Freerails Home 
Freerails > Model Railroad Forums > R.C. The Future Now If You Desire > Tam Valley no longer in radio-control

Freerails IS ACCEPTING new Members ... To join Freerails ... See how to Register as a Member in the 'Joining Freerails' Forum

 Moderated by: .  
AuthorPost
johnhu
Registered
 

Joined: Thu Feb 21st, 2013
Location:  
Posts: 39
Status: 
Offline
Saw the following on the Tam Valley home page;

In a tough business decision I have decided Dead Rail is dead at Tam Valley Depot

http://www.tamvalleydepot.com/

It's a pity to hear this from one of the innovators.
John

Last edited on Tue Oct 24th, 2017 05:16 am by johnhu

W C Greene
Moderator


Joined: Fri May 4th, 2007
Location: Royse City, Texas USA
Posts: 8100
Status: 
Offline
This "tough business decision" is probably due to low (or almost NO) sales of r/c equipment. Tam Valley offers various DCC "friendly" devices and most all model railroaders are interested in the latest high-tech (bells, whistles, animated figures, etc.) stuff which appeals to those who seem to be stuck in the "table thumping, track cleaning" fraternity. Face it, r/c hasn't really arrived...yet! I do have one comment, which I have made many times before, I sincerely wish someone had come up with a better name for r/c trains than "Dead Rail". I don't consider my r/c locos and un-wired layout(s) as being "Dead"!
Oh well, sorry to hear this news but I understand what's going on.

Woodie

davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
As I mentioned on the Bluerail topic below about lack of recent development of the product. Maybe their sales are low as well and not enough to finance investment.

Over here in the UK we have Protocab and Deltang. In my opinion Protocab has a problem with a low spec and a high price so we are left with Deltang. I think David T is a one man operation which of course keeps his costs down but puts all our eggs in one basket!

r/c will have its day when 2 things happen. Battery technology improves somewhat and the DCC types eventually realise that their basic problem is the wheel/track interface and the commands arriving via the rails

Meanwhile I have several spare Deltang Rx so should be OK for several years.

THinks - how long do electronic devices last? I have a 7 transistor (transistor?) am/fm radio that I got for my 16th birthday back in 1967. It still works!

Tony Walsham
Registered


Joined: Tue Apr 8th, 2014
Location: Casino NSW, Australia
Posts: 265
Status: 
Offline
The immediate case appears to be a result of a general lack of demand for "Dead Rail" in the smaller scales. Probably because it isn't really needed. DCC rules the smaller scales.

In the larger scales, the lack of consumer interest in new technologies is because over eager entrepreneurs who have misjudged the requirements of Large Scale outdoors operation. Mobile Phones just don't cut it outdoors in Sunshine.

Dave is right. Deltang owns the field for good reasons.

Last edited on Tue Oct 24th, 2017 01:13 pm by Tony Walsham

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
I use Deltang and it works well in HOn30 & On30.  I have no trouble.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
Over here in Germany, there is a sound R/C vehicle sector, scales from 1:87 to 1:5. So apart from Deltang, you have at least two other systems in the field, all using the same technique ( and therefore interoperable to a certain degree ).  If you are willing to sacrifice the 12V-motor in R/C locos, you find straightforwardly usable stuff from the 1:87 section.

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
This a low voltage geared motor with a cross box added by Bernard Snoodyk.  It works well with a Deltang RX and 1S battery.
Bernard Snoodyk-CrossBox

Last edited on Tue Oct 24th, 2017 02:37 pm by Rod Hutchinson

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
" all our eggs in one basket! "

" problem with a low spec and a high price "



Hi Guys :wave:



To all the paupers reading ...

... who want both a high-spec. AND a very low-price ...

... & don't like all their eggs in one basket.



If you have > $20 inc. P&P ! ... and want a top-quality 2.4 GHz Transmitter AND Receiver to play with ...

... look no further than the 'FlySky' FS-GT2E twin-pack !








If the future of R.C. trains is 'with the kids' ? ... :cool:

... they not only need to be able to afford it $$$ ... :shocked:

... they need to be able to have fun & experiment with it ... :)

... they also need to understand it, without overly complex schematics etc. ???



Since the R.C. car, boat & plane enthusiasts, of which there are already probably MILLIONS ...

... already use this easily available, affordable, simple to understand 2.4 GHz technology ...

... who needs all their eggs in one basket ? :us:



It's just so 'doable', and with extra Receivers available at only about $4 inc. P&P each. :bg:

You don't have to be 'jet-set' to get numerous baskets AND the eggs to fill them !! :thumb:



IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ROCKET SCIENCE ! :brill:



:!::!::!::!::!:



Si.



mdrailbaron
Registered
 

Joined: Sun Mar 25th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 66
Status: 
Offline
Good morning all, Here on the East coast there are a number of us that went to battery r/c and will never look back, it is that good.  I have 38 On30 locos under battery and 3-3/8n40 locos as well. I know Steve Sherrill has many On30 locos under battery as well. I can agree that the name for what we do is maybe not the best but I think we are stuck with it for now.  I also agree that the dcc folks don't get it and seem to think that if they go battery they have to change everything out.  SS and myself go to different events and will set up something for information purposes only to spread the word so to speak.  I find that the two talking points are the "explosive" nature of charging the battery and the dcc change over.  After we put that to rest they still think it is a fad and they can't see changing out their system of train control. I don't think the ratio will change all that much between dcc and battery users, there are to many advertising dollars being spent in the train magazines for dcc.  Once the magazines get behind battery and can make more money with it, then and only then will they truly promote it.  I don't know that much about Tam Valley but if you require the rail to send anything to the loco then it isn't a true dead rail system.  So maybe they tried to do too much and they priced themselves out of the market.  David T still has the best system going round but as someone said he is a one man shop and the production time was cutting into his personal life. OK, that is about as many words as I want to spend on my opinion.Wishing you all well, living the life in the land of pleasant living on the Eastern shore of Maryland,Steve

Michael M
Registered


Joined: Thu Jan 26th, 2017
Location: San Bernardino, California USA
Posts: 1913
Status: 
Offline
I'm with Si on going BPRC.  It doesn't have to be expensive.  I picked up a FlySky Tx and Rx, ESC, and LiPo battery for about $30.  Plan on installing it into a Bachmann On30 Shay.

Even at $30 per loco it's still a lot cheaper than installing DCC receivers.  And I don't have to clean track.

I do have two locos that used inexpensive RC cars for the electronic parts.  In spite of numerous fumbles on my part I got both to work. 




davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
The problem with cheap hobbyist solutions is that is not what the market wants. Their ideal is a simple plug in receiver so they insert the batteries, switch on the controller and away they go. To do this you need a loco with a battery compartment. You can use lipos especially if you use a camera style battery and charger. Or you could use commercial NiMh AA or AAA batteries. I have recently converted a number of diesels that can use either with good results

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
" I'm with Si. on going BPRC.  It doesn't have to be expensive.
I picked up a FlySky Tx and Rx, ESC, and LiPo battery for about $30.
Even at $30 per loco it's still a lot cheaper than installing DCC receivers."



