Dead Rail - The wave of the future?

Many guys playing with battery operated trains.  The one disadvantage to running an MTH engine controlled by DCS is that each engine needs it's own TIU along with Battery Pack.  Easier to do with G, than O or S, or HO  There are other products like Airwire that have their own control system and remote.  So you upgrade with their system.  G

Thanks for the reply!

I was not sure where to place this post, perhaps the control system or High Rail, 027.

The main thrust of my insight is not to look for conversions kits, but for a major manufacturer to come out with a turnkey product that incorporates the features that DCS and Legacy now command and integrate these features into a line of trains that are Ready to Run with an entire integrated system of controllers and locomotives ready to put on the track and go.

I enjoy tinkering,  since I have been a ham operator for many years and love eletronics.  But conversions are not what I hoping for now. I am looking for a entire system that does not exist yet.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike...a very good friend of mine that lives locally has developed a working system that he installed into a post war locomotive....works like a charm and ran over 2 hours pulling several cars.  He went to York as a guest and tried to present his idea/system to one of the major manufacturers but there was no interest.  I agree with you that the next big thing could be a battery system but it will certainly have to be a new operating system too...

Do a web search for products like Airwire and LocoLinc.  They already do what you're describing, and should operate pretty much any loco with a DC motor.  Honestly, unless you're planning to automate your whole layout with track sensors, etc., the idea of a central command base is a DISADVANTAGE.  I would be surprised if these direct R/C systems don't become more popular as antennae and batteries get smaller.

Battery powered operation is entirely feasible. For the past two years I have been running and demonstrating at club meets three OGauge battery powered remote controlled locos including a GP9, RS-3 and NW-2. Using a LiPO battery mounted within the loco shells, I am getting about 2 hours run time before needing a recharge. These locos have been operating flawlessly using the BlueRail Trains bluetooth board controlled from my iPhone/iPad (unfortunately this board is no longer available). The GP9 was described in detail in the December 2016 issue of OGR magazine. I have some new LC+ locos and I am looking into converting one of them to battery power. Should prove interesting.

BOB WALKER posted:

Battery powered operation is entirely feasible. For the past two years I have been running and demonstrating at club meets three OGauge battery powered remote controlled locos including a GP9, RS-3 and NW-2. Using a LiPO battery mounted within the loco shells, I am getting about 2 hours run time before needing a recharge. These locos have been operating flawlessly using the BlueRail Trains bluetooth board controlled from my iPhone/iPad (unfortunately this board is no longer available). The GP9 was described in detail in the December 2016 issue of OGR magazine. I have some new LC+ locos and I am looking into converting one of them to battery power. Should prove interesting.

Bob, I have found the amperage draw to be of concern. I’ve experimented with a single DC truck mounted motor and pulling 3 cars.  I’ve not had any issues doing this. How many cars are you pulling? Also, according to their webpage, the boards aren’t currently available unless you buy the complete kit. I was an early buyer and signed up for emails. I rarely get emails.

Steve

I'll be waiting until I can have all the cool features of current stuff.  I really don't want a steamer without smoke, and that will require lots more battery.

Steve: At one of the club meets the twin motored NW-2 pulled 12 cars. I agree we need to get more features. My bluetooth engines have speed/direction/lights(head & ditch)/bell/whistle/engine sounds. Also have app based fine tuning ability over throttle & PWM characteristics, but can't hurt to add more.

Lionel's G stuff was battery powered. While the target audience was children, the control system could potentially be ripped out of these sets and incorporated into any DC driven O scale engine. The boards are quite small.

dkdkrd posted:

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

 He went to York as a guest and tried to present his idea/system to one of the major manufacturers but there was no interest.  I agree with you that the next big thing could be a battery system but it will certainly have to be a new operating system too...

I'm an advocate, also, having seen the impact improved battery technology has delivered to other hobbies....R/C drones, helicopters, cars, boats, planes, etc..  Which is, indeed, the most active, profitable area of our store (LHS).  

Most likely the popularity comes from not being confined to the relatively small space of a layout and the limitations of having to go where the rails lead.  With all the r/c stuff, the world is literally your playground.

