Advancements in DC control?

[railfan4life]

I got to thinking about this the other day and thought I'd post my question here. My premise for the question is: With DCC becoming mainstream in the 90s, it has been about 20 years since the latest advancement in train control electronics wasn't some advancement in DCC. Lots of advancements seem to have been made in various DCC systems, decoders, sound decoders, computer interface boards, transponding decoders and their corresponding detectors, etc. But with all the advancement in electronics in society, shouldn't there have been some advancements in DC layout control as well? Which leads to me to my question, what non-DCC advancements in layout/train control have there been in the past couple decades?

I run DCC, and have since about 96, so I haven't kept up to date with the non-DCC advancements. However, I don't recall seeing anything published other than the standard electrical block control that was the standard before DCC took off. And yes, I have seen Ring Engineering's RailPro system, and while not DCC, it still operates like DCC with a decoder being put into each engine.

So, anybody up to date on what's out there if someone wanted to run without going to DCC?

[trebor]

I think a universal JMRI type signal system is needed for as close to plug and play as can be. Support for all signal types and rules would be great. Hooking up to Loconet or NCE panel and computer, draw out layout and go. I haven't gone beyond NCE detector modules yet. I am just rebuilding layout and all steps are being taken with wiring and track installation to make any signaling as adaptable as possible.

When reading JMRI, I still am at a loss when changing drivers, ports and all that computer speak is beyond me at this stage.

[Brakie]

Kevin for straight DC power MRC has the new Tech 7 and for dual mode running DC or DCC engines there is the Tech 6 and by a simple press of the mode button you can run a single DCC engine with sound or by using the hand held throttle up to six DCC engines-quite a breakthrough for DC users that wanted sound or has several dual mode DCC locomotives but,still has lots of DC engines..Other then that its still old school DC wiring as far as I know.

If interested in the T-7 news:


www.modelrec.com/train-controls/dc-power-tech4.asp

[railfan4life]

Larry,

Thanks for the info on the Tech-7, I wasn't aware of that.

[railfan4life]

Trebor,

I agree. I'm surprised there isn't some type of plug and play system for layout control and signaling. It seems all the different manufactures build parts of the system, but the modeler has to come up with the overall control architecture by himself. With the number of casual modelers in the hobby, I would think a simple plug and play system would sell well if the price could be kept low enough.

Cheers,

Jan 8, 2014 11:17:19 GMT -8 trebor said:

I think a universal JMRI type signal system is needed for as close to plug and play as can be. Support for all signal types and rules would be great. Hooking up to Loconet or NCE panel and computer, draw out layout and go. I haven't gone beyond NCE detector modules yet. I am just rebuilding layout and all steps are being taken with wiring and track installation to make any signaling as adaptable as possible.

When reading JMRI, I still am at a loss when changing drivers, ports and all that computer speak is beyond me at this stage.

Trebor,

[cfin]

Jan 9, 2014 2:50:27 GMT -8 Brakie said:

Kevin for straight DC power MRC has the new Tech 7 and for dual mode running DC or DCC engines there is the Tech 6 and by a simple press of the mode button you can run a single DCC engine with sound or by using the hand held throttle up to six DCC engines-quite a breakthrough for DC users that wanted sound or has several dual mode DCC locomotives but,still has lots of DC engines..Other then that its still old school DC wiring as far as I know.

If interested in the T-7 news:


www.modelrec.com/train-controls/dc-power-tech4.asp

Anybody have experience with the T6?  I like the idea of DCC, especially sound, but I have all DC locos and I'm intimidated by the apparent complexity of doing DCC - MRH online mag regularly devotes 10 pages or so to DCC "issues" for example.  i used to write software for digital telecom switching systems, so I'm no technophobe, but I really don't want to spend my hobby hours futzing with CV values or trying to figure which decoder is compatible with what.

I'm considering acquiring some Atlas Gold engines and I would like to tap into that sound on my DC layout.

[Mark R.]

If you look at the Tech 6 (in the link you provided), it will give you the ability to control DCC sound decoders without having to convert to a DCC system.

Mark.