Hi Michael :wave:



Strictly speaking, It doesn't have to be anything like as much as $30 per every single loco either ! :bg:

On the 2nd loco to be R.C.ed, you don't actually NEED another Transmitter ! :)



So the cost of the 2nd loco can just be ...

... the cost of another 'FlySky' receiver at just $4 inc. P&P each, + the E.S.C & battery costs.









For me in U.K. £s, the cost of R.C.ing a 2nd loco would be as follows :-

£3.84p inc. P&P - 'FlySky' Receiver.
£2.54p inc. P&P - E.S.C. Electronic Speed Controller.
£1.36p inc. P&P - LiPo battery.
------------------
£7.74p inc. P&P - TOTAL
------------------

So at $1.30c / £1.00p currency exchange-rate ...

... That's a grand total of ... ONLY $10.06c U.S. ... for me to fully fit a 2nd loco !! :shocked: :shocked: :shocked: :shocked: :shocked:



Top-quality & fully-modular 'FlySky' 2.4 GHz loco installations CAN be very very affordable indeed.



Just think outside the box ...

... Don't believe the hype ...

... & leave the Credit-Card at home !



You just need a $10 Dollar bill !! :shocked: :)



:cool:



Si.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
davecttr wrote: The problem with cheap hobbyist solutions is that is not what the market wants. Their ideal is a simple plug in receiver so they insert the batteries, switch on the controller and away they go. To do this you need a loco with a battery compartment.
That's exactly where the drawback is. Today's loco models have space for a DCC-decoder, and maybe a loudspeaker. So a complete PnP solution is not possible - you may have R/C, but still rail supply. This is no advantage compared to the present control system. You may take weight out to get that compartment, but at the cost of traction.To me, it will remain a niche ( very comfortable for me ) set apart from the mainstream, for a long time.

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
The thing about the Tam Valley solution was that enabled one to combine battery power and remote control with DCC. It was never meant to be a cheap solution, but in the context of what many modellers spend on buying multiple versions of new releases, not very expensive, either. I view a DCC loco module as a programmable microcomputer, with (in my case) programmable sounds. With the super capacitors now in use, I can go for simpler wiring, and simply not wire up anything like common crossings, but I was hoping to get completely away from powering the rails by using batteries and (eventually) induction charging.

I have the book, so I can make the basic tx and rx myself, but having just bought the rather nicely designed controller/command station, plus a receiver, I am left with an obsolete system.

Calling it dead rails was a mistake, but it wasn’t exactly advertised or promoted, either.

mdrailbaron
Registered
 

Joined: Sun Mar 25th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 66
Status: 
Offline
Good evening Helmut and all, I have three of the very old and overly manufactured 4 wheel diesels in HO, their quality depended on who manufactured it.  This was a hood unit with end cab and most times had one traction tire on a wheel.  I have without too much trouble placed a Del-Tang unit, 2 LiPo batteries, an on/off switch and small, 3.5 mm charging port in these.   I use these for local mill and yard switching on my On30 railroad.  If memory is correct I probably removed the weight from it to gain space.  I do think I spend more time on being creative as to where I hide the switch and charging port.  Of all of the Bachman offerings the On30 4-4-0 and 2-6-0 locos thrive on battery r/c. Well, that is what I think, living the dream in the land of pleasant living on the Eastern shore of Maryland,Steve

W C Greene
Moderator


Joined: Fri May 4th, 2007
Location: Royse City, Texas USA
Posts: 8100
Status: 
Offline
Wow, this got something started!
Here's an oldie from the Saturday Night Live TV show (US) back in the 70's...the words of Yor-Medieval Barber/Surgeon..." Someday, doctors will have proper surgical implements, there will be anesthetics to relieve suffering, there will be...NAAAW!"
Someday, every model railroader will be using radio control, nobody will be cleaning wheels & track, modeling will be...NAAW!
I guess that I will go back out in the garage and work on my new layout (more in a future thread) or maybe run a train with my old-fashioned 27 Megs AM analog BS system. Golly, after about 20 years, it STILL WORKS!
Dead? Definition of the word is "expired, departed, gone...not alive." Dead Rail? Come on, really?
I leave ya'll tonight with these thoughts offered for your perusal.

Woodie-one who runs wireless-ly

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
" Dead? Definition of the word is "expired, departed, gone...not alive." Dead Rail? Come on, really? "


Howdy Woodie :cb:



Maybe it's just sleeping ? ?





- - - - - - -


" 27 Megs AM analog BS system. Golly, after about 20 years, it STILL WORKS! "



I wanted to have a go at 27 MHz A.M. as well.

Only problem for me was, no matter how much I looked ( & I did look ! ) ...

... I just couldn't find the parts for sale as economically as the 'FlySky' stuff.



Price & easy availability made the choice for me ... Not BS.

If you've got it, and it works, and why shouldn't it ? ... Use it !



:)



Si.

jtrain
Registered


Joined: Sun May 27th, 2012
Location: Missoula, Montana USA
Posts: 994
Status: 
Offline
The success or failure of battery powered/ remote control trains depends on two things:

1) If a system is easy to maintain and install and still provide necessary functions, it will be popular.  It doesn't have to be cheap, but it does have to be affordable.

2) Just how small can we make a battery?  That question hasn't been answered yet, and won't be for many years.  The smaller the battery, the more usable that battery is to model railroad enthusiasts.

We have an easy to use system, Deltang, but we need a better battery.  Deadrail is popular in large scale and has been for some time.  The same thing will happen in smaller scales when the battery problem has been solved.

Tam Valley failed because the demand just isn't there yet. R/C control in HO scale and smaller is still experimental.

--James

mdrailbaron
Registered
 

Joined: Sun Mar 25th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 66
Status: 
Offline
Hi James and all, I am not sure if I agree or disagree with what you have said, though what was said has merit.  I have 38 locos of various types and the batteries have not been the issue, nor the space.  With that said I have put them in kit bashed HO to On30 locos and straight on On30 locos.  I still think that the problem for this type of loco control was more the fear mongers and naysayers, who instilled fear of exploding batteries.  I also think it is easier to say why something doesn't work, then to try and make it work, then add on the complexities of making it do more then it was designed for.  My approach to model railroading was to first have fun, then closely followed by entertaining the creative side of my modeling, and then to keep it simple.  I did have DCC at one time but when I was introduced to battery r/c, it was a game changer.  My On30 railroad fills 95% of a 1200 square foot basement, I have two operating groups that come here every month for a day long ops session, and I have had only one guy complain about the battery system.. He did leave but I think he had his on agenda and used the battery as an issue.  I also think the best thing we can do is to promote this, explaining all of the advantages, why you can do a loco at a time an not interfere with your existing system, and take every opportunity to show the uneducated masses.  I did, I have written and had published two articles in Narrow Gauge Downunder and have been to many shows and mini meets showing what we are doing.Well, that's my opinion and I wish you and everyone else a great day and happy modeling.Steve  

jtrain
Registered


Joined: Sun May 27th, 2012
Location: Missoula, Montana USA
Posts: 994
Status: 
Offline
I don't disagree with what you've said Steve,. We don't have opposing theories, we have explained two sides of the same coin.

Some people are afraid and some people just find the battery power impractical.  Drop-in systems would solve the issue, but we need smaller batteries first.  Education certainly helps though, it increases demand for technology to improve.

