Radio frequency pollution...

The European regulations for radio wave interference are much more stringent than those for the US. Getting a certification takes time and much dinero.

I don't know about Canada.

I do suspect the lack of availability of RailPro outside of the US markets probably has a lot to do with the work and $$ it takes to comply with their RF interference regulations and certifications rather than antipathy toward other countries.

Charlie

Indeed!

Yes, I am sure Charlie is correct in his speculations about RF compliance.

Still, it's a reason why folks in Canada might not want to buy into the system...?

Bummer..........eh!

Michel, why RailPro?

Michel, why RailPro over all the other command control systems? With decoders at $99 each and the throttle going for over $300, what do you find so compelling about the system?

(Joe playing dumb, since our recent podcasts and upcoming MRH video demo in the Jan issue answer these questions and more ...)

Please see my first post, "New RailPro customers.......

What's so compelling?

Michel, I guess I was wondering what you find so compelling about RailPro as compared to straight DCC systems? None of your posts really spell it out - they hint that you like the RailPro system because you find it better than regular DCC systems, but you never spell out why you feel it's so superior.

There's wireless DCC systems out there now, including duplex wireless. Don't those work just fine?

Why's RailPro's so compelling to me?

Hello Joe and thank you for asking me why I think Ring Engineering’s RailPro is so compelling?

Ring Engineering’s RailPro, seems so far more advanced than what we use today that I believe it’s going to make a paradigm shift in how we control our model trains. Does this sound familiar: Add two wires to the track and your running! Sure it does that’s DCC right, Joe? I think you and I know better!

It seems from the information I have gathered that Ring Engineering’s RailPro also has two wires to the track but that’s for power not for train control. RailPro uses what they call Direct Radio, which allows the RailPro components to communicate with each other without any wires. So for me this is the paradigm shift because how many modelers know about electrical safety and the proper electrical standards? Yes, running model trains is low voltage electricity but electricity it is and once you get to DCC it’s a whole new potentially risky hobby. It would be great if we all were electricians or electronic technicians when we go DCC but were not! From what I have read about RailPro: Add two wires to the track and you’re running your trains this is where we should be with train control!

From my experience as an older model railroader, my beginnings started by pulling a string attached to a model train! Now many years later after learning everything I needed to know to run with DCC, DCC has taken away the enjoyment of my main goal of running trains. Right now I’m using the best we have and I must say I’ve been pushing the envelope on one of North America’s most popular DCC systems by implementing advance computer control.  Am I having fun with all this? Yes! Are you surprised?  But I would rather be running my trains with Ring Engineering’s RailPro.

Michel in Canada willing to become an American so I can have RailPro!

Indeed, Michel...

RCC means your decoders communicate Directly with your command station - not through a secondary interface such as the wires and the rails.

You may look into the NWSL setup, whereas it's backwards compatible with DCC.  However, it does not have the beautiful GUI interface Ring does.

Too easy equals too limited

Hmm.  I don't think you've thought this through.

Ok, so you are using computer control...how do you implement that with Railpro?  Automation sounds like a non-starter.  How do you interface with a computer when you have no central command station?  How can a computer control multiple trains without a complex radio interface which can somehow communicate with several (dozen?) locomotives at the same time?  I know not many people want to automate their operations in North America, but Railpro doesn't seem to have any way of accommodating it.  I'm not seeing any way to run your turnout receivers by computer, so a CTC system may not be possible, either.

The other part of the problem is that the weakness of model railroading still remains reliable contact between the wheels and the track.  This system does nothing to remove that weakness.  As long as we depend on power through the track, we will be scrubbing those rails.  Perhaps they will add a capacitor or battery supply at some point, but that's not how this is designed right now.  You still have to add a feeder to each rail, and have reversing units on wyes and reverse loops and something like a Frog Juicer at each turnout frog.  Explain again how this is easier?

I don't think DCC is the ultimate in train control, but neither is Railpro.  I'm still waiting for the real solution.

Michel

It's clear Michel was convinced RailPro was his system of choice and that he's not thrilled with the current crop of DCC systems.

