GoingUnderground

We already have 2 way communication in the form of Railcom, but that has been slow to be adopted outside of European DCC manufacturers. What else do you think it could be used for? If it's a camera in the cab, then direct radio communication would be the best, but do I really want to spend my time looking at a screen showing me the view from the cab when I'm running a loco? Nice to have, admittedly, but not a killer application, for me anyway. Roco already offer it. As long as power is drawn from the rails then the loco will be just as unreliable due to dust, dirt or corrosion on the rails, so I don't see any advantage in removing the control signals from the rails as long as they are needed to supply the power. Move to an onboard power source as well and then direct radio communication has a killer advantage, no more rail cleaning and potentially total reliability of operation. EZ APP doesn't offer that, and can't on its own, which I think robs it of most of its potential benefits.

You misunderstand me, I have absolutely no trouble with my computer, or Windows 8.1 tablet. It is the worshippers of the Great God of Apple that cause me trouble. The Bluetooth resurgence was probably driven by the sheer size of smartphones making a Bluetooth headset a more practical way of carrying on a conversation legally if you are driving, or walking around. Also car makers started offering a Bluetooth handsfree option in cars that allow users to use their phones legally, i.e. handsfree, in cars which will have made it more popular. Bluetooth was ideal for that as it is short range and worked with older non-smartphones which had Bluetooth but not Wi-Fi.

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.

The "Great God of Apple" is doing its very best to tie users of its grossly overpriced products so tightly in to them that they will be unable to go anywhere else without losing all their data and walking away from a lot of very expensive hardware. Every wonder why Apple makes $ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo,ooo much money? Microsoft may have taken over the desktop PC market and with Windows appearing on every PC, but we could still choose the hardware and that at least kept its price down. It gave us a standardisation for a period that meant exchanging data between different users was easy. So no I don't want to rely on iOS, that's the very, very, very last thing I want to do. Bluetooth is a blind alley. Wi-Fi is the way to go, and some of us are already using Wi-Fi to control our layouts and operate our trains under DCC. The smartphone apps already let us do this without being tied hand and foot to Apple. You can even control an ESU ECoS running firmware 4.0.0 remotely from any make and model of tablet by using a VNC client, it's just like having the ECoS in the palm of your hand as you walk round the layout.

I was clearing out some cupboards over the weekend, and came across a reprint of an article from a 1996 edition of Continental Modeller about the 511. There were also some old price lists from the last 10 years, all showing the 511 as costing £399, with the mains transformer extra.

I've resurrected this topic, as late last year new versions of tablets using Windows 8.1 came on to the market, such as the Linx range http://www.linx-tablets.com/ I bought one myself as it was on offer at a bargain price before Christmas on ebay. Works just like a Windows 7 PC when you get to the desktop. The trial version of the Windows Phone app ECoS Cab won't download on to the tablet, but the ECoS Cab web site, http://ecoscab.at.ua/, shows that there a version of the app for the Windows 8.1 tablets under development. I contacted the developer, Konstantin Kolesnik this week to find out if he still had plans to release the app. Here is his reply: So if, like me, you are interested in the Windows 8.1 tablet version, post on here, or tell Konstantin that you are interested in it by contacting him direct using the "Contact Us" part of his web site http://ecoscab.at.ua/ I would imagine that the app would be paid for, the same as the Windows Phone version. I have no connection with Konstantin, the Linx tablet importers/distributors, Microsoft, or ESU. I'm just a long time ECoS user who would like to be able to use ECoS Cab on my Windows 8.1 tablet and am simply trying to get ECoS users who haven't already jumped on the Apple bandwagon to express an interest in ECoS Cab for Windows 8.1 tablets to encourage Konstantin to release the tablet version of the app.

Andi, I agree with you. It's not hard or difficult, and is likely to be a very infrequent event anyway. However, the memory stick method may be the most pragmatic way to let users who are not comfortable with computers install the updates at home, and not a way to charge for them as I thought.

Your comment about it having 2 USB ports, one Type A for the memory stick for firmware upgrades, and one Type B for connection to a PC, is most revealing. If any firmware updates are going to be distributed via a USB memory stick, that suggests to me that they will be paid for upgrades as it would be easier , simpler, and cheaper for Taunton to distribute them via the internet so the owner could load them from their PC. Of course the Type A socket could also be used to connect other devices that use USB.