Bottom line.....it's an aftermarket 'thing' for the model railroading hobbyist in the O3R realm, especially, and apparently of no interest in the O2R manufacturers arena, either.

I don't think the manufacturers in other scales want to deal with yet another type of system unless it could plugged into the DCC standard sockets.

Personally, after dealing with electronics and processor controlled stuff for most of my working life, the last thing I want to do is fiddle with installing it in my trains.

Rusty

BOB WALKER posted:

Steve: At one of the club meets the twin motored NW-2 pulled 12 cars. I agree we need to get more features. My bluetooth engines have speed/direction/lights(head & ditch)/bell/whistle/engine sounds. Also have app based fine tuning ability over throttle & PWM characteristics, but can't hurt to add more.

 

This feature set MORE than meets my needs.  Cluttering it up with more will drive up cost, complexity, and cantankerousness.

I fully recognize that the science of recharging batteries is tricky and could be an impediment to wider use in the model train industry. I've been working with batteries my entire technical life and still have some questions.

On another subject, I tested my LC+ locos at 12VDC which would be the nominal battery voltage I would use in my battery power conversion and they ran OK. They do require a lot more current than the BlueRail equipped locos, so I will have to deal with this technical issue up front.

Along with BobW I've been using the BlueRail boards in 2 of my locos, Williams E7 and Weaver RS3.  I also have the Deltang Rx65b receivers installed in ALL my other engines: Atlas, MTH, Lionel, Williams/Samhongsa, been running BPRC for several years now without fail.  Deltang makes 3amp and 6 amp boards, I'm currently using 3amp in all my stuff, including that 14 pound Williams/Samhongsa brass N&W Class J.

I was hoping BlueRail would come forth with a heavier amp board but it appears nothing is happening for the moment.

There's a number of posts on this forum from myself, BobW, and a few others that have pretty much covered what has been done up to now.  Just search for BPRC!!!

Thank you all for the wonderful and thoughtful replies.

Personally I think it will take a little time, but i think some small startup might come up with a turnkey system, which is what I am hoping for.  Perhaps then the big guns will get onboard or buy out the start up.

Or perhaps the big companies are in the best position to modify their existing system since they already have the marketing and infrastucture in place.   

A salt and battery on every table  

In theory there is no reason why batteries couldn't take over,given that modern engines are mostly DC...legacy and DCS components are DC as well, so there is no reason even DCS or Legacy equipped engines could not run on battery power.  The real problem I suspect is that with O gauge engines with things like smoke generators and the like, the current draw is such that a typical battery won't last long, and the charging time too long to make it practical. Given how fast battery density is changing, even that is not likely to last long. My guess is that the manufacturers are not looking at it because of inertia ie the costs involved, they are making good money with engines running through powered rails, so why change, why invest in something if the user base isn't likely to leave if you don't develop it? It is basically to me the same reason they never gave the ability to have Legacy or DCS go direct to the engine via RC rather than the systems they use. I think it will be a long time in the 3 rail world before you see battery technology becoming part of the commercial world, whereas for example with G because it is used outside to a large extent, it makes sense to offer battery control (RC based DCC and batteries would be  ideal for outdoor running). It might even end up in HO before it does in 3 rail O, simply because with DCC  being an open standard and because of competition in that market, there is reason to go that way, you would see engine makers adopting it, offering likely track/battery capabality, and a lot of third party firms offering conversions for older gear........assuming that the batteries can be small enough, charge fast enough and last long enough on a charge, it could happen. 

Seems to me that battery power would eliminate the need for 3-rail O gauge. Just go with 2-rail track. With the huge number of 3-rail trains produced in the past hundred years, I doubt that would happen quickly but...

MELGAR

Here's the problem, in my opinion.  The technology will be the easy part.  My locomotives, pulling maybe 15 cars, draw about 2 amps.  That would be a 2000 mAh battery to run one hour.  Might be OK - and with improvements in batteries happening at a rapid pace,  should be possible to get 2 or 3 hours run time, and pretty soon.

The problem is- this is all new technology for the manufacturers- who do not have a growing, young market to sell to.  Their market is US-  older guys, many running stuff we have had for 40-50 years.   Will we convert to battery power?? Probably not.  We already have layouts and trains that run reliably, for the couple of hours a week that we run them.