But I still don't get what's so terrible wrong with the current crop of DCC systems that makes RailPro such a game changer? So the signal doesn't go through the rails - yeh, but the power still does. If you have dirty track, RailPro behaves just like any other command control system - stuff stops running.

Sure, the touch interface is nice, but I like running my throttle one-handed and a knob plus a toggle direction switch is about all you need. You still have to wire the track with feeders on RailPro, so I don't get your "electrical" concerns of DCC vs RailPro.

We need specifics ...

Nothing's wrong with DCC I only see the future!

I agree with both of you, Jurgen and Joe there’s a lot to be discussed and I think by bringing RailPro to the forefront we’ll make these discussions.

All Ring Engineering needs is an infusion of capital so that they can partner with Siemens and have Siemens miniaturize the train control equipment for our scale which is already developed for the 1:1 scale! Is Michel dreaming? Sure I am in Technicolor to boot! But you be the judge?

I remember years ago when I was heavily involved in radio control aircraft and ducted fans were all the rage did you think we would ever dream of seeing miniature turbines? Of course we did and where is the hobby now? Zoom, Zooooom......

Concerning the bane of model railroading, DIRTY TRACKS!  I agree sure dirty track are a royal pain but it’s a part of the experience of the hobby. Hopefully it’ll be diminished due to DC power. Even if it doesn’t we’ll still have to clean the tracks because we don’t live in a hermetically sealed environment do we? I’m happy I don’t have any cats I’ve seen what they can do to the tracks!

Michel

Just Order it!

Michel,

So if you order it from the states, the Canadian Mounted Model Railroad Police will stop it at the border?

I think you should just take a chance and order it.  I dont think they really examine electronic items that closely

anyway.

James

Track cleaning...

Jurgen, I visited a layout here in Tucson where the owner has not cleaned the track in over 15 years.  Not days, YEARS.  He runs straight DC, and his trains ran flawlessly. Without hiccup.  His layout is roughly 20'x30', fully sceniced, gorgeous scenes.

The issue is not the voltage itself.  The issue is the signal riding on top of that voltage, and rail grime distorts that signal as proven by how often we now have to clean DCC rail systems.  I see the difference at the club - rails that aren't even dirty need to be cleaned, and the results are real.  Remove that signal from the rails, we're all better off.

The central command station is perhaps still a good idea, one that Ring has not incorporated into their system - At This Time.  This does not preclude such operation in the future.  Further, a good interface between PC and RCC with backwards compatibility to DCC will probably be the very best unit to have on the market.

What's wrong with DCC?  Well, what's wrong with DC?  What's Wrong with AC, for that matter? 

Maybe Ring hasn't gone far enough?

Maybe Ring needs to go the rest of the way and offer battery power?

Then dirty track will no longer be a concern and you can go straight to the loco with wireless.

What was that Stanton drive solution?

Didn't someone from NWSL or affiliated with them take an NCE decoder or Tsunami and marry it with  radio control and optionally a decent sized battery? So that the only thing the track was needed for was to charge the battery occasionally?

I seem to remember hearing about this around the convention/train show last summer, but nothing since.

Ah, here it is: http://www.nwsl.com/S-CAB_Radio_DCC_Control.html

The interface is more traditional - no touch screen there. It's also less expensive for the non-sound solution than RailPro, but more expensive for the decoder only sound solution. Plus the battery is extra. With the configurable antenna it seems to be a bit more of a custom-order solution than RailPro as well.

NWSL+RING

This would be the best of best of both worlds, in my mind...

NWSL nailed a decoder/reciever system that is forward and backward compatible.

The "more traditional" controller is the weak link.

Ring's interface is where things are headed - and where things SHOULD be already, in terms of GUI and database structure, but their Decoder/Receiver locks out everybody else, including all the decoder makers as well as anyone who already has a decoder in their system.  So that's a No Go.