--James

bobquincy
Registered


Joined: Sun Jan 27th, 2013
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 323
Status: 
Offline
@Woodie

I have built HO and N scale models with 27 and 75 MHz radios, my only problem with those frequencies is there is not enough space to allow an efficient antenna. With a 1/4 wave antenna they worked great, especially at the distance we require.
Antenna length is the reason I started using 900 MHz and later 2.4 GHz. There is always room for a 31 mm antenna! ;)

boB

davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
From the Tam Valley site third party(s) are interested in continuing the deadrail stuff

Bob D
Registered
 

Joined: Wed Apr 1st, 2015
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia USA
Posts: 659
Status: 
Offline
OK,
For those of us already singing in the choir, it’s a no-brainer.  But for folks who read our musings and want to try it, where do they start if they want to go with off-the-shelf equipment???
We need to publish the requirements for each component of a BPRC system, not just that you need a Tx, Rx, and battery...that tells them nothing they don’t already know.
Keeping in mind the different scales (space and weight of each scale), what does each component need in order to work.
Motors, brushed or brushless.
Rx and ESC, number of channels, brushed/brushless, reverse, amperage.  It’s my understanding the voltage and current requirements of the ESC have to meet the requirements of the motor, the Rx doesn’t.  My 14lb Williams 4-8-4 requires more amperage than an HO version of the same engine.
Add to this battery size, lighting, and charging requirements then we may be able to get more converts willing to give it a go.

jtrain
Registered


Joined: Sun May 27th, 2012
Location: Missoula, Montana USA
Posts: 994
Status: 
Offline
That's a great idea Bob!

The primer would need to have:

>Comparison between many manufacturer's systems in an objective manner.  Not "x is better than y because I said so".  Unless a system really is garbage, there's no need for subjective rhetoric.
>Detailed directions on installation and specifications for each system.
>An easy to understand article about batteries and their different requirements.
>Articles detailing how different throttles operate including R/C car and R/C airplane transmitters as they relate to trains.
>An article about electricity requirements including the motor, lights, sound and other "functions" like those found in DCC systems.

The only problem is that no one person will be able to make such a primer unless they devote themselves a couple of years labor.  I would do it, but aside from the electrical jargon, I don't know enough yet to make informative articles on the subject. That and budget.  It's expensive to buy the basic components of every system, it's far cheaper to find one and stick to it.

--James

Last edited on Sun Oct 29th, 2017 09:20 pm by jtrain

bobquincy
Registered


Joined: Sun Jan 27th, 2013
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 323
Status: 
Offline
I have looked at using DCC decoders with a wireless transmission system. One sticky point is the DCC decoder specification requires a minimum of +/- 7 volts so the system in the train would require at least that voltage and we would have to boost the receiver output (from a typical 0-3.7 ?) to the higher voltage bipolar signal.

The DRS book shows how to do this but it sure would be easier if a DCC decoder worked at 3.7 V so we could run the trains with a single cell. :)

To that end, there are some articles on how to make a DCC decoder using a PIC...

Last edited on Sun Oct 29th, 2017 09:53 pm by bobquincy

Bernd
Registered


Joined: Wed Jul 18th, 2012
Location: New York USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Hi guys. I haven't been on Freerails in quite some time. When I saw that Tam Valley was going to stop selling their "Dead Rails" equipment on another site I thought I'd stop by and see what's going on here since this site has more discussion on R/C.One thing I've observed from the discussions on other sites about R/C is the lack of knowledge on how they work. I started with the Deltang system back in Oct 2012 when I asked David about his R/C system.

 LINK:http://www.freerails.com/view_topic.php?id=4451&forum_id=45&page=2 Post #12

 I went and looked for my thread on building the crane here on Freerails. I had a slight problem with my ISP and never got to finish updating the pictures. That's why many aren't showing up. Hopefully I can remedy that soon. I do have a web page up on building the crane using a Deltan R/C system. That also needs to be updated. To many pictures to load all at once. It takes a bit of time for the pages to load.

 LINK: http://www.kingstonemodelworks.com/crane.html 

Anyway, on to the threads topic. How many know what the frequency is that's being used by Tam Valley? Reason I ask is that it never comes up in the discussion about any R/C system that are out there now. Both Ring Engineering, Stanton, and CVP use the high end MHz band width. Ring Engineering can not be sold in Canada, at least as of last check. Tam Valley uses 869MHz and 916MHz. I believe they do not need FCC certification to use these frequencies, but can not sell them outside the US because they are not certified. The 4.2 and 5 GHz frequencies are a world wide use for Bluetooth and WiFi. So any new equipment that will interface with DCC should use one of those two frequencies. 

Bernd 

Last edited on Sun Oct 29th, 2017 11:17 pm by Bernd

bobquincy
Registered


Joined: Sun Jan 27th, 2013
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 323
Status: 
Offline
@Bernd,

As far as I can tell all of Region 2 (North and South America) is ok with ISM radio on 916 MHz and 2.4 GHz.  Microflight/Plantraco sell their 900 MHz system in Canada ( it may help that they are based in Canada) and 868 MHz in Europe.

I agree that 5.4 GHz would be the way to go although the 2.4 GHz band may end up being less crowded if there is a mass shift to 5.4 GHz.  Our systems don't need the extra bandwidth.

boB

Last edited on Mon Oct 30th, 2017 05:12 am by bobquincy

Bob D
Registered
 

Joined: Wed Apr 1st, 2015
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia USA
Posts: 659
Status: 
Offline
jtrain wrote: That's a great idea Bob!

The primer would need to have:

>Comparison between many manufacturer's systems in an objective manner.  Not "x is better than y because I said so".  Unless a system really is garbage, there's no need for subjective rhetoric.
>Detailed directions on installation and specifications for each system.
>An easy to understand article about batteries and their different requirements.
>Articles detailing how different throttles operate including R/C car and R/C airplane transmitters as they relate to trains.
>An article about electricity requirements including the motor, lights, sound and other "functions" like those found in DCC systems.

The only problem is that no one person will be able to make such a primer unless they devote themselves a couple of years labor.  I would do it, but aside from the electrical jargon, I don't know enough yet to make informative articles on the subject. That and budget.  It's expensive to buy the basic components of every system, it's far cheaper to find one and stick to it.

--James

James, I hear ya :Salute:

All the answers are probably right here on this forum, but extracting them out of the weeds can be hard work :bang:

There's going to be different levels of "know how" in this too.  For someone who wants to build their drive system from the ground up, they have to know motor specs, gear ratios, etc.  Those wanting to convert from a conventionally powered engine (older Athearn or Lionel) need to know what will fit and how to be a machinist.

All my conversions have been in O scale, either old E-unit or more modern TMCC, and PS2 systems, most involved reusing the existing cables/connectors on the rear of the steam boiler and trying to find a spot to place the on/off switch and charging jack.  A few I had to Dremel out a spot to mount the connector, on diesels it's not an issue unless you're running multiple engines lashed together (which I don't).  While you don't have to know how a Tx or Rx works internally, you do have to know what connections do what and how to solder.