So- where's the market for battery powered trains??

Mike Wyatt posted:

... market is US-  older guys, many running stuff we have had for 40-50 years.   Will we convert to battery power?? Probably not.  We already have layouts and trains that run reliably, for the couple of hours a week that we run them. So- where's the market for battery powered trains??

Why would there be any conversion of your model railroad required for battery power? Just put the locomotive and cars on the track and off you go. I got a quote to convert a locomotive about a year ago but it was expensive... To me, the biggest advantage would be elimination of layout wiring and wheel cleaning.

MELGAR

Aside from deciding whether "dead-rail" is an appropriate definition of battery powered operation, it's just another way to run our trains with some advantages (no track continuity issues) and some disadvantages (recharging). On balance, it's kind of nice to take a battery powered loco anywhere and know you can run it. I am in the process of looking into a battery powered LC+ loco to add to my BlueRail array. 

To me an enjoyable part of the hobby is figuring out complex wiring situations. It’s a great feeling of accomplishment finding the solution. I think the more we remove the challenges and continue on with the out of box drop on layout and run philosophy, it will be increasingly difficult to maintain a strong interest in our layouts and trains. There will be nothing left to keep our attention.

I'm not sure if everyone here understands what dead rail is.

True dead rail is when you have an RC throttle inside your locomotive, and you power the motor with batteries. That's it in a nutshell. Any talk of command systems, TMCC, Legacy, DCS and DCC are not dead rail, because they all use the rail to send a track signal to an onboard decoder.

The only system that could directly become a dead rail application would be any of the Lionchief incarnations, in which the remote communicates directly with the onboard electronic throttle. Feeding your battery power directly into the control board would give you true dead rail. The rail is only there to guide the train, and plays no part in powering or controlling it.

If you choose to go that route, then the center rail has no meaning, and you can just use two rail track.

Personally, I don't see much value in dead rail for indoor applications. Its real advantage is for outdoor railroads where keeping track clean for traditional operation can be a real chore.

Note: my comments are from a person "late to the game".

Does anybody think sending code through rails, wheels, wipers or rollers is going to be reliable (ever)?  As a former network admin, I remember how it required painstaking care to install Cat5 in a way to ensure proper flow of code. 

The idea of indoor battery powered models doesn't seem necessary when voltage for traction motors and features could be supplied through the rails while code to the command board could be sent wirelessly.  The present command systems that send code through the rails, wheels, etc. reminds me of our old party line telephone at the ranch that actually carried tip and ring through two of the barbed wires of a fence. (It was kinda noisy...)

Why would there be any conversion of your model railroad required for battery power? Just put the locomotive and cars on the track and off you go. I got a quote to convert a locomotive about a year ago but it was expensive... To me, the biggest advantage would be elimination of layout wiring and wheel cleaning.

MELGAR

Melgar- the changes required are to our existing locomotives, OR buying new, battery powered locomotives, and we could KEEP the "hot" center rail for those that have been converted or are new ones. 

And, true- for someone building a new layout or a new hobbyist, there is an advantage.  But my point is- there are not enough NEW hobbyists or new layouts for the manufacturers (except maybe "cabin industry" manufacturers) to do it.

Rob Leese posted:

Does anybody think sending code through rails, wheels, wipers or rollers is going to be reliable (ever)?  As a former network admin, I remember how it required painstaking care to install Cat5 in a way to ensure proper flow of code.

Gee, I run trains all the time sending the code through the rails, wheels, wipers or rollers, and they run just fine.  Obviously, the protocols aren't the same as gigabit Ethernet, and neither is the throughput.

dkdkrd posted:

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

Any talk of command systems, TMCC, Legacy, DCS and DCC are not dead rail, because they all use the rail to send a track signal to an onboard decoder.

 

That's at odds with Duncan McRhee's treatise on 'Dead Rail Systems', referenced in my comment earlier.

And I quote..."The transmitter puts DCC commands over the airwaves."   DCC commands are not transmitted through the rails in a radio controlled system.  To do otherwise would defeat the value of radio communication altogether, and have no advantage over a non-radio DCC system.

