DCS Remote Question

There has to be an easier way to do this.  

 

There is!

 I can't find anything in the DCS Manual..

That's because you're looking in the wrong book!

 

From page 28 of The DCS O Gauge Companion 2nd Edition:

Selecting Engines:

• Pressing the ENG key enters the Engine List

• The Engine List displays all of the PS2 engines that are entered into the DCS 

Remote by DCS ID# and name

• Engines may be either in the active or inactive portions of the list

• An engine is selected by either scrolling to it using the thumbwheel or entering its one or two digit DCS ID# using the number keys. This will highlight the engine

• If the engine is in the inactive portion of the list (below the line INACTIVE ENG), 

pressing the thumbwheel selects the engine and places it in the active portion of the list

• If the engine is in the active portion of the list, pressing the thumbwheel selects the engine and returns to the Engine Control Screen

• There are three soft keys displayed above keys S1, S2 and S3

• Pressing soft key S1 (INA) will place the highlighted engine in the inactive portion of the list

• Pressing soft key S2 (S/U) enters the Engine Setup menu

• Pressing soft key S3 (ALL) select all of the active engines to be run together and 

returns to the Engine Control Screen

 

This and a whole lot more is all in MTH’s “The DCS O Gauge Companion 2nd Edition", available for purchase as an eBook or a printed book at MTH's web store!

thanks Barry for the info.   Yes I do have your 2nd edition book, and yes I was reading that on page 28, but it was not sinking in.

 

So I guess the only time you have an active engine, is when u are running it..is that correct?

 

And u have to be in ENG mode to key the two digit ID number to find an engine.

 

 

Any time I put a different engine on the layout I do a READ. Then I select which engine I want to run by pushing ENG. 

yep that works Bob M.  I just tryed it (Read) and it lists the TIU and MTH engines on the track.  thanks....

So I guess the only time you have an active engine, is when u are running it..is that correct?

By definition, the Active Engine is the one in the ENG screen display.

Bob,

Any time I put a different engine on the layout I do a READ. Then I select which engine I want to run by pushing ENG. 

In order for that to work, any engines that you want toy operate must be getting track power. Any that aren't are sent to the Inactive Engine List.

 

That becomes an issue if you have lots of engines in the remote. I have 94 engines in my remote and I never intentionally press READ unless I'm using a test remote with only a handful of engines in it.

Barry and others:

 

First of all, thanks for clarification. I have your book, Barry, and have to refer to it often. Even then, I some times get confused. Operator error!

 

I am still a little confused about engine ID. I know that every engine has a unique ID that is hidden within the engines circuitry so that when calling up a particular engine, only that one will respond, others on the layout will remain idle.

 

I place a new MTH engine on the tracks, and go to ADD NEW ENGINE, MTH. It finds it and places it in my remote, say in position 5 and then either lists the engine info or I can custom change the engine info/name. At no time do I see a screen that shows engine ID.

 

If I take the engine to another layout, the first question I am asked: "What is the ID?" I know "5" is not the ID. How do I find the engine ID?

 

I had the same issue when I took a TMCC engine to my friends layout as well.

 

Is there a feature within the DCS handheld that list engines ID? If so, where in the MENU feature is it?

 

Thanks

If I take the engine to another layout, the first question I am asked: "What is the ID?" I know "5" is not the ID. How do I find the engine ID?

 

Actually it is.  The position on the  remote screen is also the engine's ID number.

Ray,

 

This is how it works:

 

For any DCS (PS2 or PS3) engine in the DCS Remote:

• The number to the left of the engine's name, either in the Active Engine (ENG) screen or in the Engine List, is the engine's DCS ID#. Period.
• Regardless of what is a DCS engine's DCS ID# in the remote, the engine ID# in the engine's memory is one greater than it's DCS ID#. Always. However, I include this not because it's important (it's not), but only for completeness.
• An engine that has never been added to a DCS Remote, or that has been Factory Reset and not re-added to a DCS Remote, has no DCS ID# and an internal engine # of "1".
• When an engine is added to a DCS Remote, either yours or the club's, it is assigned a DCS ID# as follows:

If it's available, the engine is assigned a DCS ID# equal to it's existing DCS ID#

 

However, if that DCS ID# is not available, the engine is assigned the lowest DCS ID# currently available in the remote. At this time, it's internal engine # is changed to be the new DCS ID# + 1. If this happens, the engine will not be found by any other DCS Remote that knows the engine by its old DCS ID#.