Most will probably want a RTR engine where they don't have to do anything but put it on the tracks.  We can't help those, only the manufacturers can.  Until one of them offers the general public a RTR BPRC engine this will stay on the sidelines and not become mainstream.  Hopefully that will soon change.

  As with anything, there will always be those that will have issues and blame the system instead of trying to understand what it is they're doing.  Some will keep tinkering until they manage to break it, when they should have just left it alone.

LEDs by themselves can kick people's butts if they don't take the time to understand them.  I actually have a 3.6v lithium battery I use to determine the polarity of LEDs before I connect them (mainly because my eyesight isn't the best in the world).

What I see is folks who have a load of engines currently equipped with the latest command control system saying how expensive it would be to convert.  Thing is if they even want to try all they have to do is convert a single engine, which can be run along side their existing setup.  When I started my conversions I started by converting older, conventionally equipped engines, then once I made the decision to go whole hog I converted the engines that had command control systems.

The one spoiler is SOUND.  The sound systems in these modern engines are really nice, sounds specific to an engine are the name of the game.  For a lot of folks, if it doesn't have sound (and smoke) they aren't buying.  The first manufacturer that offers BPRC with onboard sound will get the ball rolling.  Conductive recharging between (not thru) the rails (think refueling track) and the batteries (like in a cordless toothbrush) will also help push BPRC into the mainstream.

jtrain
Registered


Joined: Sun May 27th, 2012
Location: Missoula, Montana USA
Posts: 994
Status: 
Offline
Batteries still need to get smaller and better though, they just take up too much space in HO scale to share room with all the circuitry, sound speakers, weights, and drive mechanism for a unit to be completely self contained.

And sure, primers could also be made for the scratch builder, but generally I think what's needed is an easy to read article or articles about installing R/C systems into analog and DCC equipped locomotives.

--James

Bob D
Registered
 

Joined: Wed Apr 1st, 2015
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia USA
Posts: 659
Status: 
Offline
I might have to convert one of my older Athearn HO Geeps just to see what it will take. All I'd need is motor and directional, constant lighting. As I recall there isn't a lot of room inside.

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
Ever heard the expression 'nuts & bolts' ??

Sometimes ... Perhaps many of the times ...

... THAT is what gets the dooody DONE !



From an understanding of a NEWBIE ... ( no R.C. experience ) :f:

... to getting some kit ...

... HAS been a learning curve, but NOT that much of a one !! :dope:



Just gotta get my micro-chips installed ...

... but HEY ! it ain't ROCKET SCIENCE !



AND it CAN be simple & affordable ...



:)



Si.

Bob D
Registered
 

Joined: Wed Apr 1st, 2015
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia USA
Posts: 659
Status: 
Offline
Si. wrote: Ever heard the expression 'nuts & bolts' ??

Sometimes ... Perhaps many of the times ...

... THAT is what gets the dooody DONE !



From an understanding of a NEWBIE ... ( no R.C. experience ) :f:

... to getting some kit ...

... HAS been a learning curve, but NOT that much of a one !! :dope:



Just gotta get my micro-chips installed ...

... but HEY ! it ain't ROCKET SCIENCE !



AND it CAN be simply & affordable ...



:)



Si.


Sorry Si...WEEDS is all I see in your post, don't get how your response is helpful for anyone looking into BPRC.

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline

Hi Bob :wave:



I'm sorry to see that my enthusiasm over learning about R.C. is not appreciated. :f:

Not entirely sure about what you are saying concerning WEEDS ? ??? :dope:



What I HAVE DONE ! in the R.C. Forum ...

... is to propose an alternative for railroaders who might wish to consider an interesting alternative, to the same old expensive mantra !



If my Posts are considered "WEEDS" by you ...

... or perhaps " Unhelpful " ...

... I am sincerely looking forward to YOUR massively helpful Posts ! :) :2t: :thumb:



Don't worry about the HUGE ( Kg ) MASS of your chu-chus ... :us:

... concentrate on useful FACTS ... I am trying to do so !



If anyone comes up with anything that is useful ...

... Post it !



Just don't MOAN about what people DO Post ! :y:



:y:



Si.

Bob D
Registered
 

Joined: Wed Apr 1st, 2015
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia USA
Posts: 659
Status: 
Offline
Si,
I'm trying to get everyone to post data, ideas, and suggestions on what information might help folks determine how to proceed on converting an engine to BPRC.  This information shouldn't be spread throughout 1000s of posts but held in a depository/primer so anyone could take a look.

I like to BS as much as the next guy but BSing and making snarky remarks don't' help anyone who is trying to learn BPRC.

So my first serious thought is to ask for a primer/database in the form of a sticky at the top of the RC Control forum.

Next is...how do we get something in the sticky if it's relevant?  There's a lot of useful information here but it's so diluted by posts that offer "attaboys", "cudos", etc that the data gets lost.

If nothing else I'd like for all of us to list exactly what pieces and parts we used when installing a BPRC system.

I'll start.

Most of my O-scale installs use the following:
RCS Australia Tx2, Tx3, or Tx7 transmitter

Deltang Rx65b (from RCTrains) OR RCS Australia ALPHA3v2 (Rx65b-based) receiver (no longer offered I think)

RCS Australia BIK-U3/6 battery installation kit (includes on/off switch, fuses, charging jack, and screw connections)

Tenergy 9.6v, 2000Mah, NiMh OR 11.1v, 2200Mah, LiPo battery packs from All-Battery in California

3mm LEDs, warm white, 6-12vdc, with 14" wire leads with inline resistor from Evans Designs in Colorado

Tenergy Model 01005 OR 01336 Universal Smart NiMh/Nicad Charger for NiMh batteries (for 7.2-12v packs) (I have both models)
OR
Model 01267LiPo/LiFe Balance Charger for LiPo batteries (for 1-4 cell packs)

There's also a need for some connectors/adapters/jacks depending on the connectors that come with the battery packs, if I can find the part numbers I'll post them, but I found what I needed at the local hobby shop (LHS) based on this link:

RC CONNECTORS

I also have 3 engines using the Bluerail Bluehorse Rx board and the same battery types and battery install kit listed above.  The Bluerail board uses an APP on my Ipad (used as a Tx).

Deltang, RCS Australia, and RCTrains all have documentation showing how to install the equipment.  IMO the one thing that needs clarification are the instructions on changing the Rx65b settings.  Once it's done a couple of times it's easy to see what is going on, but the first time can be a really tedious.  I had to make changes because of the factory settings on one of my Tx and a couple of Rx.  I prefer low-off to center-off throttle.  99% of the time, changes to factory settings aren't/weren't required.

Maybe a bit of an explanation as to what the different Tx do is in order, but my fingers are tired.

This may not be what I/we really want to see, model or part numbers change way too often and don't tell you what the requirements really are.  Doesn't help to tell someone to get "X" receiver if it's not available anymore.

Batteries...Most of my (O scale) motors are 12VDC can types.  But a couple of them are 14-15vdc can motors.  Using a 9.6v or 11.1v battery doesn't get these motors up to full speed that the motor is capable of, while some of the engines using 12vdc motors scream at full throttle.  This may be due to gearing differences.  But if I can determine what track voltage the motor was normally run with I'll go with that when looking for a battery.