I tend to agree with you that there is an advantage of battery power for outdoor layouts from the cleanliness perspective, but there is tantalizing potential advantage for its application to indoor 2R railroading in the smaller scales: No track polarity concerns....period!  In fact, with on-board battery power, the wheels play no role in power pick-up whatsoever.  So, the 2 rails can be simply/solely used for detection, much as our O3R technique for the outer rails provides.  Wheel/axles no longer have to be insulated...a cost advantage as well as detection-enabler.

Look, I also agree it ain't gonna happen overnight.  At my age, it will never be offered by an OE for this branch of the hobby.  But, to ignore the advancement of any technology....such as that of batteries...with potential application to our hobby is absurd on the surface.  I've converted one LGB Mogul to battery power, using a radio control system that was offered for several meets in Orange Hall at York.  It's been a blast to demonstrate it at our hobby shop from time to time when customers inquire.  I set the engine and tender on the carpeted store floor, turn on the system, dial up some speed, blow the whistle, ring the bell, back it up.....no track....no rails.....a lot of wide eyes and smiles.  The RC folks applaud...and yawn.

But, this is the stuff people use to sit around the pot-bellied stove at the country store and chew the fat over....dreamers, curmudgeons, free-thinkers, skeptics....'allofus'.

And so it goes...

KD

When I made that comment, I was totally unaware that there was DCC that transmitted commands through the air. That changes everything. TMCC, Legacy and DCS still won't work, but Bluetooth could also be used for dead rail.

Dead rail still seems a little unnecessary for the 3 rail world, but becomes a lot more interesting for those who wish to lose the center rail.

Once battery technology is fully developed and becomes cost-competitive, my  purchases would be battery-powered and could be run with track power turned off on my now antiquated 3-rail layouts - or, I could turn the track power on and run the old 3-rail trains - probably at the same time as the new battery-powered ones. New layouts could then be built with realistic 2-rail track and would have the distinct advantage of not needing wiring from power supply to track. I'm an old guy, but I like progress. And I think it will help to bring young people into O gauge railroading.

MELGAR

All I can say is there's a few of us running BPRC NOW (even in smaller scales).  I happen to run on 2-rail code 148 track, but all my wheels are hi-rail, all I did was remove the center roller pickups.  No changes to my rolling stock (other than Kadees).  My passenger cars are currently unlit, but I do have one with a string of LEDs inside powered by a flat battery inside a tiny box with an on/off button on it.  I use Atlas, Micro-Engineering, Signature Switch, and homebuilt track/switches.  I even took one of my engines over to Ed Rappe's and ran it for him to see.

Currently no onboard sounds, except for 1 of the engines that is equipped with a BlueRail board.  I installed a bluetooth 2" speaker (with help from Bob Walker!) and instead of the sounds coming out of my Ipad they're now coming out of the engine (Williams E7).

For the most part I used a 9.6v, 2000Mah NiMh battery that's approx 1-1/8"x1-1/8"x5" and fits in the steam tenders or inside the diesel body.  Motor power, headlights, rear headlight and marker and class lights on some engines.  There's plenty of clickety-clack on the rails for sound, though I do miss steam chuff and diesel rumble somewhat.

It's only a matter of time before sound will be included in newer receivers.

If you have an engine sitting that has broken electronics, why not bring it back to life with BPRC!

NO wires to the layout ever again!

Bob- about how long will they run, assuming that you run them to 1 volt per cell?? (Running them any lower than 1 volt per cell is damaging to the battery.) 

I would GUESS that number is an hour.  That's OK- I probably never run more than an hour anyway using conventional or LC+.

Mike, I usually get 2+ hours run time.

 I did some testing when I started and almost every test resulted in approx 2.5 hours until I had to recharge.

 I don’t have any electronic signal/light as such to let me know when the battery gets low (I don’t know if there’s anything that I could add into the circuit), but the engines start to act a bit odd when it happens.  They usually just stop or the headlight flickers.  If the 9v battery in the transmitter goes the LED on the Tx starts to flicker.

 I do keep a log of when I recharge the batteries, some have gone unused for 6 months and still ran when I turned them on.

 I actually have 3 different batteries I use.  9.6v 2000Mah NiMh, 12.0v 2000Mah NiMh, and 11.1v 2200Mah LiPo, just depends on what fit in the tenders.

