rgmichel Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Erm, it's not battery operated... I still think you guys are thinking from the wrong direction here, I think this has zero to do with 'replacing DCC'. Instead, think of new entrants, where if this works can now get a dcc sound like experience without spending hundreds on sound locos and a proper dcc system, or folk that may have been tempted by a modern smartphone interface but don't want to properly go dcc, or folk that use their locos on many layouts, some dc, some dcc; where this now means it would work identically on both... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 (suppose it doesn't help that this is under dcc topics when it's not dcc tech!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmichel Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 (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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingUnderground Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 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. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmichel Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingUnderground Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) 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. Edited February 1, 2015 by GoingUnderground 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Erm, it's not battery operated... I don't think anyone suggested it was, Martyn? I still think you guys are thinking from the wrong direction here, I think this has zero to do with 'replacing DCC'. Instead, think of new entrants, where if this works can now get a dcc sound like experience without spending hundreds on sound locos and a proper dcc system, or folk that may have been tempted by a modern smartphone interface but don't want to properly go dcc, or folk that use their locos on many layouts, some dc, some dcc; where this now means it would work identically on both... Replacing DCC? Yes and No. The sales pitch is that you no longer have to buy an expensive array of DCC equipment, or keep having to add on extra bits for increased functionality. Most existing DCC users would probably stick with what they have though. Your second paragraph nails it. Assuming the EZ App can do most if not all things DCC can do. We don't know that yet and there are many questions left unanswered. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) 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. Removing command and control signals from the rails has many advantages. Apart from reliability, it opens up the availability of more modern 2-way communication technology and protocols. The killer advantage depends on what you're looking for. e.g. Much reduced cost, or the ability to exploit the technology available. Then again, the use of Bluetooth could equally be applied to DCC use in some form. As has been said before, it might not be helpful to confuse wireless technologies and control interfaces, with the control systems themselves. The BlueTrains/ Bachmann EZ-App system is a different type of control system, that just happens to use Bluetooth as its communication vehicle. It might just as well have used WiFi instead. 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 totally agree there, but this isn't a subject about Dead Rail or battery power. Bachmann EZ-App isn't about power sources AFAICS. The Dead Rail, battery power thing is a different subject. . Edited February 1, 2015 by Ron Ron Ron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoingUnderground Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Removing command and control signals from the rails has many advantages. Apart from reliability, it opens up the availability of more modern 2-way communication technology and protocols. The killer advantage depends on what you're looking for. e.g. Much reduced cost, or the ability to exploit the technology available. Then again, the use of Bluetooth could equally be applied to DCC use in some form. As has been said before, it might not be helpful to confuse wireless technologies and control interfaces, with the control systems themselves. The BlueTrains/ Bachmann EZ-App system is a different type of control system, that just happens to use Bluetooth as its communication vehicle. It might just as well have used WiFi instead. I totally agree there, but this isn't a subject about Dead Rail or battery power. Bachmann EZ-App isn't about power sources AFAICS. The Dead Rail, battery power thing is a different subject. . 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenser Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Just to inject a non-techie perspective here: Consider the following facts: - It took about 20 years (1987-2007) for DCC to start to achieve significant takeup in the British market. - In the German market a large proportion of modellers still use 3 rail, an electrical control system that was obsolete by 1945 - In the USA , there is a substantial market for hi-rail tinplate 3 rail, something that was widely regarded as "less than ideal" in the 1930s - The demographic of the hobby is heavily skewed towards the 40-75 years old range. This demographic group are not natural early adopters Any rapid takeup of a new Bluetooth based system is unlikely. And does anyone want to bet that Bluetooth will still be a mainstream IT protocol in 10-15 years time, when a new control system might start reaching critical mass in terms of takeup? If this comes to market - and at the moment it's brochureware - it will need to show clear advantages over DCC to attract people going digital. At the moment there is no obvious "killer advantage". Those already committed to DCC - and that's probably a large majority of those willing to go digital - won't change , not least because they have a substantial investment in DCC decoders and equipment and they'd have to scrap the lot and start again. A majority of those still in analogue DC (especially in the US, where