Re: Model Railway control Systems

C. Dewick wrote in news:d4m87c$jbo$ snipped-for-privacy@yoda.apana.org.au:

Now let's imagine how this might work in practice. I've got a Digitrax 400 type controller which has throttle knobs for two locos but can actually run many more simutaneously by dialing one up, setting the speed, then dialing up another loco on the same knob. SO, two throttle knobs, 10 function buttons for all those nifty sound effects, and now we add 2 deadman buttons...looks like I'll have to grow some extra digits or hire a former accordion player to run my trains! Methinks our quest for realism can easily get out of control (no pun intended).

Well i've seen pictures of one 'nut's layout where he obtained the entire cab assembly off a real locomotive, complete with control stands and wired that up to the layout.

Obviously the thing to do is not modify you existing hand held throttles

- but to do it properly. Get the entire control desk from a modern locomotive with all it's usual controls including the vigo, and wire them up to your layout controls. You will need an entire computer to interpret the signals from the control desk and convert to your desired layout control system (DC blocks or DCC doesn't matter), so you can implement all sorts of simulation features in that interface computer. Get it to drive actuators to shake the cab - give realistic vibration and shocks to the operator. Drive a multichannel sound system to make the right engine noises. Put large displays up in 'windows' and feed in a live camera feed from the model down on the layout....

Heck, go the whole way and buy a million dollar train simulator, or probably the best, just sign up and drive the real things :-)

LOL! An interesting suggestion, Matthew. I suspect that many modellers would quickly lose their interest if they had to run trains for a living!

All the best,

Mark.

& cross posting removed

Um, Digitrax already does something like this. If you have the proper OPSW#'s set up in the DCS100 (Chief)'s brain, you can set it so that after a certain time span (IIRC, it's 2-3 minutes) of inactivity (ie, not pushing any buttons or throttle adjustments), the DCC system will stop the loco and sever the control of that throttle over them. The idea behind this supposedly is to stop "ghosts" from clogging up the slots...

Paul A. Cutler III

************* Would somebody please save r.m.r from itself? Thank you. *************

But would Terrance approve of such a system???

Well, now that you've mentioned it, I am sure we will find out very shortly. Like in a week or two

Just kidding Terry, but you are sometimes a bit slow to read the postings and respond.

Digitrax DCC can be made to use DC as a stop control such that you can integrate the track circuitry into the signal circuitry. When the signal is displaying a STOP aspect, a short section of the approaching track has the DCC signal removed and replaced with DC. The decoder will then stop the train before it can overrun the signal. I've not done this, because in my coterie we place the responsibility for obeying signals upon the engine driver. Never the less, replacing the DCC signal with DC works differently than simply removing all power from the track, as the locos can be made to come to a somewhat smoother stop than is possible when running into a dead section. This can be discussed in much greater detail on the Digitrax group. I've just told you all I know about it, so there is no point in asking me for more information. ........F>

It's easier (and cheaper) to get MSTS or BVE. You can even drive virtual trams along Blackpool Prom!

I use a similar technique but use the broadcast STOP signal provided by the Digitrax booster. Either way the inertia settings provide a controlled stop and restart.

Methinks if you are trying to control multiple locos independently in this way, you're not actually driving any one of them :-)

========================================================== John Dennis snipped-for-privacy@optusnet.com.au Melbourne,Australia Home of the HOn30 Dutton Bay Tramway and the Australian Narrow Gauge Web-Exhibition Gallery Dutton Bay URL:

Good point. I've known VERY few 'real' railroaders that model railroads (a FEW, but not many). I HAVE known several model railroaders that became 'real' railroaders, largely because of their interest in trains. NONE of these are still active model railroaders, though a few continue the interest via railfan photography, etc. From this admittedly small sample I conclude, with reservations, that being a 'real' railroader often kills the desire to model trains.

I think this is similar to the several persons I have known that decided to start a 'basement' hobby shop. Their idea was to make their work their hobby, and PLAY all the time. What really happened was that they made their hobby their WORK, and had to WORK all the time. After a few years all either gave up the business and went back to the hobby, or dropped BOTH, and are now doing something altogether different. It's another way to kill a good thing.

Most of us, IMHO, are model railroaders to escape from other facets of our existence. A change of 'scenery' is often good. Too much of anything is seldom good.

Dan Mitchell ============

I agree, this working for a living is a royal pain {;^)

Brian

He's just running several units in MU mode. The lead unit controls all the rest. Not common in UK or Europe, I know, but S.O.P over here.

Ummm, I don't think so. It seems to me that he described several locos operating independently, selected, put in motion and left to run, while another was selected and treated in the same manner.

Not a good way to operate your models, unless you can multitask at warp speed.

The context is Norman's remark was "consist", I believe, which means two or more locos run as a unit. But you may be right. Maybe he meant running two or more trains on independent routes. Hey, Norman, what were you thinking?

Ocean Springs wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.east.earthlink.net:

And in case no one noticed, that bulge in my cheek was caused by pressure from my tongue.

=========================================================== Norman Morgan

I wake up grumpy. Other times I let her sleep. ===========================================================

I think it may have been J H Ahern of Madder Valley fame who was said to have resolved the conflict between work and modelling by giving up work - Now why didn't I think of that!

Mike

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote in news:SwQbe.7284$ snipped-for-privacy@news20.bellglobal.com:

I guess I'll have to resort to a new pair of HTML tags when I post something like that: ......

I was actually referring to the ability to run multiple, independent trains from such a controller to point out the silliness of simulating a deadman switch.

LOL! I would do that if it weren't for the fact that I tend to get bored easily, and then life becomes more expensive.

Brian

Actually my new layout is designed to run a train or two that's not attended by the operator. It's in an area where there won't be other operators so I have a passenger train running in the background while freights are also running. I have a panic button if things go wrong. Even in my setup 4 would be an absolute maximum.