[fr8kar]

I use Digitrax since it's what Free-mo calls for, but I am not a fan of their controllers or many of the others I've tried. I really would like to see some alternatives when it comes to controlling locomotives. I don't use sound because the way the sound responds to the throttle doesn't strike me as realistic at all. In fact, the locomotive should respond to the sound, not the other way around. There's no easy way to control how the locomotive responds to the load, whether light power or uphill on a heavy drag, either in accelerating or decelerating situations. If fact, it seems to me that if I could tell the throttle what the load was and whether I was going uphill or downhill or gliding along on river grade, I could get some realistic throttle and sound responses.

Another thing that makes me crazy is variables like momentum and headlight functionality are assigned in the decoder and not easily adjusted with the throttle, especially on the fly. Why is the throttle the dumb part of the control system and the decoder is the smart part? It seems like it should be the other way around.

An example is directional lighting. I hate directional lighting. If I have a three unit consist running light power moving forward, the lead locomotive should have the light on and the rear locomotive should have a light on as a marker. A typical directional lighting setup has no light on the rear. If you turn the rear locomotive's light on, it's the light facing the middle unit. When you start to back up, the rear light on the lead locomotive comes on. If you have the headlight turned on the rear locomotive, at least its light will come on to display a marker when you're backing up. To get around this I have to set various lighting CVs to control the headlights individually. Still, I cannot select the rear headlight of the consist without selecting the rear locomotive then selecting the headlight facing the rear. This is so much easier done on the prototype.

I have a friend who loves to set momentum on his locomotives and has programmed a switcher to accelerate and decelerate very slowly as if handling a heavy load. That's what it's doing about half the time when it pulls the industries picking up several loaded cars. But the first couple moves handling four or five hundred tons shouldn't bog the switcher down like the last half dozen when you're handling three thousand tons. Likewise, when spotting empties to the industries even if you're switching without air you can sling several cars around with good response from the locomotive. There's no easy way to adjust for this on the fly, unless you were to eliminate the momentum and manually recreate it by turning the throttle slowly taking care to adjust for tonnage and grade as you go. I give my friend points for setting his switcher up this way. It really can make it a challenge to switch, especially with a bunch of cars. But I'd like to see this taken to the next level and have the handling characteristics of the locomotive change as the load and grade changes. Even if it means manually inputting this information periodically, it would be much more realistic and challenging to have the characteristics change as you work.

As long as a change like this could be made, the sound could respond differently according to the load. When you're switching, handling more tonnage means using more throttle and more braking, whether air or dynamics or handbrakes or a combination. With a pair of geeps, I could handle half a dozen cars on relatively flat grade and never need to get out of notch one, which doesn't sound much different than idle. Change that to two dozen cars on the same territory or one dozen on a grade and it's going to take notch two or three to make the same moves. Yet the sound as it is now never changes. Go faster you get a higher engine RPM whether you're light power or pulling a full yard track. This needs to change and it doesn't need to be something that I have to mess with separately while I'm trying to control the train.

It seems to me these changes could all be addressed with a smart controller that can tell the locomotives when to turn which headlights on, how rapidly to respond to throttle commands and how much power the diesel prime mover -- that is, the sound -- needs to supply to the consist to perform the work. I would love to see this addressed, especially if it could be done with a throttle that's compatible with various systems. The wifi throttle apps used through JMRI can be used with different systems and maybe some version of those apps could be made to address these shortcomings.

Whatever the solution is, I hope we see it soon. DCC is good -- I mean, it's better than the old days of DC -- but it's far from good enough.

[ashpit]

I think Bachmann's new EZ App is a DC accessory (http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/ez-app.php). I guess it allows you to run a DC locomotive with a Blue Tooth Smart device, if that appeals to you. Personally, I don't see much of a need for such a device and think if there is a direction the the hobby will be taking, other than DCC, it will be towards Dead Rail and R/C.

[emd16645]

To say Railpro is just like DCC is a misnomer. Yes, each locomotive gets a module, or chip. But that's where the similarity ends.

With DCC, command signals are sent to each loco via the tracks. Railpro uses radio signals. Therefore Railpro can utilize any electrical source for power, DC/DCC power through the tracks, or just as easily onboard batteries (aka dead rail). It doesn't matter as long as the module receives adequate power.