DCC has been mainstream for longer) are never going to go digital Backward compatibility is important and it's not obviously there And I'm rather uncomfortable with the casual equation of modern IT with a particular proprietary operating system. If the last 20 years have taught anything on the subject it's that the sands shift, substantially and quite quickly, dominant positions don't last, and I certainly don't think Apple have any kind of dominance of the type Windows had at one point. I don't own any Apple products My guess is that this is an interesting little by-way cul-de-sac, and that if it comes to market it may end up like products such as the early command control systems (eg Zero1) or Hornby's OO live steam. Radio control/battery systems are another idea that's been floated occasionally as a commercial product but which have never taken off, and in my view probably never will Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
10000 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) 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. Sorry to get off topic but I have to comment on some of the above. Don't just blame iPads for your attachment problems I suffer similar problems from Windows users. Its usually a fault of the user not the software. Your Pages issue again don't blame Apple. Pages happily opens Word documents so maybe you should reproach Microsoft and developers for not including the ability to open Pages documents. Yes iOS is a closed environment (keeps the malware down) but you are wrong about OS X I run several programs on my macs NOT obtained through iTunes or the App store. And for info I also use Win XP and Win 8.1 Edited February 1, 2015 by 10000 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 I don't think anyone suggested it was, Martyn? . It was a post a couple above mine talking about battery tech not being good enough and that it might be useful in the garden... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greengiant Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Listening to someone from Bluerail, this will be available generally, not just tied in to Bachmann, there is also talk of open source. One aim is to try and attract new blood into the hobby via a medium youngsters are already familar with and do own. The ability to intigrate game play into railway operation is an interesting concept. We could integrate that into our own railways, giving a new level of operating and indeed interest. In App downloading sounds and features slots nicely in to today's tablet and smart phone environment. Android Apps are in development at the momement. I don't see this as replacing DCC, more one of complementing, if it attracts youngsters into the hobby via a medium they are very familiar with then that can only be good. Battery power should be possible, after all if the OO9 boys can do it with RC then the technology is there. Ss far as Apple is concerned, not everything has to be downloaded/installed via iTunes, for example Adobe CS Suite is via Adobe, Quarkxpress is through Quark etc. An advantage of Apps through iTunes is they have to have been approved as safe before being available for sale. Windows users having problems with Mac emailed attachments, I supspect these are image format files, for which the default for Mac mail is to embed them, Windows mail Apps seem to have trouble extracting them. Solution is get the sender to change the default in 'Preferences' to attach, rather than embed. If they find that too difficult, get them to zip the file, then it will attach by default. As someone else has said Pages opens Word files, Word cannot open Pages files. Pages comes free with the Mac OS, Word has to be paid for. Not all versions of Word can open docx files, Open Office will and back save them so Word can open them. I always found it odd that Word could not open Works files unless you download an extension. I use Apple and Microsoft products in my job, both have advantages and disadvantages. Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) Those already committed to DCC - and that's probably a large majority of those willing to go digital - won't change , not least because they have a substantial investment in DCC decoders and equipment and they'd have to scrap the lot and start again. I agree that established DCC users won't change, but you are incorrect about them having to scrap the lot. A loco fitted with this should work perfectly well running on a dcc layout concurrent with dcc trains in use. The only thing you can't do is use your dcc handset to drive it. Edited February 1, 2015 by Glorious NSE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold farren Posted February 1, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 sounds like a good idea and will be better when the app is extended to android operating system in the next few months. http://www.bluerailtrains.com/faq.cfm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 As someone else has said Pages opens Word files, Word cannot open Pages files. ..... In Pages, there is the option to export or save a Pages document in a Word readable format. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 It's interesting reading the reactions to new developments like this, on American forums. It was the same when the Ring RailPro system was introduced. Clearly a lot of American DCC users have only been exposed to, or are only aware of domestically manufactured DCC systems (e.g. Digitraxx, NCE, CVP & MRC) and possibly Lenz; with their basic and dated/legacy handsets and user interfaces. The reaction to RailPro and now EZ-App/BlueRail Trains suggests most are not aware of more recent DCC systems that already have modern GUI based user interfaces such as the ESU ECoS, Viessmann Commander, Roco Z21 or the Zimo (MX10/MX32). It does kind of cloud the issues being discussed. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Bit of a late entrant into the foray but here goes. When I first got into the hobby some nine's years ago. I wasn't aware of DCC. So while sat watching my Flying Scotsman prezzie going round in circles. My mind got to thinking that there had to be a better way of controlling the loco rather than good ole DC. In fact my musing went along the Bluetooth route. So much so that I sat down with a very good friend of mine who is rather adept at such things and pondered upon the technicalities of it all. However that all got filed away as a browse through a relevant magazine highlighted readily available DCC rather as opposed to the half mill we where short to develop bluetooth control. I must admit that although over the years I've come to love my Lenz system. I've also come to loathe it's inherent limitations. Now in very simplistic terms "Bluetooth" is not a product. It's not owned outright by Apple, nor is it the sole preserve of Microsoft. It is a communications standard. In much the same way as we accept that the BBC now transmits digital TV to our homes. We also accept that the BBC does not as a whole own the communication format it uses to transmit our favourite bit of telly. "Bluetooth" transmits a sequence of numbers. It is a pathway, a means of one device transmitting information in its own language to a another remote non physically connected device capable of understanding that language. There are plenty of uses for bluetooth. remote computer keyboards and mice. in ear listening devices, car stereo's through to a growing number of industrial applications. Will Bluetoth disappear? I'm not so sure. The Bluetooth standard imposes relatively small and therefore more constrained power limits for radio frequency transmission. This makes bluetooth preferable when it comes to connecting devices that are as part of their normal operation, kept at relatively short distances. Wifi on the other hand has comparatively greater transmission power (Otherwise Hotels would be sticking Wireless base stations outside every other hotel room). So Bluetooth has a potential market beyond model trains. Furthermore because it is a well established standard and widely licensed. Attractive to any of the myriad of Chinese semi conductor manufacturers. In implementation a "Bluettoth" control system requires essentially three things. A bluetooth device that can be connected to the device that it needs to provide data to (a control board, or some form of digital to analogue sound device for example). A means of making a bluetooth transmission. A laptop or desktop PC or Mac. Handheld device such as a smartphone or tablet. Or potentially a proprietary device such as a QWERTy keyboard or mouse. In the case of the transmission device being a computer, tablet or smartphone. Then form of software to convert a set of instructions most likely created by another program into the Bluetooth transmission. Importantly Bluetooth is fully bi-directional in the way it can transmit data, assuming that both ends of the link are able and configured to both receive and transmit. So here as I see it is the killer app. With a hypothetical Bluetooth train control system my buying choices are more economic and robust. Like DCC I obviously have a choice of control device manufacturers, with considerations of quality, size, interface etc. But what I won't need to do is to make an investment of some hundreds of pounds in DCC power stations and control hardware. All my layout will need is suitable power. How I supply that power is much more open and should I need to get creative, that power could come from on board batteries. Cab control from my device of choice. At present and from what I can see of it. Computer control via DCC requires a fairly hefty chunk of investment and a requirement for the user to kind of nail his colours to the mast at an early stage. So you've built your layout using DCC and you've gone the XYZ com route with hardware based on that supplied by ABC limited. But somehow your not quite sure it's where you want to be. Control software utilising Bluetooth communication means that should your friend be using software by a different company. It would be a relatively straightforward process for him to set up (for example) his laptop running the software alongside your layout. The software to then recognise and pair with the loco's and any controlled points, block detectors etc that are under bluetooth command. Reasonably quickly you can start to make that assessment of another control environment. Multiple cab control? Straightforward enough. Taking your favourite Loco along to your club's bluetooth layout. Either control from your own smartphone once the loco is on the rails. Or instruct the host system to interrogate your loco to access the loco's running profile. It would also offer a software developer the potential to create a true dispatcher type environment. Software on the host layouts system would sent out despatch style instructions to each individual loco's operators control device. The operator would read the instruction from his device and then operate his own loco (or loco's) accordingly, observing and instructions at signals setting his speeds accordingly.... The ability for bluetooth to transmit information bi-directionally means that the range of data transmitted is only limited by the amount of information that the control device that is linked via bluetooth can generate. For example. The load on a loco's motor due to number of wagons, coaches or incline could be returned to the layouts host computer or whatever type of cab control is your choice. Signal control is no longer dumb. It isn't a case of the software telling you that it has operated the switch that turns the signal to green. The control device within the signal transmits back via bluetooth that the green lamp has actually lit. Again venturing into the realms of operational realism. The amount of diesel fuel carried by a Loco could be specified. Data is transmitted from the loco controller via bluetooth the layouts control software. Run your loco to hard and for