 

For any Legacy or TMCC engine in the DCS Remote:

• The number to the left of the engine's name, either in the Active Engine (ENG) screen or in the Engine List, is the engine's DCS ID#. It is not it's TMCC ore Legacy ID#
• Regardless of what is a TMCC or Legacy engine's DCS ID# in the remote, the engine ID# in the engine's memory is never changed by the ADD TMCC ENGINE process.
• A TMCC or Legacy engine's TMCC or Legacy ID# is never displayed anywhere by DCS.
• When an engine is added to a DCS Remote, either yours or the club's, its TMCC or Legacy ID# is never changed.
• A DCS Remote must always reference a TMCC or Legacy engine by its DCS ID#, never by its TMCC or Legacy ID#.
• A TMCC Cab-1, or Legacy Cab-2 or Cab1L, mst always reference a TMCC or Legacy engine by its TMCC or Legacy ID#, never by its DCS ID#.

As I mentioned the engine's ID is the same  as the position in the remote.... Nobody  uses  internal ID numbers that I know of.

 

 At home your engine  has  ID 5 ..... take it to the club the engine still has  id 5  because ID numbers stick with the engine....

If there's another engine with ID 5 at the club you could take it off the track to avoid conflicts or edit the address of your engine to an open ID( if any) at the club.Any remotes  with the old Id will now give error messages.

 

At the club you also need the same TIU numbers added to your remote and probably set to super mode.

 

Bottom line.. engine Id number is the same as the position on the remote screen

 

IDs stick with the engine    unless... Factory reset / edited /and  ID already  taken by another engine in remote when attempting to add.

This is why when you go to a large club like the NH Hi-Railers you can't use your own DCS remote, they want you to use one of theirs to avoid conflicts with all the ID's that are already defined.

 

 

I use the READ to bring all engines that are receiving power into the ACTIVE and the ones that aren't go into the INACTIVE. I do it to stop the creepers. No problem when you use 1 TIU as I do.

 

But if I remember correctly if you are using multiple TIU, then there can be a problem.

I think the engine has to be on the TIU it was added to, to be moved out of the INACTIVE when using the READ.

 

Barry, correct me if I'm wrong as it seems to be what I remember.

 

 

Joe,

But if I remember correctly if you are using multiple TIU, then there can be a problem.

I think the engine has to be on the TIU it was added to, to be moved out of the INACTIVE when using the READ.

That's correct, due to a bug in DCS. However, it's fixed in the current beta test release.

That's correct, due to a bug in DCS. However, it's fixed in the current beta test release.

Barry,

Can you tell us of any other fixes or new features of the new software coming up?

And when will it be available to download?

 

Thx

 

Alex

Guys,

 

At this time, all of the bug fixes in the new release appear to be working. All that's left is one new feature that may, or may not, make it into the release. If the release goes without this feature, it could be released any time.

 

However, I'm hoping to see the new feature implemented, and am also asking if the release can be delayed pending some additional stuff being included. This is purely up to MTH and depends on resource availability.

 

Due to the above, I'm disinclined to provide any additional information regarding the availability of the release, or exactly what it will contain. When I know exactly what will be in it and when it will be released, I'll post that information.

There are always new features that "can" be included, but at some point, they should release the update and then work those "additional" features into a later update.

 

John,

There are always new features that "can" be included, but at some point, they should release the update and then work those "additional" features into a later update.

My concern is that a "later update" release of DCS could well be a long ways off due to other stuff that MTH has in the works. As in most things, it's a trade-off.

 

You'll just have to trust me when I say that I'm somewhat closer than most as regards what is on MTH R&D's plate.

Well, I figure it'll be out when it gets out, that much is true.  

 

I just know that engineers tend to want to refine a product endlessly, and I come to that realization because I are one.   There's always "one more thing" that we can fix or add.

 

 

I agree with John!

 

If new additions keep being added and are causing delays in the updated release. This is what we heard in OCT!

 

Draw a line in the sand and all current, tested approved updates be incorporated by "X" Date and be released on "Y" Date!

 

Anything still in testing, not approved or still in the works gets released at "Z" Date!

 

The users, consumers are still having to deal with issues that could be fixed by being released now, not longer into the future.

Dennis & John,

 

Kindly refrain from offering criticism regarding something of which you have no relevant knowledge at all.

 

While I'm not seeking gratitude for sharing what I deem appropriate, I'm certainly not going to accept criticism, either!

 

This isn't a case of "feature creep" or "polishing the chrome", or anything even closely related. Rather, it's a matter of windows of opportunity which, once they close, stay closed for quite some time.

Guys,

I'd rather see it tested first than have the new software sent out prematurely before it's thoroughly tested and have more bugs pop up when we're using it.