More later ;)

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
"  like to BS as much as the next guy
but BSing and making snarky remarks don't' help anyone who is trying to learn BPRC."


Hi Bob :wave:



Couldn't agree more when it comes to the 'facts'.

'WEEDS' can be chopped up & burned ! ;)



I'm an amateur around here ...

... but if I have what I think is useful $4!7 then I'll Post it. :)



Might even get that R.C. junk I scored in my Porter soon !  .  .  .  ???



:!:



Si.

jtrain
Registered


Joined: Sun May 27th, 2012
Location: Missoula, Montana USA
Posts: 994
Status: 
Offline
Bob, the only way that much info could be concentrated into an easy to read series of articles is if a new website was created.  Think about it, all the different aspects of R/C would have to be explained in great detail and then the stuff useful to beginners would have to be published in a series of Primer articles.
I love freerails but this isn't a blog or a standard website, this is a forum with hundreds of users.  Telling Si off, who is a Super Moderator mind you and one of the core people on this forum, just because he's having fun doesn't solve anything.  Any thread with this much info will inevitably have posts that are humorous and off-topic.  Believe me, you aren't the first to try this.
What I recommend, and I'm willing to help, is that you start a blog/website with Blogger.  Blogger is free, plenty of data storage, and simple to use.  You can add authors as well so not everything needs to be done by one person.
Anyways, this is getting off-topic since the thread is about Tam Valley no longer selling deadrail equipment.  PM me if you have questions.
--James

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
Theses websites maybe helpful.
https://www.deadrailsociety.com
http://rctrains.co.uk/index.htm



Michael M
Registered


Joined: Thu Jan 26th, 2017
Location: San Bernardino, California USA
Posts: 1913
Status: 
Offline
Somewhere in FreeRails Si did provide a simple list and photos of necessary RC parts to convert a loco.  It consisted of a FlySky transmitter and receiver along with an ESC.  Easy to pick up off of eBay.  I think the total cost was about $25 plus whatever dollars for a battery.

I have all the parts but just haven't gotten around to converting my Bachamnn On30 Shay to RC yet (too busy playing outside with my layout).

I have converted two locos by using inexpensive RC cars as donors.  My rail truck runs at a top speed of 12 inches every 13 minutes!  I've got a third on my workbench that I'm about to dive into.

I almost sound like I know what I'm talking about.


Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
It might come as a surprise to some folks, or maybe not ...

... but it seems to me, most 'blogs' are a bit of a waste of time ...

... when do you ever see a 'conversation' in a blog ?


Never that I've seen.


They come & go ...

... perhaps a minute amount of something interesting there ...

... but if so, mostly though a 'non conversation' ... conversation COUNTS.


As for 'moderators' or 'not' ...

... what is the relevance there ??

This is FREErails ... not draconianRAILS.


Freerails is exactly as it says ... FREE ! ...

... FREE to Post what one wishes, to move a Topic forward.

To discus & Post SURPRISES as well as solutions.


One thing there is no place for, is DOGMA.


All this talk about exactitude as far as every possible scenario is concerned ...

... as far as I can see, is just 'dreamworld' ?

Anyone gonna write THAT up ?


Members wanting sound help & advice GET IT and can DISCUS IT ...

... what else is there ?

A blog ??



???



Si.

Tony Walsham
Registered


Joined: Tue Apr 8th, 2014
Location: Casino NSW, Australia
Posts: 265
Status: 
Offline
Sorright.
I don't even know what a Blog is!!!

jtrain
Registered


Joined: Sun May 27th, 2012
Location: Missoula, Montana USA
Posts: 994
Status: 
Offline
Most blogs are a waste of time, that's why I find it hard to get one going, the subject needs to be interesting and the author needs to have access to interesting things.

Bob can do as he wants, I'm just putting it out there that expecting a thread to always be on topic, always be helpful, always be concise and well written, and always interesting is unrealistic.  You can't have it all.
--James

Last edited on Tue Oct 31st, 2017 07:29 am by jtrain

W C Greene
Moderator


Joined: Fri May 4th, 2007
Location: Royse City, Texas USA
Posts: 8100
Status: 
Offline
Howdy Tony, I believe a blog is a muddy hole which the unfortunate animal can get swallowed up when walking across. Or is that a bog? Well, it's about the same thing.
BTW, humor is a great thing, we all need some. It could keep us from falling into any blogs.

Woodie

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
" expecting a thread to always be on topic, always be helpful, always be concise and well written, and always interesting is unrealistic."



The ol' stone-age saying comes to mind here ...

... 'It is what it is'



Now where's that Mastodon soup Woodie put on the cooker ? L:



:brill:



Albert

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
Hi Guys :wave:



BTW ... I'm just a 'gobby git from South London' (a friends description !) :P

So don't listen to my drivel.



I do think 'focused' how-to-do-it Threads are a great idea.

When I install my 'FlySky' stuff, I would like to try and do one on that system myself.



As a thought on how to Post such a how-to-do-it Thread ...

... I wondered about how to get all the important info on the 1st Page.



eg. I thought perhaps an initial Post on the 1st Page of simply numbers 1-10 to start with.

The Poster can easily Edit the 10 Posts on the 1st Page, as they wish.

Adding photos, descriptions etc. etc.



Any comments can then follow on further Pages, without 'cluttering' the meat & potatoes.



Also, if anyone wants to 'dig up' some focused & technical Threads from the R.C. Forum archive ...

... please do so.

BUMP 'em up the Board to the top.

If they are 'super relevant', they CAN be made a 'Sticky' if popularity demands this.



All thoughts welcome as per usual !



:old dude: " I remember South London in my yooof when folks were POLITE ! " ;)



Si.


Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
It is just a hobby.

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
Yep !

Bob D
Registered
 

Joined: Wed Apr 1st, 2015
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia USA
Posts: 659
Status: 
Offline
I fully get and understand what everyone is saying, just don't treat these questions like they're coming from a 2-yr old. plus I'm pretty good at going off the rails while posting on these topics [whack]

I agree with the comments on blogs, they're a one-way street from what I've seen.

Seriously, I doubt I'll ever give some of these "toy" RC systems a try, DavidTs Rx65b works extremely well, plus I've installed enough of them now I (think) I know what I'm doing. The only bad thing is my LHS (Debbies RC World) has shutdown, now the only place to go is Hobbytowne USA, or online to get connectors and such for installs.

bobquincy
Registered


Joined: Sun Jan 27th, 2013
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 323
Status: 
Offline
Meanwhile, back to Tam Valley...

The Tam Valley system is a good idea, merging inexpensive 900 MHz band RC with commercially available DCC decoders.  The downside is also that it uses commercial DCC decoders.