to long without returning the lcl back to the MPD for refuelling? That'll be you buying the round after the exhibition then.... OK a bit abstract but you se where I am going. By and large DCC is one way traffic and what two way capability there is, is fairly restrictive. Coupled with the fact that any purposeful control with DCC requires investment in fairly bespoke additional interfaces. It becomes easy to see how far the use of Bluetooth communication between on board loco controllers and and cab control on platforms which become more a case of personal choice than buying into a methodology becomes a bit of a winning formulae. I personally hope it comes through. I'd be quite happy to ditch my rather archaic DCC system for something with development potential. Economically I can't see any reason why a Bluetooth connected control board for a model loco shouldn't be any more than a good quality DCC chip is now. No need to tie cash up in the rest of the DCC paraphernalia that I only really get to use an hour or so a week when I already own a good laptop, tablet and smartphone. The only other additional cost will be my layout control software of choice and that has the potential to offer some exciting features. 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. If there is a fly in the ointment with bluetooth, then it's bandwidth. Like any kind of pipe there is only so much you can stick down it. However this limitation could be easily overcome. Most laptops as well as their own in-built bluetooth transceiver chip have at least a couple of USB ports that additional and couple of quid cheap, Bluetooth dongles could be plugged into. Controlled internally by the appropriate software that should help ease bandwidth issues. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiptonian Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 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. The Bluerail board does have provision for battery power. http://www.bluerailtrains.com/faq.cfm Scroll to the bottom of the page, last but one question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmichel Posted February 2, 2015 Author Share Posted February 2, 2015 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.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crosland Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 If there is a fly in the ointment with bluetooth, then it's bandwidth. Like any kind of pipe there is only so much you can stick down it. However this limitation could be easily overcome. Most laptops as well as their own in-built bluetooth transceiver chip have at least a couple of USB ports that additional and couple of quid cheap, Bluetooth dongles could be plugged into. Controlled internally by the appropriate software that should help ease bandwidth issues. How does Bluetooth use the allocated radio spectrum? Simply adding more dongles will not increase bandwidth if they are competing for the same spectrum. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 ... 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... That's actually a misapprehension in finescale 4mm and smaller scales (may apply to larger scales too). A reduction in cleaning of wheels and rails perhaps. Crap build up on rail and tyre still happens with no power through said rails and tyres, I promise you. Even if the resulting lurching progress can be tolerated, the eventual derailments tend to be unwelcome. ... Control software utilising Bluetooth communication ... Be afraid, be very afraid. Remember the old joke about the software engineers analysing the events ahead of a fatal crash stored on the car's onboard computer? 'Oh look there, he failed to double tap the brake pedal to initiate braking from speeds above 50mph that was downloaded in last weeks v 5.7.12 upgrade.' Nice clunky mechanistic stuff that no software author can dick around with, that's what I want for model rail hobby purposes The underlying concept of rail as a wholly hardware based guidance system might suggest a basic hobby interest incongruity with the concept of control via software? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) No DCC system is entirely electromechanical! As for the prototype - neither are they these days!Führerstand Siemens Vectron MS by kilux, on Flickr(Edit - linked the wrong image!) Edited February 2, 2015 by Glorious NSE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nile_Griffith Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 How does Bluetooth use the allocated radio spectrum? Simply adding more dongles will not increase bandwidth if they are competing for the same spectrum. Andrew Hi Andrew. What I was referring to was the data bandwidth of he Bluetooth device, not the part of the radio frequency spectrum allocated for Bluetooth device use. It's not my area of speciality (Ask me one on radio microphones instead). But like any other data transfer device. A bluetooth device has a finite limit. I'm not entirely sure what it is but if memory serves I think it equated to something like the ability to transmit four stereo recordings simultaneously..... Most likely MP3 files but that would equate to potentially 800Mbps, But I could be very wrong. Radio frequency bandwidth allows for something like eighty or so individual Bluetooth devices within their own transmission area. However I could be wrong, but I'll try and get something a bit more solid and let you know. However of those sorts of figures. It would be more than reasonable for one bluetooth capable laptop to control and transmit a good quality mono sound file to seven loco's simultaneously and operate a good quantity of Bluetooth control enabled points signals and stuff. Add another transmitting dongle and you are effectively doubling that. I think fourteen loco's moving on a layout and emitting sound at one time would cover most peoples aspirations. Hope this helps but will try and dig out something more defined. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now