 

I think it was back in 4.01 or 4.02 that I downloaded immediately when it was released. The next day or so another version was released and had to do it all over again.

 

I can wait.

Barry,

I agree I have "no relevant knowledge at all" BS!

BTW it doesn't matter what the product is!

I provide Training, Service & Support Products World Wide, for devices costing from $2500 to >$750,000, and I would kindly ask you to rethink your first sentence, as you do not know me either!

But as a consumer, who has purchased "your book" to learn more about DCS as an option. It does allow me to voice "my opinion" on how a Manufacturer Supports a product. Especially one to where I am contemplating purchasing from that Manufacturer!
 
If we were to provide a level of service, like what is being supported here, we would not be where we are: "Ranked Number 1 in Products, Service and Support" for the past 7 years straight!

Or are you trying to drive potential business away?

I feel that the delays in releasing a version with solutions to known problems, should be released in a timely manner! Again, today is Feb 7th 2014, I sat thru your presentation at the DCS Users Meeting in OCT 2013 and was told that these issues have been addressed but were waiting on 1 or 2 additional items to be added.

I was "NOT" criticizing you! Unless you are the one that makes the decisions on when the upgrades are released! I was criticizing the Manufacturer!

If you are, then I feel that this is a poor way to support a product.

Exactly how are we criticizing you Barry? Are you now MTH management?  I expressed my opinion, last time I checked, that was still allowed in our free society.  As for no relevant knowledge, I'm with Dennis on that point, that's simply not correct.  I worked in product development for forty years, that gives me certain insights to the process.  You really need to lighten up, nobody is taking shots at you. 

 

Perhaps if MTH was not so secretive about exactly what this "great new feature" was, we'd have a bit more understanding.  What's the big secret, why not offer some sort of explanation instead of insults?  Folks might just be a lot more understanding about the delays.

John and Dennis,

I was "NOT" criticizing you! Unless you are the one that makes the decisions on when the upgrades are released! I was criticizing the Manufacturer!

 

Exactly how are we criticizing you Barry? Are you now MTH management?

You should be aware that I, along with the other beta testers, are the arbiters of when a release is ready to go GA. In my case, I've been beta testing DCS for more than 10 years. This provides me with an insight into, and an understanding of, the DCS product that neither of you have.

 

The beta testers are a very important part of the process that, hopefully, results in a release that is, at the very least, better than all of the ones that came before. When you cast aspersions on the testing process, you're taking pot shots at a group of beta testers who work very hard, for no compensation and little recognition, so that you can have a good user experience.

 

Therefore, yes, I take your criticisms personally!

then I feel that this is a poor way to support a product.

You can feel any way that you darn well please. I truly couldn't care less. When  you  have contributed to the DCS product in any way whatsoever, then you have right to be heard as regards how the release testing process is managed. Until then, you're just along for the ride.

 

Regardless, I'm done providing any information at all regarding the status of the beta software. When it's available, you can have it. Until then, either wait patiently or complain, I don't give a hoot either way.

Barry, we're not casting any aspersions on anything about the testing  process here that I can see.  I thought we were inquiring as to the status of the development.  I've beta tested a bunch of products, and I'm fully aware of the process and the role that beta testers play in the process.  We've been hearing about this beta version for probably a year, I don't think it's unreasonable to query the status of the development.

 

As far as contributing to the DCS product, who do you think pays for all of this stuff? 

 

If you said MTH customers, congratulations, you got it!  If it weren't for folks buying MTH product, There'd be no need for DCS.  This is a point that is not lost on most manufacturers.

 

John,

As far as contributing to the DCS product, who do you think pays for all of this stuff? 

You buy stuff and that makes you a contributor to the product? LOL - that is one of the funniest things I've heard in quite some time!

 

You spend your money to serve your own purposes, not out of any desire to make DCS a better product. On the contrary, it's because others make it a better product that you buy it!

 

You may contribute by answering questions here on the forum, however, as far as contributing to the DCS product, you just don't.

How much product do you think there would be if nobody bought it?

John,

How much product do you think there would be if nobody bought it?

Don't be dense.

 

First there is product, then there are customers. Customers buy product because companies make it. If it's not good, they don't buy it. Get it?

 

To the best of my knowledge, after reading nearly every post on the DCS Forum for the past 10 years or so, I don't ever remember you even suggesting an improvement to DCS, let alone contributing to one.

For what it's worth, you two BOTH give so much to the hobby and are so respected. I am so jealous of the opportunities you both have had to learn and participate in this very challenging part of the hobby. I am sure that many many of us have had a lot more fun in this hobby as a result of your contributions.