With just a DC motor and a couple of LEDs there’s really not a lot of amperage being used.  The only one I have issues with is the Williams E7 using the BlueRail board (2amp?), sometimes it shuts down when I initially try moving the engine at low speed.  I’ve had zero issues with the Deltang 3amp boards.  It may be because I don’t have any smoke units installed, didn’t like them when I was running DCS/TMCC anyway.  Deltang now offers a 6amp board which may allow use of smoke and sound.

Me personally, would hate having battery operated trains.  LEGO trains are 'dead' rail as you put it.  It is such a hassle to charge batteries or swap them out, and limitations in signal range and interference too.  I still enjoy collecting and building them, but they almost never get run because they are battery operated.  I like being able to place my trains on the track, applying power, and going.  I don't have to think about checking the batteries first, or installing any, or the train running out of juice.

And think about your scale Big Boy.  Where would you put the battery?  Can you imagine picking up the locomotive and taking it apart to charge or swap your batteries?  Okay, so put a charge port on it, now rivet counters will complain about how it's not prototypical in how they hide the charge port.  You could solve that by putting it under a cover or hatch, but now how about where you charge it?  Are you going to be carrying a 15lb locomotive to and from a charging location all the time?  So to me batteries are not worth the hassle, so I would never buy a MTH or Lionel battery powered locomotive.

Totally understandable. As Bob D. and I have stated many times, battery powered operation is not the next big change to sweep the model train industry, but merely another way to run and enjoy our trains. I have three battery powered OGauge engines which have performed flawlessly for about two years and have been demonstrated at various train meets. It's nice to know your loco will run anywhere regardless of what power is available or not. I still run conventional on my layout.

In order to keep an eye on battery voltage, I have a 2.5mm jack on my locos connected to the battery. To measure battery voltage, I have a self powered digital VM mounted on a 2.5mm plug. See photo.

I spoke with someone at the last Edison NJ Greensburg show.  He was running a mth cnj gp 9 using Airwire.  I looked it up after the show and found the cost per loco for conversion far too high for me.  I'll stick with my fleet of TMCC and ERR conversions since I already gave the layout built and wired.

As far as charging large locomotives like the Big Boy or any other for that matter, couldn't you have a powered siding or two where your locos could be parked and be charging at all times (trickle or a fast charge rate user selectable) and not need to be opened up or handled unless a battery change is necessary?

c.sam posted:

As far as charging large locomotives like the Big Boy or any other for that matter, couldn't you have a powered siding or two where your locos could be parked and be charging at all times (trickle or a fast charge rate user selectable) and not need to be opened up or handled unless a battery change is necessary?

It's good to see some forward thinking around here.

MELGAR

necrails posted:

I spoke with someone at the last Edison NJ Greensburg show.  He was running a mth cnj gp 9 using Airwire.  I looked it up after the show and found the cost per loco for conversion far too high for me.  I'll stick with my fleet of TMCC and ERR conversions since I already gave the layout built and wired.

Until you can afford to convert all the locos you want to keep, one option would be to put the decoder in a boxcar or trailing car.  Then all you would have to do is add a discreet tether to each loco you want to run, along with a DPDT switch.  (This approach also solves the issue of how to get the signal into a metal tender shell. ) When you're not using the Airwire R/C, you could tuck the tether back inside the body.

I've seen both of the major proprietary systems struggle on large layouts, and with certain track arrangements (i.e., closely spaced yard tracks, over & under, wire mesh tunnels, etc.)  I happen to like the Airwire controller, and R/C direct to the loco has a lot of advantages.

Information I have been given indicates you could actually charge it while running. The benefit is that a locomotive that might run an hour and a half on a charge could run 2 hours or more. The juice running through the track would not have to be the quality of continuous continuity we now need; it just needs to be consistent enough to keep the charge going. 

Some of my setups have the battery in a  trailing carcar/tender with a tether to the engine, seems to work fine. Recharging LiPO batteries has to be done carefully. I am experimenting with recharging while sitting on a siding.

I've been keeping an eye on developments, as my far future plans are hopefully to go Dead-Rail. This article on solid-state batteries caught my eye - might be dead rails all round soon.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Busine...t-in-home-appliances