What are the other R/C Systems?

Why not use back-EMF and dispense with the tach sensor?

The primary purpose of the tach-sensor in to get “precision-scale-distance-control”, which along with “controlled stops at precise locations” (for removing distance-errors) opens up a lot of inexpensive automation capabilities. 

Testing on the first USB-tethered-Loco was getting a distance control accuracy of approximately +-1 to 3 scale-feet over the 12” test run.  This will obviously degrade some over longer distances and for wheel-slippage, which is the reason for the “controlled stops at precise locations”.  In the future, I plain on adding the ability to remove the distance-control errors (at low speeds) without stopping. 

Back-EMF will also be implemented as a control-variable option (without “precision-scale-distance-control&rdquo.  The Back-EMF-control will be added after the initial HO-FTA-demo-loco is up and running.  The sampling has already been implemented in the hardware and firmware.

John, I have an interface specification that I can email you, just PM me.

Good point about the precise distance, though as you say, wheel slippage on curves will doubtless impact that for any distance run.  Since this is a new product, it would be nice if there was somehow a way for an external trigger to signal it's time to stop.  One of the things I like with the Lionel LCS system is you can program a stop with the sensor tracks, but that's an expensive option.  I'm envisioning something a lot cheaper, perhaps RFID or something similar to perform the same function.

I would, but you have no email address in your profile.

John,

DBTC is confusing because the sensor (read-switch) and “smarts” are in the locomotive on the DBTC board and firmware.  All that is needed to define a “precise location” is a magnet.  This is the low-budget approach (in HO uncoupler-magnets would also be used).  Users could use about any other type trigger-sensor in place of the read-switch-sensor in the locomotive.  In sort DBTC is about a lot more than just adding a direct wireless Bluetooth interface.

Just finished getting the wireless bootloader integrated into the DBTC firmware.  This enables updating the DBTC firmware without touching the locomotive or needing any other device.  Add it is fast!

[Sent you an email to you address listed here.]

Some alternatives might be Airwire (CVP Products) or LocoLinc, also AristoCraft's Train Engineer.  These systems are designed for controlling a DC motor with DC supplied by a battery.  However, if you want to use track power, you could design a small circuit to convert AC on the rails to regulated, filtered DC.

Using Zimo brand decoders designed for G-scale, together with DCC equipment might be another option.  The beauty of the Airwire/Locolinc approach is that you have direct RC control suitable for ANY layout, with no "ground plane" issues, "check track," "RF out of range" errors, etc.  I really like the idea of LionChief Plus, especially if they release a "super remote" capable of controlling multiple locos.  

I'm surprised it took so long for one of the major manufacturers to embrace RC direct to loco.

Speaking of batteries...I've been getting mine from All-Battery.  I've had exceptionally fast service from them and what I thought were great prices.

This morning I searched for a 9.6v NiMh battery pack, All-Battery had one but the shipping cost almost as much as the pack!!!

I searched some more and found a Buy Now on Ebay shipped for $2 more than the cost of the pack (w/o shipping) from A-B.

Guess who the Ebay seller is...ALL-BATTERY!?!?!?!

The only thing left is to see how fast I get it.

There seems to be general agreement that the 9.6V NiMH battery pack is the go to solution for running OGauge trains on battery power. This is the battery I've been using for over a year in my home designed R/C system and it's worked beautifully. The design I use will work equally well with any voltage between 9.6V and 16VDC, so I can also use unregulated track voltage any where within this range with no problems.

Interesting you think 9.6V is the way to go.  If your sending DC directly to the motor at that voltage you certainly will have sufficient voltage.

But other RC systems supporting O and G are using voltage that are in the 14V all the way up to 24VDC.  In fact Airwire is selectable.

Once you start pulsing DC to the motors, or have cruise that requires a voltage reserve, 9.6V seems inadequate.  Additionally if you running for long periods a higher capacity Voltage source allows the train performance to be maintained as the voltage of the power back drops off as it discharges.  A 9.6V source will deteriorate faster even with a higher energy pack.

G as and example uses multiple 12V packs in series, allowing 24V available to power the motor driver and accessory equipment, while tapping off the 12V feed to power the circuits and sound system.

Of course a simple direct drive motor can run with the 9.6V, but what is the fun in that?  G

George, recall from my previous posts that I'm using 9.6v NiMh and 11.1v LiPo batteries in my 7 steamers, I have had no issues with not enough voltage.  My 22lb N&W J 4-car passenger train runs fine off either voltage and the run time is more than adequate.

Of course I'm only powering the Rx electronics, DC can motor, headlight, and backup light.  The RCS website says their product has "Cruise" but it's not the cruise we know of on our DCS/TMCC engines.  Their cruise means that the transmitter can be turned off and the engine keeps running at the set speed.  I can see a slight decrease in speed when I go up an incline, I just turn the throttle knob up a bit to compensate (imagine, actually having to run your engine vice letting it run itself )

I had to put my 0-6-0 on charge this morning, 1st time since I installed it back on April 1st.  It's been doing a lot of switching back & forth at very low speeds since the install.  Takes about 2 hours to recharge or 10 minutes to swap out a battery.  I need to relocate the charging jack on this engine, I put it on the bottom thinking I didn't have enough room under the coal load (the other engines have it located under the coal load) so I need to take another look.  Having it underneath causes me to have to remove the engine from the track to charge it.

When I made the jump into BPRC everyone said batteries didn't have enough capacity and that a 3 amp system wouldn't work.  I haven't installed sound yet, but IMO 9.6 volts is plenty to keep an engine running, plus I have yet to trip a poly switch fuse.