Transmitting the data and then passing it to a commercial DCC decoder is great for compatibility but requires voltage levels that are not compatible with the receiver.  Commercial decoders must meet the DCC standard so they have to receive a signal with a minimum of +/- 7 V.  A DCC decoder that operates at receiver voltage would be preferable.  Semi-commercial decoders will work with 3-5 V, negating the need for a voltage level shifter circuit (H-bridge)

Using a low voltage motor driver (and motor) could allow the system in the locomotive to be powered by a single LiPo or 2-3 NiMH cells.
The standard DCC protocol would still be used for compatibility, with decoders based on MERG or PIC designs.

davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
Well it was my fault for trying to be helpful. The topic on another forum was about choosing between DC and DCC for a new smallish terminus to fiddle yard layout with only 1 loco in service. I suggested trying BPRC  and suggested that the components could be sourced for about £120 which they can. Someone else than said they would try it if it could be done at that price. I pointed out that for testing choosing a loco with plenty of space inside would be best and which loco was he interested in. The answer was a tiny 00 scale saddle tank loco drawing 60mA and with 2 voids in the body, 9x20x25mm bunker and 3x20x55 saddle tank.
I know that I do not have the manual dexterity to do such a job although a 130mAh bare tabbed cell would fit in the bunker and a Deltang Rx-63 in the tank. You could fit a voltage regulator in the tank as well. Drawing 60 mA would give up to 2 hours use on 130mAh but he wants a dead crawl eg BEMF
now how do I get out of this one?
I can see this going something like - DCC could do it so BPRC is no good and I fell for it, sorry folks.

bobquincy
Registered


Joined: Sun Jan 27th, 2013
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 323
Status: 
Offline
@davecttr

MichaelM has a rail truck that runs at a top speed of 12 inches every 13 minutes. Is that an acceptable dead crawl? ;)

boB

W C Greene
Moderator


Joined: Fri May 4th, 2007
Location: Royse City, Texas USA
Posts: 8100
Status: 
Offline
Allow me to make one comment. I am assuming that "toy r/c car" systems are those used in the $7 toys for kids. I started with those and with the proper mechanism & motor (Grandt Micro-Mo 80:1 gearhead and Grandt drive components) the little cheap boards work well for railcars and little critters. However, the r/c car boards that I have been using for many years are "hobby grade" quality which came from the expensive models, not cheap toys. I got into the r/c idea back when nobody was interested in this and most thought it was craziness to want to operate without DC or DCC. I am glad to see how far the idea has come but there is far, far more to happen before it is taken "seriously".
So, I still feel that the cheap toys are a way to "get your feet wet" in r/c but don't include high-tech r/c car equipment in the "cheap toy car" discussions.
Now that I have vented my views, I will sit back and watch what develops. Well, maybe not, I feel like going out and running one of my Shays, there are full ore cars that need to be switched at the mines.

Carry on...
Woodie

Michael M
Registered


Joined: Thu Jan 26th, 2017
Location: San Bernardino, California USA
Posts: 1913
Status: 
Offline
I started with some of those cheap RC cars to get my feet wet.  I do have some FlySky equipment waiting to get installed in my Shay.  Still, I like to use those inexpensive RC stuff just to see what I can make happen.

The best part is that I'm having a great time!

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
I began and have only used Deltang.  Works very well.  

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
" I do have some FlySky equipment waiting to get installed in my Shay."


Hi Michael :wave:



Been doing a few tests on my 'FlySky' stuff here. L:

Amazingly easy to use & immediate 'trim' controls on those transmitters. :bg:


No programming required ... Thank god ! :old dude:





Slightly different transmitter to the ones you & I have.

But the same easy-set analog controls.

NICE !

Less than $20 Bucks for all that ? ... Yep ! ... Bring it on bruv. :pimp:



:!:



Si.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
For a simple dead crawl on a straight track, you don't need BEMF control at all. But when it comes to switchwork, curves and grades, especially under load, you'll be forced to readjust your speed settings in order to compensate their effects. Now everybody is spoiled by the standard DCC decoder offering this feature without any required action from the operator. It isn't realistic for all but the newest generation of locos, but that's what the average guy doesn't know. 

dan3192
Registered
 

Joined: Thu Oct 14th, 2010
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 226
Status: 
Offline
Dave,

If your friend is willing, replacing the existing motor with a precision gear-head unit to get very low crawl speeds might be the answer. See the link below. 

I have several of these and they are amazing (2.5mA no-load current draw).

Dan

https://www.allelectronics.com/item/dcm-705/precision-dc-gear-motor-used/1.html


   

Last edited on Thu Nov 2nd, 2017 07:15 am by dan3192

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
We have found this one quite good. geared motor with crossbox by Bernard Snoodyk

Last edited on Thu Nov 2nd, 2017 07:42 am by Rod Hutchinson

Bernd
Registered


Joined: Wed Jul 18th, 2012
Location: New York USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Are those Hobbytown helical gears?

Bernd

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
No.  I think they are PSC helical gears.

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
How is it that despite the Tam Valley solution that is the matter for discussion, and that the solution they offered was for RADIO CONTROL OF DCC, we keep returning to other, non DCC topics? I am all in favour of a bit of topic drift, but there are other threads covering BPRC that is not DCC related.

I come to this thread to find out if there is any more news on a successor to Tam Valley’s DCC based solution. I already know that I can install a cheap solution based on a toy that doesn’t support DCC, I know that I could go the DelTang route, and if I want to read about those solutions, there are plenty of other topic threads I can turn to.

We have 6+ pages in this thread, and 5 of them have nothing to do with the OP, and are covered elsewhere in the Dead Rails part of this board. Much of that dross appears to be the output of a moderator, too. Hardly a good advert for Free Rails.

For those wondering about the difference between a forum and a blog, assuming a blog allows comments and thefore dialogue, then a blog tends to stay to the point rather than being derailed into other agendas.

davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
It is a pity that Tam Valley could not sell enough product to make it viable to carry on production but I suspect that low sales volumes plague many manufacturers.

Why could they not sell enough systems? Was is it a high price or poor specification?

What is it that DCC'rs want in a radio control system? Or maybe they are just not interested in a product that could enhance their hobby's enjoyment?

This little recent anecdote from a forum over here interests me. A group were using radio throttles with their well known DCC system at exhibitions. They have gone back to using cabled throttles because of interference at exhibitions. Apparently the problem is multiple same make radio throttle systems in the exhibition hall interfere with each other and can steal control of your locos! I wonder if this has led to them thinking all radio is bad and reinforcing their preconceived doubts.

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
What I want, is what Tam Valley provided. I can do the other bits (voltage regulators, battery protection, etc) myself, or even set it up using an Arduino Mini Pro plus 2.4GHz Wireless (although the nature of the command signals is a bit cumbersome for the processor).

But ideally, to gain a wider market sector, all the extra bits and pieces would be on a single board, which plugs into the DCC socket on existing models, and which itself contains a socket for the DCC module, to which us attached a 1S1P battery, either that or a stabilised 3S1P with four wires, etc.
Edit: There is also the added perceived issue that until the NMRA creates a standard, anything purchased may go out of date... This isn’t an area where the NMRA needs to get involved, of course, but such is the power of conformity to standards.

Last edited on Wed Nov 8th, 2017 12:13 am by Simon Dunkley

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
davecttr wrote: This little recent anecdote from a forum over here interests me. A group were using radio throttles with their well known DCC system at exhibitions. They have gone back to using cabled throttles because of interference at exhibitions. Apparently the problem is multiple same make radio throttle systems in the exhibition hall interfere with each other and can steal control of your locos! I wonder if this has led to them thinking all radio is bad and reinforcing their preconceived doubts.The answer to which is to use something like Bluetooth or standard network protocols.

