyday Bluetooth equipment. Almost everyone has the "controller" hardware in their pocket already. The system is a free app. I don't think you could get a better starting point than that. Whether the system can be developed into something that competes with DCC in terms of functionality and capabilities, remains to be seen. I don't know enough about the latest versions of Bluetooth Smart (BT4/LE) and future developments in multi-device capabilities (MPS etc) to say where this could go. .

I'm sure Dave was referring to the limitations preventing Bluetooth streaming to multiple locos?

While being able to get a good view from your seat is very nice, part of any high density commuter train requirement will be to have the capacity to transport x-zillion people per hour/day/year. I don't suppose sightseeing facilities gets anyway near the specification? I'm sure it's very busy in the peaks, but is Merseyrail rammed enough to warrant longitudinal, Overground type seating arrangements? .

AFAIK a politically based decision isn't possible under the rules..

A couple of concerns I've noted. Scrolling through the loco list. This would appear to be achieved by using the "Previous" and "Next" buttons, which I believe would be a cumbersome and slow means of access to the list and something I would consider not to be proper scrolling. With a touch screen, it would be easier and far more intuitive to scroll by swiping or dragging a finger, which will provide very quick access to all locos and would by its nature provide variable speed scrolling. Function Access. The "More" button gives access to all 29 loco functions F0-F28. However, there is no mention of.... ....latching and non-latching capability for these function selections, either for how many functions (if at all) and.... ....if available, whether these settings can be stored individually for each loco in the Loco List? The lack of user defined latching/non-latching selection for individual loco functions is a shortcoming of many old style, first generation DCC systems, particularly those of US origin (Digitrax, NCE, MRC etc). The use of a software driven touch screen should allow this shortcoming to be properly addressed. Also, if by selecting the "More" page, all you are going to get is a page full of buttons labelled "Lights" and "F1" to "F28", then personally I think this is a major failing, particularly when we are talking about a software driven glass screen. It would make more sense for stored locos, to only present the function buttons relevant to the selected loco and preferably be able to assign an icon or name to the individual function buttons, particularly with sound decoders. Otherwise, I think this project is shaping up quite well. Hopefully more information and clarification will come to light in due course. .

Assuming all this stuff will eventually deliver a fully featured control system and decent sound quality, then it can't get any better. Digital Control system for £0 (zero) On-board Sound for $10 Despite my own investment in DCC kit, I'm rather hoping this really does take off in a big way. .

The WiFi MultiMaus is designed to work specifically with the Z21/z21. It looks as if it cannot be used with a "normal" MultiMaus system. .

Ian, you can also add that Bachmann are introducing the E-Z Command Smart Interface module, that allows smartphones and tablets to be used as handsets with the E-Z Command system. http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/docs/E_Z_Command_Smart_Interface.pdf .