The sound of the train going round the layout is plenty, a whistle/bell/chuff module actually masks some of this "noise".  Good thing is I can hear what's going on with the engine, if it's loosing speed slightly as it goes thru a curve, up a hill, or gaining speed slightly as it's coming down.

This morning I dropped a screwdriver across the dead rail tracks, nothing shorted out, haven't cleaned the track since I pulled up the middle rail

Bob, Everyone did not say it was insufficient  Lets not generalize.  I know your happy and that is good.  But to confirm as fact on a small sample size of what folks are doing when they just want motion is not a sound engineering practice if your going to manufacture a system.  Add sounds and smoke and see how long it last. You have smoke units in your MTH connect them up and see how long your battery last.

I am just commenting on what manufactures of Battery operated RC Trains are doing.

Undersize the product for convenience and see how hard it is to recover in a marketing environment.  G

I for one would not be happy if I was limited to no sound, no smoke, no cruise, etc.  If that's what is offered, I'll be passing it by.

The 9.6V battery pack seems to work fine. If I use track power and raise the voltage, I can get a little higher top loco speed. In my R/C design, I used both types of motor speed control approaches, an adjustable voltage regulator and a PWM module. Loco performance on the track was identical with either setup and was quite smooth and responsive in both cases. For battery powered operation, the PWM module is more efficient. One of the keys to practical battery power is a very low standby drain when the system is on and the loco is not moving.

I am no means an expert on this, but I have listen to what Lionel folks say about there PWM modulation, and I have experience on how MTH does it.

Starting with a high Voltage peak (near 24VDC for MTH) and do the chop with a high voltage pulse seems to be the engineering practice being used. Also at high frequency.

The best peak your going to get is 9.6VDC.  So your PWM has to be completely different.

Example, I can light LEDs requiring 12V to operating on equivalent 6V because the pulses are at high voltage 22VDC and at such a frequency you don't see it flicker.  Yet a 6V straight DC voltage would not lite them.

Apply this to your motors and you will have completely different operating (torque) characteristics.   But I stand by to see and evaluate the product when produced.  G

You guys are talking way over my pay grade.

All I know is, when I had to thump my 1st HO engine to get it to move, all I wanted was for someone to offer battery-powered remote control.  Now I have it, in O scale.

The RCS components I'm using have PWM (I don't know how it works, it just does) and I'm using 9.6 and 11.1 volt batteries to power my 7 steam engines (MTH, Williams, Weaver).

Using it is simple, no book to read, maybe 4-5 pages of installation instructions to get things going.  I've made a few tweaks in the programming, but could easily have left it alone.  That's another 5-6 pages if you download the whole list of programmable features that most will never use.

I don't think we're trying to make this a competition and we're not trying to compare it to TMCC or DCS (kinda hard to do though).

I've tried DCS and TMCC, and now BPRC.  Haven't tried DCC, I've seen reams of paperwork trying to explain how it works and what needs to be done to do it.

I wouldn't have pulled up the middle rail if I didn't like what I'm seeing.  All the systems have their weaknesses.

I ran a 2-8-0 freight this morning while switching with my 0-6-0.  Once the 0-6-0 assembled a train for pickup, the mainline freight pulled in, dropped off some cars, and picked up what the switcher had set out.  All this with the flip of 4 On/Off switches/push buttons on the engines and transmitters.

The one thing I'm going to start doing is logging when I recharge the engines batteries and TRY to keep track of how long they run.

Don't forget, the title asked "What are the other R/C systems", we're trying to provide answers.

Let's not get too defensive Bob D.  I was commenting to Bob W who has stated he is producing a system.  I was just commenting on his conclusion that 9.6V seems to be the ideal power pack.

Just an observation from my experience with other manufacture RC systems, that they settled on Higher voltage power pack.  Nothing more diabolical and I was not comparing to DCS or TMCC, only commenting internally how pulsing motors with higher peak voltages at much shorter duration seems to be what manufactures do.  Not just in the toy train realm either.

IF Bob W is building a system, I am probably not talking over His head.  G

Just for the record, I have a masters degree in EE, hold several U.S. patents and have been designing battery powered wireless systems most of my life. When TMCC first came out, I was intrigued, but quickly decided that a direct remote to loco wireless link made more sense and would be more reliable (and less expensive, too). So I designed such a setup and published the details in the summer of 2011. Lionel was thinking the same way and then a bit later brought out LionChief. It wasn't until early 2014 that I added battery power to my setup and found it worked great as well. I recently published a four part series on the whole battery power issue. Never assumed that this was the last word on the subject, just a useful discussion of the battery approach to running trains. The next major debate subject is probably going to be bluetooth.

No problem George, we're all good

BT looks interesting Bob, I watch all of the battery powered stuff with interest, even though I'm not ready to jump just yet.

Bob (Walker),

Where did you publish the details in the summer of 2011?  In an LCCA publication, or...?  I would like to read more about this.  Thanks!

The first wireless article was in TTOS's mag The Bulletin (Summer 2011). The four part battery series starts in the LCCA mag The Lion Roars (Oct. 2014). My 2011 design was quite simple as I was just experimenting with direct remote to loco wireless as a concept. LC has more bells & whistles and is a more complete package as you would expect since it appeared much later. (Guess they read The Bulletin).

There's a few other ways to go with rc DCC. One is to use the Airwire Convrtr which is basically a 902 -928Mhz radio receiver that accepts/ forwards DCC commands. Technically it can be piggy backed onto any DCC motor/ sound decoder...in theory it should work with PS3 decoders. Downside is it's only rated at 2.5 amp continuous

 http://www.cvpusa.com/mini_airwire_convrtr.php

Another is the S-Cab System which is basically the same as the Airwire Convrtr. That is a add on radio receiver to an existing DCC compatible board...though again for the smaller scales.

http://www.s-cab.com/