The biggest difference is consisting. In DCC, consisting is achieved by speed matching. As most of you know this can be a tedious process at best. Railpro uses the concept of load sharing. Each module provides feedback to the controller as to how much load is placed on that unit's motor. The controller automatically analyzes the data for each unit in the consist and makes adjustments accordingly. This is much like how the prototype functions. After installing a module in a new locomotive, a test program has to be run to establish a performance analysis on the motor. Running this test is as simple as punching a few buttons. Once the performance curve is established no further attention is necessary to ensure trouble free consisting.

By continuously analyzing motor performance and load, Railpro is more accurate in sound timing as well. Motor load spikes, engine revs. Pretty simple and more realistic.

[riogrande]

To say Railpro is just like DCC is a misnomer. Yes, each locomotive gets a module, or chip. But that's where the similarity ends.

Perhaps the similarity ends there but to some it's may be the salient similarity.

I can imagine that DCC may eventually bring the feature you mention which could automate the speed matching aspect of consisting. Hopefully it will. Railpro may not be practical for people who are already invested in DCC and have well over 100 diesels; the cost per diesel is still a good deal higher with Railpro from what I've read, and some of us don't have deep pockets.

[mlehman]

Mar 22, 2016 21:44:33 GMT -8 fr8kar said:

I use Digitrax since it's what Free-mo calls for, but I am not a fan of their controllers or many of the others I've tried. I really would like to see some alternatives when it comes to controlling locomotives. I don't use sound because the way the sound responds to the throttle doesn't strike me as realistic at all. In fact, the locomotive should respond to the sound, not the other way around. There's no easy way to control how the locomotive responds to the load, whether light power or uphill on a heavy drag, either in accelerating or decelerating situations. If fact, it seems to me that if I could tell the throttle what the load was and whether I was going uphill or downhill or gliding along on river grade, I could get some realistic throttle and sound responses.
SNIP

As long as a change like this could be made, the sound could respond differently according to the load. When you're switching, handling more tonnage means using more throttle and more braking, whether air or dynamics or handbrakes or a combination. With a pair of geeps, I could handle half a dozen cars on relatively flat grade and never need to get out of notch one, which doesn't sound much different than idle. Change that to two dozen cars on the same territory or one dozen on a grade and it's going to take notch two or three to make the same moves. Yet the sound as it is now never changes. Go faster you get a higher engine RPM whether you're light power or pulling a full yard track. This needs to change and it doesn't need to be something that I have to mess with separately while I'm trying to control the train.
SNIP

Whatever the solution is, I hope we see it soon. DCC is good -- I mean, it's better than the old days of DC -- but it's far from good enough.

Ryan,
I won't go off on a DCC tangent (maybe a separate thread, if someone wants to do it in detail), but did want to note something I just discovered, based on something I previously knew...

At least with steam, the Tsunami does exactly this sort of thing once the Dynamic Digital Exhaust (DDE) is programmed in a loco to fully use its features. My locos will dig in and bark at the start of a grade and drift quietly downgrade with a murmur of beats. But I don't do diesel sound (much), in part because my narrowgauge diesels make pretty darn sweet noises on their own and, to be frank, my budget has made that choice and easy one for now.

Of course, as readers here know, many consider the Tsunami to be dated, even outdated, technology that pains their ears and insults those so stupid as to actually buy one...
Well, YMMV.

My experience with steam Tsunami's was reinforced just last week, when a couple of the local major operators (who do get around) were just blown away by my double-headed set of Blackstone K-27s. They couldn't get enough of that, although they've been here before and have heard and run them running singly. And I did do a small tweak of the DDE I'd been meaning to get around to since their last visit. They weren't listening to something that hurt their ears and their pride -- they enjoyed every second of it.

Sort of like what you want, but with diesels I presume.

And I do presume. I thought that the diesel version Tsunamis (which people seem to focus their ire on for various reasons, again we won't belabor that here) had their own version of DDE, but, nope, they don't. So beyond supposedly weak horns, no DDE. Maybe in the next gen top of the line Soundtraxx decoder? Who knows yet?

