Layout Controller Update

"IMAGE NOT FOUND"

NO IMAGE!!!

Sounds interesting! I have a few questions on that PC part:

1. Can we use Ubuntu or Linux Mint?
2. Can we use a raspberry pi?
3. Will it interface with JMRI or is it more of a replacement for JMRI?

BillYo414:

The software currently runs on Windows 64 bit. The compiler is Delphi which has support for other platforms including iOS, Android, and Linux. I do not intend to spend time porting to other platforms right away, but will once the Windows version is completed. The system likely can be run on a pi since the new one is pretty powerful. The screen needs at least 1920 x 1080 resolution and the system needs at least one USB port capable of supporting serial communications.

The system is a replacement for JMRI. It may be possible to interface to JMRI and LCC systems, both neither is a priority right now.

I'll post the image tonight if I have time. It was there when I posted but it must have not uploaded.

@Scaled Automation gotcha. For what it's worth, those questions were just general questions. I have the right equipment. I just wasn't sure. I was mainly asking out of curiosity for others who are embedded in JMRI and have dedicated rigs and whatnot.

No problem, I do want to support other systems, I just have to prioritize my time right now.

Because I chose to do an advanced Layout Controller and an advanced Locomotive Controller at the same time it has been a huge effort. There are six separate pieces of software: Layout Controller, CTC Dispatch, USB2CAN interface device, Locomotive Controller, Cab Control, and Speed Scaler (measures scale speeds very accurately). Altogether, thousands of lines of code and multiple custom printed circuit boards.

I am super excited about what is coming next. I think of model railroad controls as different levels:

Level 1 - Everything is isolated, little or no automation, signals that are not realistic, throttle control is turn a knob and watch it go. This is mostly where controls are now in the industry. Some aspects of Level 2 are available, but only in a limited way.

Level 2 - Layout and Locomotives are still isolated, but signals and CTC is realistic, locomotive response is based on prototype physics such as train mass; rolling, air, and bearing frictions; gradient, engine tractive effort; etc. In-cab control accurately represents prototype controls. This is the level I am on the verge of doing beta testing for.

Level 3 - Layout and Locomotives are connected, one or both can be in automatic mode, prototype is completely and accurately represented. For the locomotive key features are in-cab signaling from the Layout Controllers, and  Positive Train Control (PTC) automatically limiting speeds to safe, predefined values. This level will be started during the beta testing of Level 2. Some of the data values are already included in the Level 2 software and the hardware includes the needed comm links.

Hmm...

From the page: https://www.chetu.com/blogs/te...delphi-evolution.php

Is Delphi programming language dead?

The short answer: no. Although Delphi still has an active user base, not many new Delphi programmers are popping up, which raises the question of eventual extinction.

gunrunnerjohn:

I have seen that before. There are lots of Delphi programmers and Embarcadero continues to support it. They just released an update to provide support for Windows 11. My opinion is that for Rapid Application Development (RAD) it cannot be beaten. It has plenty of horsepower to develop powerful programs and is much easier to read than C/C++/C#. It's origin traces back to Turbo Pascal which I started using at version 1.0.

I write the embedded software in C though since it is more suited to embedded chips.

Here is the rest of the quote above:

The short answer: no. Although Delphi still has an active user base, not many new Delphi programmers are popping up, which raises the question of eventual extinction. This is not to say Delphi is archaic by any means, and those who have used Delphi in the past will probably continue to use Delphi until the end, simply because it is so resilient and future-proof. Pascal code requires minimal maintenance, and some of the Delphi apps we build 15 years ago are still alive and well, with very few upgrades made from their original from.

So, there is validity to the Delphi is dead frenzy, but it has nothing to do with obsolesce, but rather a shortage of skilled Delphi programmers. If you’re looking for one of those elusive Delphi programmers, you’ve come to the right place.

Here is the missing picture. It is a screenshot of the CTC Dispatch software. This is the traditional CTC design, not the Modern version. Finding information about the Modern versions is difficult, but I have a couple of references.

Jonathan: For your ABS system, will you include the flashing yellow ADVANCE APPROACH aspect in the sequence of trailing signals? Then it would go from GREEN to RED to YELLOW to FLASHING YELLOW and back to GREEN. This requires a 2 block look ahead. UNION PACIFIC uses such a system.

Consolidated Leo:

I do not have the Advance Approach in the software now. I will add it, but it should require three block look-ahead. The logic (simplified) should be:

Closest Block Occupied (Block 1) - RED

Next Closest Block Occupied (Block 2) - Yellow

Farthest Block Occupied (Block 3) - Flashing Yellow (Advance Approach)

None of the three blocks occupied - Green

One of the questions I still have concerns turnouts (switches). Does the signal system look through a turnout when it is switched? In other words, do the three blocks noted above change when a turnout is in the Reverse position? Input or thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.

Jonathon: Thanks for the response. I like the idea of adding the Advance Approach to the mix. But I don't think this would apply to all railroads, past or present. So, you might want to make it optional.

As far as your question about the signal indications before a turnout, I know that the Union Pacific uses two heads at these locations. The upper head indicates the state of the Main route while the lower head indicates the state of the Diverging route. As long as the turnout is aligned for the Main (Normal) position, the upper signal is relevant while the lower head is either Red or blank. Then, when the switch is thrown, the upper head shows Red and the lower head shows the ABS indication for the Diverging route.

There are corresponding signal aspects for when the turnout is reversed and the train is headed for the diverging route or siding. Red over Green is Diverging Clear. Red over Yellow is Diverging Approach. Red over Flashing Yellow is Diverging Advance Approach. And Red over Red indicates that the block through the turnout is occupied.

This makes sense to me. But again, not all railroads will do it this way. I have seen pictures of U.P. signals where the lower head consists of just Red and Green aspects. That might be workable for a model railroad where this is quite familiar.

Consolidated Leo:

Definitely will be optional, in fact optional signal by signal.

I understand about the turnout signals. I was more thinking of the signals before the turnout signals.

Consolidated Leo:

The Advance Approach (flashing Yellow) is added and tested. It is optional for each signal.

Level 2 (see above) is almost complete, just a little more testing to verify all commands added recently are working.