Last edited on Wed Nov 8th, 2017 12:13 am by Simon Dunkley

bobquincy
Registered


Joined: Sun Jan 27th, 2013
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 323
Status: 
Offline
davecttr wrote: ...snip...A group were using radio throttles with their well known DCC system at exhibitions. They have gone back to using cabled throttles because of interference at exhibitions. Apparently the problem is multiple same make radio throttle systems in the exhibition hall interfere with each other and can steal control of your locos! I wonder if this has led to them thinking all radio is bad and reinforcing their preconceived doubts.
I don't know if Tam Valley radios used frequency hopping or not but 2.4 GHz DSM2 is advertised as being very resistant to interference.  Spektrum shows where they had 100 xmtr/rcvr pairs operating in one room and reported zero interference!

Bernd
Registered


Joined: Wed Jul 18th, 2012
Location: New York USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Tam Valley uses 916MHz or 869MHz. Not as sophisticated as the 2.4GHz spread spectrum and prone to interference. 
Bernd

davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
Maybe that DCC radio throttle problem was not using 2.4Ghz either. I will have to try and find out.

Over here Hornby's cheaper Railroad Range are now being sold with cheap DCC sound chips as standard. They have power bogies and traction tyres giving lots of space for RC equipment and battereies but that space is full of speaker etc.

Maybe the minimum RC setup for commercial success has to include on board sound and lights?

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
The frequency alone doesn't say anything about the transmission technique used. FHSS/DSSS is possible in both 868/900MHz and 2.4 GHz bands, but you can employ simple narrow band FM as well and be prone to interference.

davecttr
Registered
 

Joined: Sat Nov 9th, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 540
Status: 
Offline
I think the DCC system was NCE which uses 916.5Mhz

Nice Guy Eddie
Administrator


Joined: Mon Sep 5th, 2016
Location: Long Beach CA
Posts: 374
Status: 
Offline
" We have 6+ pages in this thread, and 5 of them have nothing to do with the OP

Much of that dross appears to be the output of a moderator, too.

Hardly a good advert for Free Rails."



Hi Guys

A member has complained about this thread

It is not the regular policy of Freerails to tell members what they can or cannot post

But in view of the members specific complaint

I am considering deleting these posts



3    davecttr

5    Rod Hutchinson

6    Helmut

7    Rod Hutchinson

8    Si.

9    mdrailbaron

10  Michael M

11  davecttr

12  Si.

13  Helmut

15  mdrailbaron

16  W C Greene

17  Si.

19  mdrailbaron

20  jtrain

21  bobquincy

23  Bob D

24  jtrain

25  bobquincy

28  Bob D

29  jtrain

30  Bob D

31  Si.

32  Bob D

33  Si.

34  Bob D

35  Si.

36  jtrain

38  Michael M

39  Si.

40  Tony Walsham

41  jtrain

42  W C Greene

43  Si.

44  Si.

45  Rod Hutchinson

46  Si.

47  Bob D

49  davecttr

50  bobquincy

51  W C Greene

52  Michael M

53  Rod Hutchinson

54  Si.

56  dan3192

57  Rod Hutchinson

58  Bernd

59  Rod Hutchinson

63  Simon Dunkley

66  davecttr

67  Helmut

68  davecttr


:f:


Eddie
 

slateworks
Registered


Joined: Wed Oct 6th, 2010
Location: Twickenham, United Kingdom
Posts: 948
Status: 
Offline
That would seem to be a pity. One doesn't have to read the posts if they're becoming boring but for others the titbits of additional information add to the knowledge bank and understanding. You can't satisfy all of the people all of the time - whatever the issue!

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
I don’t think, and don’t want, the posts deleted. Moved to a new thread, maybe.

I was simply requesting that we get closer to the topic, and not discuss alternative ways of doing things - all perfectly legitimate and of interest in themselves - as there is plenty of space elsewhere.

In short, Tam Valley are no longer producing their wireless system for DCC, so discussion about how else to get a similar system is of great interest to those who are, were, or were planning to use it, but making a cheap start using a radio controlled toy car does not help with the particular problem.

I also think some of the posts you suggest for deletion could remain here in either case.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
For an alternative you have to find a transmitter/receiver set capable of 'streaming' unformatted serial data, without inserting any CR's etc . Then you have to identify the DCC-decoder's internal data input pin, where you could feed the 5/3.3V level serial stream in. Every other appraoch would require a hefty H-Bridge onboard to generate a DCC track signal first - close to BS for me. I know of people who have done this in G-scale and used a whole dummy diesel unit for battery, receiver , and H-Bridge electronics. For the money spent they could also have invested in proper layout wiring.But there's more to it: When you want to change CVs, do you want to program the decoder directly ( oh, that altered data input!) or by air? How do you obtain an ACK signal and send it back? So that data link has to be bi-directional ideally, and then you have to find a suitable network hard- + firmware where you could set up both a DCC-data net plus a LocoNet for the wireless throttles you want to employ, if you do not want to dive deep into the idiosyncrasies of LocoNet PE spec. and brew your own slot management and the like.Have fun.

Last edited on Wed Nov 8th, 2017 10:54 pm by Helmut

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
Well, yes. Nothing like a list of obstacles...

I am happy to unplug for programming, etc. As I have said, the question is nothing more complicated than asking if there is likely to be a retailer who takes on their product? I have the book. I could make my own, if so inclined, I could do it with Arduinos and 2.4GHz as well, but ideally I will buy something and plug it in as electronics is not my hobby: model railways is.

I know what it does, and what it doesn’t, do - or rather, did - and I am happy with that.
Why are so many people who have made different choices unable to accept that I am happy with mine, am aware of limitations, etc? I am not telling them what is wrong with their choices, nor spilling over into topics related to their interests, pushing my agenda.

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
It is a curious thing how a vocal minority can have things altered whilst the not so vocal majority just let most things slide.
This happens in law making particularly.  Curious things we humans, where the squeaky wheel gets all the attention.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
@Simon
Obviously none of us knows whether there will be another entrepreneur daring enough to continue where Tam Valley gave up. So all discussion about the product's future here is a look into the magic bowl.

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
But there are alternatives: buy the book and build your own, make use of work others such as Geoff Bunza have done with DCC and Arduinos, etc.

Or just await announcements, and discuss non-DCC solutions in different topics.

Apologies if I have offended anyone by trying to get things back on track, but this is one of the few threads that interest me, precisely because I have looked at alternative solutions, and they don’t do what I am looking for.

W C Greene
Moderator


Joined: Fri May 4th, 2007
Location: Royse City, Texas USA
Posts: 8100
Status: 
Offline
OK then, why worry about this news, if everyone is truly interested in getting some manufacturer to make r/c equipment for trains...then write, call, send e mails, etc. to some of the companies that are ACTUALLY making r/c equipment. Futaba, Losi, Traxxas, and several others. These companies may be interested in r/c trains, adapting what they already manufacture. After all, it would be another source of money for them and they have already done the needed "R&D" on their products.
Think about that.