That said, thought I'd mention that at least for steam, what you want in sound is old hat for the Tsunami. Since it is DC compatible, I assume that once the DDE is dialed in, the same sweet sounds emerge from the Tsunami on DC as they did on DCC. In this case, it's a good thing all the brains are on the decoder board, too, although I do like how you're thinking about the need for more creative controllers.

[mlehman]

Mar 23, 2016 3:18:41 GMT -8 ashpit said:

I think Bachmann's new EZ App is a DC accessory (http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/ez-app.php). I guess it allows you to run a DC locomotive with a Blue Tooth Smart device, if that appeals to you. Personally, I don't see much of a need for such a device and think if there is a direction the the hobby will be taking, other than DCC, it will be towards Dead Rail and R/C.

I think Bachmann's dive into BlueTooth is very first generation and will soon be updated. The folks who did the work on that for B-mann are about to get their own, full-featured version to market, maybe already have? Thought I remembered seeing something about this in last month's MRH? Anyway, someone else may know who I'm speaking of since I can't recall who it was right now.

So the current issue product isn't where this stops, consisting as they anticipate being the most important missing piece with this initial product release. I like the idea that it runs on DC, DCC, or maybe even batteries if you have a feasible amount of space for that, great for a set of traveling locos, shows, and other displays. Maybe a good idea to give a kid this instead of one of the DCC controllers, too? for so folks. Lots of potential for it, although I see no reason to reconsider my commitment to DCC as a whole.

[jonklein611]

Mar 23, 2016 10:54:39 GMT -8 mlehman said:

Mar 22, 2016 21:44:33 GMT -8 fr8kar said:

I use Digitrax since it's what Free-mo calls for, but I am not a fan of their controllers or many of the others I've tried. I really would like to see some alternatives when it comes to controlling locomotives. I don't use sound because the way the sound responds to the throttle doesn't strike me as realistic at all. In fact, the locomotive should respond to the sound, not the other way around. There's no easy way to control how the locomotive responds to the load, whether light power or uphill on a heavy drag, either in accelerating or decelerating situations. If fact, it seems to me that if I could tell the throttle what the load was and whether I was going uphill or downhill or gliding along on river grade, I could get some realistic throttle and sound responses.
SNIP

As long as a change like this could be made, the sound could respond differently according to the load. When you're switching, handling more tonnage means using more throttle and more braking, whether air or dynamics or handbrakes or a combination. With a pair of geeps, I could handle half a dozen cars on relatively flat grade and never need to get out of notch one, which doesn't sound much different than idle. Change that to two dozen cars on the same territory or one dozen on a grade and it's going to take notch two or three to make the same moves. Yet the sound as it is now never changes. Go faster you get a higher engine RPM whether you're light power or pulling a full yard track. This needs to change and it doesn't need to be something that I have to mess with separately while I'm trying to control the train.
SNIP

Whatever the solution is, I hope we see it soon. DCC is good -- I mean, it's better than the old days of DC -- but it's far from good enough.

Ryan,
I won't go off on a DCC tangent (maybe a separate thread, if someone wants to do it in detail), but did want to note something I just discovered, based on something I previously knew...

At least with steam, the Tsunami does exactly this sort of thing once the Dynamic Digital Exhaust (DDE) is programmed in a loco to fully use its features. My locos will dig in and bark at the start of a grade and drift quietly downgrade with a murmur of beats. But I don't do diesel sound (much), in part because my narrowgauge diesels make pretty darn sweet noises on their own and, to be frank, my budget has made that choice and easy one for now.

Of course, as readers here know, many consider the Tsunami to be dated, even outdated, technology that pains their ears and insults those so stupid as to actually buy one...
Well, YMMV.

My experience with steam Tsunami's was reinforced just last week, when a couple of the local major operators (who do get around) were just blown away by my double-headed set of Blackstone K-27s. They couldn't get enough of that, although they've been here before and have heard and run them running singly. And I did do a small tweak of the DDE I'd been meaning to get around to since their last visit. They weren't listening to something that hurt their ears and their pride -- they enjoyed every second of it.

Sort of like what you want, but with diesels I presume.

And I do presume. I thought that the diesel version Tsunamis (which people seem to focus their ire on for various reasons, again we won't belabor that here) had their own version of DDE, but, nope, they don't. So beyond supposedly weak horns, no DDE. Maybe in the next gen top of the line Soundtraxx decoder? Who knows yet?