Except that you need a flag or symbol to show you if you're looking at F0-F14 or F14-F28. On Combe Martin's point about the 335 occupancy detection feedback, there is feedback, and there is feedback, it all depends on the device to which you're feeding back the information. As I understand the 335 manual, the 335 is a very simple device that monitors the DCC current flowing through it. No current flowing = unoccupied: Current flowing, i.e. being drawn by a decoder or a resistor between an insulated wheelset, =occupied. The 335 uses that to complete an internal circuit so that a light or LED connected to the output will be illuminated. The light could be in a traditional external track plan diagram. Or you could use it to operate a relay. The relay could be used to switch in diodes into a track feed to produce an asymmetric DCC signal to make the loco brake. That's all the feedback it gives you. But that doesn't matter as the 511, and so it would seem, the 611, have no way to receive that information, and even it they did, could do nothing with it. If you want to use it in conjunction with PC control there is no data output. You would need to connect to the 355's output ports another device that can pass that information back to a PC. Even then it cannot tell you which loco is being detected as it doesn't have Railcom. You would have to use RFID or something similar and a reader to pass that back to your PC. More sophisticated occupancy detectors do have a data bus output that can pass the information back to the DCC master controller and the controller can then pass that on to your PC through its PC interface. If the detector includes Railcom that can also include the identity of the loco. Some DCC controllers can then use that information to trigger routes automatically. e,g, goods locos always go into the loop whilst passenger trains get routed into the station platform.

So if the better display is a long way off and has still to be developed, doesn't that suggest that the 611 main board may not be able to support whatever is developed, or alternatively that the design/capabilities of the new display, when it comes, will be limited by the capabilities of the 611 board? Your point about the unit colour is also interesting. If 611s can be distinguished by the green casing, what colour will upgraded 505/511s be when returned to their owners as they will be 611s not 505s or 511s? Will they get a respray during the upgrade, or will units sent in for upgrade in fact just be exchanged for a new 611 and the old cases go away to be refinished in the new colour scheme to provide a source of cases for later upgrades? If they get sent back in their original finish, then the "what colour is the case" question doesn't work when giving telephone support. One other question, does the 611 still have the same multiple button pushes to operate an accessory decoder as the 505/511?

Astounding. Seeing it in miniature makes me appreciate the beauty of the original all the more. And to think that the powers that be wanted to demolish it, just as they did with its twin St Pancras! Thank goodness both were saved.

Just in case anyone is tempted to go ECoS instead of 611, according to an e-mail I've just received from Olivias Trains, you can buy an ECoS from them for £440, PROVIDED the order is placed online between 10pm tonight, Thursday 27th Nov, and Midnight tomorrow, Friday 28th Nov. It is part of their Black Friday 20% off DCC promotion. http://www.oliviastrains.com/trains/model-trains/black-friday-deals/

Is there any indication what type/style of display upgrade they're considering - a few more lines of monochrome text; a monochrome screen allowing fixed icons as well as descriptions: or a much larger colour screen allowing meaningful graphics?

I thought there was a Chinese clone of most things western.

I am convinced that sales of 611 upgrades will ensure it has a reasonable installed user base. If you have an old 505 like I did, it makes a lot of sense to spend the GBP200 or so on the upgrade. But I wonder how many new converts the 611 will attract in this digital smartphone touchscreen age? I also have trouble seeing the way it could evolve. Replacing the current display panel with a colour touch screen for the Starship Enterprise (or modern 1:1 diesel or electric loco design) look could come, but that would give it the appearance of a laptop or a tablet, which, judging from posts in this thread, is the last thing that current users want. When you rule that out, the design seems to me to have come as far as it can as function buttons with icons, graphical programming of decoders within the unit, mimic panel/track plan diagram, and so much more can't happen. Taunton/ZTC aren't alone in this respect as the designs of many other DCC controllers without screens also seem to have come as far as they can as there is no way for them to exploit new features and functionality within the screen-free hardware design.

