MTH Draw Bar possible changes...

I hope they do an infrared tether like Lionel.  I have been buying more Lionel steam than MTH - particularly where they make the same locomotive - largely due to the difficulties I experienced with the MTH wireless tether.  The Lionel infrared tether is easy to connect and operates flawlessly.

Well, it could also work with their old wired tether. Infrared would be more complcated for MTH as they require bidirectional communication. A 6 wire PS3 tether would be thinner and more flexible than the old ten wire version. Most everyone else other than Lionel have been using wired tethers with few problems.

Pete

I see absolutely no technical barriers to using the inferred technique for two way communications if time differential multiplexy  is applied. 

The transceivers would have to switch from listen to talk which can easily operate in the millisecond window. In fact, a forward error  correction algorithm could be run in this time frame to insure expected data clarity. 

None of this is new technology, it has been in use for the past twenty plus years in micro wave communications. The circuit real estate and dollar cost can be compared to that of computers in the same two decades. In other words, it's very doable in the price mark of O-Gauge trains. All that is needed is to invest in the application cost.

I wouldn't go by the cat pic unless you saw it in the description too?

I never said it couldn't be done but what is the upside? Using a wired technology MTH would not have to change anything except some connectors. That would also allow a simple drawbar with multiple holes the allow close coupling if desired.

Ever try that with with Lionel's wireless drawbar? I have and can tell you simply putting the tender post in another hole is easier.

Pete

Norton posted:

I never said it couldn't be done but what is the upside? Using a wired technology MTH would not have to change anything except some connectors. That would also allow a simple drawbar with multiple holes the allow close coupling if desired.

Ever try that with with Lionel's wireless drawbar? I have and can tell you simply putting the tender post in another hole is easier.

Pete

Agreed Pete, I was just thinking out loud. 

Engineer-Joe posted:

I wouldn't go by the cat pic unless you saw it in the description too?

Yea I know Joe, but a picture is worth a thousand words. And those pictures are so darn glaring! None of their HO products use such a coupling system. In fact I think Marks was the last manufacture to use it and lets face  it it's a simple as can be system, that could solve all of their problems. 

Your an engineer so let me bounce this thought off of you. We know DCS works beautifully between the engine and TIU so why could it not be used to talk between the engine and coal tender but at at slower data rate like the millisecond time frame? With a little engineering problem solved.

gg1man posted:

I see absolutely no technical barriers to using the inferred technique for two way communications if time differential multiplexy  is applied. 

The transceivers would have to switch from listen to talk which can easily operate in the millisecond window. In fact, a forward error  correction algorithm could be run in this time frame to insure expected data clarity. 

None of this is new technology, it has been in use for the past twenty plus years in micro wave communications. The circuit real estate and dollar cost can be compared to that of computers in the same two decades. In other words, it's very doable in the price mark of O-Gauge trains. All that is needed is to invest in the application cost.

 

You mean other than redesign the board to use it and what would you be communicating with a speaker or coupler?  Or a motor and smoke unit?

Lionel is different in design.  MTH with PS-3 could approach it since you have a circuit board in engine and tender, but again you have to design it into the board and write code to support.  Would be PS-4 and not backward compatible.  Could they do it, I guess so.  But folks that like MTH like the price point.  It is what it is.  You could more easily convert your engine to run with a wired tether if you really wanted to.  G

Hi G, of course your right the simplest solution is to return to the wire, or (Anaconda) tether and that would be simpler then all of the above. But, that's not as much fun to talk about.

Wired tender connections work well when the engine doesn't have to be put on and taken off the layout.  They quickly become a pain when they have to be frequently connected and disconnected.

This happens whenever an engine is taken to the club to run.  This is why I prefer to run Lionel steam engines at the club instead of MTH.  The Lionel infrared engine and tender connection is easy and fast.

 It sounds as if the new MTH drawbar design has more problems than the old wired design making it even more difficult to run at the club.  

NH Joe

GGG posted:

gg1man posted:

I see absolutely no technical barriers to using the inferred technique for two way communications if time differential multiplexy  is applied. 

The transceivers would have to switch from listen to talk which can easily operate in the millisecond window. In fact, a forward error  correction algorithm could be run in this time frame to insure expected data clarity. 

None of this is new technology, it has been in use for the past twenty plus years in micro wave communications. The circuit real estate and dollar cost can be compared to that of computers in the same two decades. In other words, it's very doable in the price mark of O-Gauge trains. All that is needed is to invest in the application cost.

 

You mean other than redesign the board to use it and what would you be communicating with a speaker or coupler?  Or a motor and smoke unit?

Lionel is different in design.  MTH with PS-3 could approach it since you have a circuit board in engine and tender, but again you have to design it into the board and write code to support.  Would be PS-4 and not backward compatible.  Could they do it, I guess so.  But folks that like MTH like the price point.  It is what it is.  You could more easily convert your engine to run with a wired tether if you really wanted to.  G

You would communicate with everything via the old tried and proven packet technology just as the DCS dose. The tender power source is from the track just as that for the engine. The communications will be through the rails as is with DCS. The filtering of the packets from engine to tender could be done via packet filtering just as we see used everyday, for the past thirty -  five years in routers.

Today the required hardware real estate for each unit would require no more then the size of a quarter in each unit. DCS packets would pass on through the track to the TIU as always. The engine to tender packets will be rejected by the TIU. I believe the TIU dose that now so as to filter out any noise on the track and the engine to tender packets would look to the TIU as just that, noise. And, because of the above TDM difference I mentioned in the above coupled with the very filtering technique of said packets that slaves any tender to it's associated engine.

Of course the engine must be married to it's tender unless a associated board transplant was done from one tender to another. But, how many of us have ever done anything like that?

There is nothing new and dynamic about the possibilities I mentioned above, just the application needs a little engineering.   

My 0-6-0 gets power from tender, no rollers on locomotive.

clem k posted:

My 0-6-0 gets power from tender, no rollers on locomotive.

" just as that as for the engine"! 

 Beam power to the engine or third rail pickups on both steam engine and tender.

HI Clem, I just reread your post and it finally sunk in that you are talking about your 0-6-0 switcher having no rollers under the engine, Da!

Of course the engine would need pick rollers for my idea to work. That said most switchers do not carry long consists and are seldom used on any grade so the change would be meaningless in your application.