That said, thought I'd mention that at least for steam, what you want in sound is old hat for the Tsunami. Since it is DC compatible, I assume that once the DDE is dialed in, the same sweet sounds emerge from the Tsunami on DC as they did on DCC. In this case, it's a good thing all the brains are on the decoder board, too, although I do like how you're thinking about the need for more creative controllers.

WOWsound uses a back EMF function to do the same thing:

www.tcsdcc.com/Customer_Content/Web_Tools/Videos/WOWSound.php

[autocoach]

Mar 23, 2016 11:04:51 GMT -8 mlehman said:

Mar 23, 2016 3:18:41 GMT -8 ashpit said:

I think Bachmann's new EZ App is a DC accessory (http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/ez-app.php). I guess it allows you to run a DC locomotive with a Blue Tooth Smart device, if that appeals to you. Personally, I don't see much of a need for such a device and think if there is a direction the the hobby will be taking, other than DCC, it will be towards Dead Rail and R/C.

I think Bachmann's dive into BlueTooth is very first generation and will soon be updated. The folks who did the work on that for B-mann are about to get their own, full-featured version to market, maybe already have? Thought I remembered seeing something about this in last month's MRH? Anyway, someone else may know who I'm speaking of since I can't recall who it was right now.

So the current issue product isn't where this stops, consisting as they anticipate being the most important missing piece with this initial product release. I like the idea that it runs on DC, DCC, or maybe even batteries if you have a feasible amount of space for that, great for a set of traveling locos, shows, and other displays. Maybe a good idea to give a kid this instead of one of the DCC controllers, too? for so folks. Lots of potential for it, although I see no reason to reconsider my commitment to DCC as a whole.

This is probably the direction for the 21st century form of model train control.  A built in form of keep-alive will suffice until sufficiently small power sources (batteries whatever) become available. I am somewhat concerned that Blue Rail is proprietary but then DCC was initially also proprietary until Lenz open the communications protocol of their system. This change will probably incur a lot of antagonism from many just as DCC did to die hard DC block control enthusiasts. in 10 years it will probably be the norm and we will be looking to another advance in train control. You will not be forced to rip out your DCC or DC block control. Just remember you won't be the cutting edge anymore getting all the new stuff. One thing I like about Blue Rail is their adherence to an 8/9/21 pin board connection architecture to the motor or other control board allowing component choice.

Now can we get on to replacing electric motors powering our models.  I recently saw a YouTube clip of a G scale vehicle powered by a gerbil in a wheel rolling down the track at high speed.

[Paul Cutler III]

DCC is an NMRA Standard. It was offered to the NMRA for free by Bernard Lenz, and was judged to be the best control system among the ones being considered at the time. The NMRA smartly decided that their Standard would be compatible at the rail head, meaning that any DCC-equipped loco will work on and DCC layout. Controls and system architecture could be different to allow innovation. As it was, it really didn't take off in popularity until the sub-$20 decoder hit the market. Blue Rail (or any other direct control system) would also have to be given to the NMRA and develop a sub-$20 reciever to have any hope of replacing (rather than complimenting) DCC.

The main problem I have with any kind of battery system will be the constant need to replace said batteries. Even a $5 battery that lasts 5 years will cost me $100 a year for my 100 engines, and means that on average I'd be replacing two batteries a month every month for the rest of my hobby life. I kinda laugh at that idea because when we went DCC in the first place, we said things like, "Well, you can just buy a handful of decoders and switch them around your fleet." Yeah, right...that didn't happen either.

[mlehman]

Mar 24, 2016 9:17:57 GMT -8 autocoach said:

SNIP

Now can we get on to replacing electric motors powering our models.  I recently saw a YouTube clip of a G scale vehicle powered by a gerbil in a wheel rolling down the track at high speed.

They do work wonders with bioengineering these days. Soon as someone whips up some micro-gerbills, someone else will be experimenting with them in HO. Just gotta remember that gerbils must be fed and watered -- and they do produce various noxious exhaust products that are not good for your machinery and track.

[riogrande]

I did a search for the gerbil powered G scale but didn't find it; can you post a link?