Without wishing to fall out with anyone, both USB and Ethernet/network port are appropriate ways to connect a master controller to a PC, and both will work. The choice is probably down to the way that the DCC unit interfaces with the PC. In addition to allowing connection to a PC, a Network connection allows the connect of devices without needing a PC at all, such as smartphones running a throttle app, like Touchcab for iPhones, and there are similar apps for Android and Windows smartphones. You do need a Wi-Fi router to use a Wi-Fi throttle, but almost all broadband routers are Wi-Fi so most of us already have all the necessary kit. But the appeal of the 505/511/611 design to many is that it doesn't look high tech, so perhaps the lack of a network connection to connect direct to Wi-Fi throttles doesn't matter.

Ian, Sincere apologies, I misread the meaning of your post. We seem to be in agreement after all.

Ian, Shooting myself in the foot? Hard sell? Far from it. If I was spending as much as £470 and realised that for just an extra £28, the cost of a decoder or two, I could have an ECoS, I'd go for the ECoS every time.

Saw the pre-production sample at Warley yesterday. It looks about right, much better than their EM2/Class 77 which was a disappointment, so I have ordered one in Wartime Grey livery from a well known trader in Cheltenham. That way it won't be competing with my modified Radley kits ones in LT 1960-62 livery.

Was at Warley yesterday and walked past the Taunton stand. There was a unit with 611 branding on display, immediately next to an ECoS. I didn't enquire about the 611 as I'm never going to be a buyer and I don't believe in wasting a trader's time at a busy show like that when they could be making sales or taking orders from serious purchasers. The stand was much simplified over past offerings, and all the better for it.

The Taunton web site as of tonight, 21st Nov 2014, is still showing the 611 as "coming soon". How soon I don't know, but I' m sure the new owners will be sick of answering that question by Sunday night if they're not on sale this weekend at the NEC. I haven't seen any comments on RM Web by anyone who has already had their 505 or 511 converted to a 611, so that also may not be on sale yet. Sorry I can't tell you if an ECoS will operate ZTC accessory decoders. In theory it should, but you would need confirmation from someone who has experience of using ZTC 304s with ECoS.

Colin, The problem with removing the Union Jack is that the "Made in Britain" marketing is a key USP for the 611. It was one of the factors that influenced me to buy a 505 as my way in to DCC. Take that away and you've removed most of its uniqueness. The only USPs that I can think of are the separate regulator, brake and direction controls, and if it has been carried through to the 611 from the 511, the "conventional DC" option. All its other selling points are also present on every other DCC master controller to a greater or lesser extent.

Graham, I wish you good luck with the 611, and the rest of the ex-ZTC range. I still think you should have dumped the ZTC name, too much emotional baggage.

Combe Martin, You asked what were the shortcomings of the 611 compared to the ECoS, and I gave them as I saw them. If they're not shortcomings as far as you are concerned, then that's fine by me. But you did ask. What I didn't mention was the interminable button pushes needed to operate the 505/511 as until the 611 goes on sale we won't know if that is the same as the 511. Being able to update the firmware yourself is one thing, actually releasing upgrades for your users to apply that provide significant additional functionality, or even just applying bugfixes, is another matter. So the jury is, as far as I am concerned, still out on that one for the 611. Railcom will be no use to you if your loco decoders are not Railcom capable. Only you know if they are, and if they are not then the lack of Railcom on the 611 won't affect you. But I use it, and like it. I wasn't trying to sell you, or anyone else the benefits of the ECoS. Just pointing out how incongruous I felt it was for Taunton to be selling the ECoS as a DCC controller on their web site when the ECoS is so much more advanced, as I see matters at least having owned a 505, and being a current owner of both an ECoS 1 and an ECoS 2, than the still to be released 611. The 611 may indeed evolve into a much more capable machine, or it may not. Only time will tell. For me the ECoS gives a lot more bang for your bucks than the 611. The 611 will I am sure be a modest success if only due to owners of the 505/511 getting upgrades to 611 spec to remove the shortcomings in the 505/511 firmware. But it is, at least judging by its current published spec, hardly cutting edge technology. But perhaps that is what some people, such as yourself, want.

Hi Andy, No I don't have the 505 any more, it was sold years ago. However I do still have my ECoS 1, on firmware 4.0.1, (it started life on firmware 1.1.1) as well as my colour ECoS 2. The only area for me where the 511/611 scores over the ECoS is that you can use a 511/611 as a slave to another 511/611. To date, you can only use the track out to sniffer port method to connect one ECoS to another. Will that change to give us master/slave sharing the locos, routes, track plan and accessories between 2 ECoSs....? Who knows...?