Woodie
***and for heaven's sake, don't call it Dead Rail!***

And for deleting posts, I am the one who would do the deleting and unless somebody flames somebody else or posts some outright crap, I don't delete posts.  Thanks guys.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
If you are willing to make your own electronics and do some java, you can start here. There's some more source code to load on your cellphone, the how-to ( albeit in German )is here, too. It's the complete source code and how-to for running DCC decoders overWLAN with battery power. But you need 18V in your loco and the space for it. There's a short demo of a G-scale diesel running DCC over WLAN. Here on rails. ( from 2:34 on )

Last edited on Thu Nov 9th, 2017 02:50 pm by Helmut

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
Woodie,
It is news, and there may be developments. As with most of my modelling, I can do it myself if I have to, but like some other things such as motors and gears, I really would prefer to spend my time on other things when I can buy these basic items.

If some of the more sophisticated features of DCC, not just the sound recordings in their own right, but the ability to link them to how the engine is running, and other configuration variables to simulate the mass and inertia of the real thing so that steam engines can bark and cost, were available on other radio based systems, then I would happily use them.

But I also don’t wish to be tied to a proprietary system such as ProCab or BlueRails. I don’t include DT in that as Dave has wisely decided to steer clear of extra features and what he has produced is a sophisticated alternative to two-rail DC.

So at the moment, for me at least BPRC is to be combined with DCC for the foreseeable future, not least because of the capital investment already made.

There are a number of modellers in the same position: interested in BPRC, but with significant existing DCC, so a commercial system which provides for a simple remote, wireless transmission will encourage the wider adoption of the technology.

Simon Dunkley
Registered
 

Joined: Mon May 19th, 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Status: 
Offline
Helmut wrote: If you are willing to make your own electronics and do some java, you can start here. There's some more source code to load on your cellphone, the how-to ( albeit in German )is here, too. It's the complete source code and how-to for running DCC decoders overWLAN with battery power. But you need 18V in your loco and the space for it. There's a short demo of a G-scale diesel running DCC over WLAN. Here on rails. ( from 2:34 on )DIY Arduino solution, is potentially what I am looking for.
I joined this bulletin board because I believed that free rails also referred to an open mind set, and because I would find helpful and knowledgeable friends. Provided that I want to use a simple BPRC solution, I suppose that will be true.
Generally what I have seen is a bunch of guys who have been using basic radio control and battery power, with a focus on keeping the cost down, who use every opportunity to disparage and discourage two-rail DC and DCC, and behave like a bunch of crusty old farts who dislike anything that confronts their entrenched opinions. In short, it is just like your typical model railway club, where everyone is happy because anyone with a dissenting view has left.
And no, I do not write this out of anger, merely out of sadness.
I have been quite clear about my interests, but at best I get unhelpful and inaccurate advice (I don’t need s large battery pack, nor do I need 18v) and usually selective reading and quoting. Or of course, outrage at perceived slights. 
I would advise looking in a mirror, gentlemen, but there is no point: old farts, no matter how crusty, are characterised by the noise they once made, a stale aged fragrance, and invisibility.
Don’t bother replying: I won’t be here to read it.

Si.
Moderator


Joined: Thu Feb 23rd, 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5905
Status: 
Offline
Hi  " crusty old farts "  (_!_)



Mmm ...



Seeing as the original-Post was essentially a 'news story', plain & simple, about the demise of a product ...

... is doesn't surprise ME in the least, that various alternatives were offered up.



The open minded, helpful and knowledgeable friends of the Freerails R.C. Forum ...

... instead of just bemoaning the discontinued products passing ...

... or simply suggesting hoarding loads of said product for the future ...

... concentrated their " wind " on describing what IS actually available, that has worked for them.

Or what COULD be possible with some creativity.



So as far as I can see, describing the Forum as :-

" just like your typical model railway club, where everyone is happy because anyone with a dissenting view has left."

... seems to me the ABSOLUTE ANTITHESIS of the vibrant conversation which followed the news.



" crusty old farts who dislike anything that confronts their entrenched opinions."

Is this REALLY a picture of the sincere & passionate diversity of opinions expressed by most Members ?

I would say quite the OPPOSITE.



Far from being " Hardly a good advert for Free Rails." ...

... the willingness of the majority of Members to actively Post & discuss many possibilities ...

... is in fact the PERFECT ADVERT for Freerails acceptance of ALL things model railroading.



We are NOT running a prison camp.



Si.

Helmut
Registered


Joined: Sun Feb 17th, 2013
Location: Friedberg, Germany
Posts: 1254
Status: 
Offline
As I was cited as an example of the 'crusty old farts' and their narrow-mindedness, some technical remarks to that what was dunked in our basket.
The Arduino solution is but a very simplistic fixed-frequency approach that will work for a guy who runs his home layout and can be sure that there never will be interference on the RF-channel he has selected. I may be mistaken, but there's no provision in the source code to cope with something like Spread Spectrum, or to change channels externally. You need another baseband processor to handle that, and the Arduino is loaded enough by handling the normal data transmission.The Arduino solution referred to does not at all consider how the user tells the command station what he wants to do.I presented a solution that offers both reliable transmission by using Spread Spectrum, and the independence of any tethered or wireless manufacturer-specific handhelds. Sure one can adapt it to work at a lower voltage, but the standard DCC-Decoder needs at least 14V to give a 12V output at full speed. Especially the sound decoders sometimes need a lot of current to produce their sound, so a sizeable battery may be needed.Very wishful thinking produces claims like "I have the book, I could set up an operating system from that if ..."Don't believe any manufacturer is presenting his know-how ( and that's where his capital lies ) to the public for nothing. That know-how is NOT written in the book.So much for my ramblings. As a friend of mine uses to say - "if there were an easy solution, I would have done it myself"

W C Greene
Moderator


Joined: Fri May 4th, 2007
Location: Royse City, Texas USA
Posts: 8100
Status: 
Offline
Well, I for one, didn't get into r/c to use the "toy" stuff or cheap stuff, these were the ONLY bits of r/c equipment that were around. I didn't look for the "cheap way" to go wireless, I was and am NOT A FAN of wiring a layout, especially one with old type stub switches (you need a bit of sophisticated wiring to make the track power work with these), not a fan of constantly cleaning track & wheels, having the damn locomotive stall out on some speck of crap which occurs (most often) out of my reach, and many other worries that I fail to remember!
I am glad that there is a "wagon" to jump on now and I wish those who are "tech savvy" the best. As you may deduce from what I write, I have no need or want a "smart phone", my old dumbass phone is fine, I would have an old rotary phone if they hadn't become collectors items selling for big bucks now. And besides (for me) I can't imagine using a cell phone to run my trains...I seem to be about the only dinosaur left who uses a stick transmitter to operate a loco. I have been in cabs of steam, diesel, and electric locomotives and they all have STICKS as throttles. Why shouldn't I?

The above tirade is just my view point and doesn't reflect the views of Freerails or the moderators-see, I allow tech talk and ideas even when I don't have a clue as to what it all means!
Now, back to the world of "modernity"...
Woodie

Rod Hutchinson
Registered


Joined: Fri May 8th, 2009
Location: Mooroolbark, Australia
Posts: 559
Status: 
Offline
This might be the only time I agree with Si. 


UltraBB 1.172 Copyright © 2007-2016 Data 1 Systems