Hornby Elite DCC - some comments

In message , simon writes

Hmmm. All my TCS decoders have been programmed in direct mode.

Reply to
Jane Sullivan
Loading thread data ...

There's more than one flavour of direct mode.

NMRA compliance with RP-9.2.3 requires that if you support one then you support them all but some decoder manufacturers pick and choose. I have no idea if that applies to TCS but if the decoder is expecting, say, byte direct mode and the Select only uses bit direct mode then you're stuffed since the select does not support paged mode as a fallback.

Simon Kohler's comments also show that the Select is not NMRA compliant since a direct mode programmer must also support physical register mode for a basic subset of CVs.

See

formatting link
Andrew Crosland

Reply to
google

There's a classic quote from Hornby at Warley in a post on the MERG Yahoo group:

'Forget about standards, it's time to move on...'

How's that for a statement? Now where's the respect?

Andrew Crosland

Reply to
google

You know, this is my hobby, its a pleasure. if it makes me as agressive as you appear to be then its time to pause and consider priorities.

The missus always says 'kill em with kindness, thatll suprise them'. So here goes :- If I understand it correctly, some person at warley had a discussion or overheard a remark by someone on the Hornby stand who in some context uttered the words noted above. The person on the hornby stand may have been Mr Kohler but may have been someone who has little respect for Mr Riddles's engines. This was then reported on the MERG Yahoo group. From this you wish me to discuss the statement - on both sides of the paper ? - and explain why I continue to respect Mr Kohler - assuming I do, perhaps I should be swayed and - well I dont know what !

Nope, I'm sorry but with all due respect you can take you aggression and posit it where the sun dont shine.

Regards, Simon

Reply to
simon

messagenews: snipped-for-privacy@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Eh? I may be blunt and I don't mince my words but it certainly wasn't aggressive.

I was aiming my comments at the company as a whole, rather than any individuals employed by that company.

Andrew

Reply to
google

Blunt ! I thought that was where you speak your mind, but you missed out most of the clues to your thinking. Terse perhaps, to the point of cryptic.

How is anyone to guess that !

Look at your reply again, show it around to a few people in the street, form a focus group. give them a multiple choice paper - Blunt, terse, cryptic, agressive ....

Did you want an answer, i cant spell retor/rhetor....

Simon

Reply to
simon

RPs are recommended practices rather than mandatory from my understanding of NMRA naming conventions. So you can be DCC compliant without fully implementing RPs.

Chris

Reply to
Chris

RPs are not mandatory but to gain an NMRA conformance warrant you must implement the standards and all *applicable* RPs.

Thus, if a command station supports CV programming it must implement RP9.2.3. Within that RP, some modes are optional but there are stated requirements about the combinations of modes supported that are acceptable for conformance, hence my earlier statement.

If a command station does not support programming of any kind then RP9.2.3 is optional (irrelevant in fact).

Similarly, if/when the Railcomm RP is officially adopted it will be optional but if a product claims Railcomm compatibility it must implement the RP.

Andrew

Reply to
google

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.