Ring has the least distance necessary to capture the Controller/controller interface market.  NWSL's interface provides a method to get "2-way" communication into every locomotive [an add on RCC/transponder interface], but they don't have the software Ring Does.  Ring's internal software in the decoder, is something else.  When you have two engines MUed together, if you put more load on one engine, the other engine automatically responds by gearing/speeding up.  NO input by you, it simply speed matches your locomotives all by itself. AKA, no more independent/custom speed tables in every single locomotive.

Rings new Handheld is $399 and contains all of the software necessary to control just about ANYTHING on the railroad - it is not a controller, but a Controller/Command Station.  Digitrax's new Handheld is $250, but it does not have anywhere near the programming Ring's Handheld contains becasue digitrax also sells Command Stations. 

We're looking at the difference between my Candybar Nokia phone and the new Driod/iPhones, and here I am still using my Motorola RAZ-R 3.  The fact is, current DCC throttles are still between 2 and 3 generations behind the curve, whereas today's curve is already one generation behind the next generation as it is already in development.  Our failure to upgrade our mindsets puts us at a disadvantage when it comes to preparing for the capabilities the next generation allows - such as Self Speed matching MUed locomotives!!

And one "Idea" that may indeed now be a thing of the past are these things we called "Command Stations."  We will still need Interfaces, but that brick that used to supply the commands has been microized to the point that it FITS IN YOUR HAND! 

I really hope Ring puts their focus on providing links in such a manner that their system will play well with the rest of the market.  Otherwise, they'll only be like another DCS.  PCs, for instance, work great together because they all run on Windows.  Ring should jump on it and sell product licenses to allow other manufacturers to USE their Software!!!

Battery Power is still "Too Far."  Ring DOES need to go one step further in implementing their system int eh hearts and minds of every model railroader, though - they need to build the bridge that allows their software to play well with the previously established market.

Think Soundtraxx+Bachmann.  It's the same basic idea.  The DCC manufacturers will probably be resistant to giving up their component sales, but their best focus would be on Decoders, thus freeing Ring up to focus mainly on Control and Software, and perhaps even better decoder designs - decoders with up to 64GB of onboard storage space, for instance, and USB connectivity through a port on the bottom of the unit.  

Close...

 that would be the Department of RF Security that would handle that...

Too easy, Too limited?

"You still have to add a feeder to each rail, and have reversing units on wyes and reverse loops and something like a Frog Juicer at each turnout frog.  Explain again how this is easier?

I don't think DCC is the ultimate in train control, but neither is Railpro.  I'm still waiting for the real solution."

Michel,

I suggest you get a copy of Joe Fugate's  excellent DVD:  Vol. 3  Electrical and Control(including DCC) on the Siskiyou Line.

You will then see how "fun" it is to program a loco decoder thru your laptop computer using the JMRI Decoder Pro program.   Railpro has made loco program operations much easier.

I have met Tim at Ring Engineering and played with Railpro, it really is easy to work with and has lots of features now and in the future...and is FUN!   Some people get more enjoyment from things that are more complex... not me( thats why your interested in Railpro).

For me building a layout is half the fun.  I expect the the track wiring to be somewhat complex,  but doable for most people.  

DCC and Railpro is  the ultimate in control!

James

What's this?

What was that?

No Michel.

My point was DCC can be quite complex.  Thats why you and I like Railpro!

Derogatory??   I'm on your side!

James

I'll take that and ….

Sorry for the confusion..

Sorry for the confusion.... I should not have directed my reply post at you.  I was responding to an earlier post that was in "quotes" at the top.

James

Proper Electronic Principles versus Electronic Programming

"You still have to add a feeder to each rail, and have reversing units on wyes and reverse loops and something like a Frog Juicer at each turnout frog.  Explain again how this is easier?"

I think we have to keep in mind the difference between reliable electrical [power] transmission and reliable information [programming] transmission.  There is no power source for our hobby more reliable than a cord plugged into the wall.  and with power, you either have connectivity or you don't.

The issue with DCC is that you are putting a signal on top of that primary purpose and thus leading to issues due to the very nature of information transmission via an unreliable connection [the wheels to the tracks]  The more dirt you get, the more scrambled/broken the information becomes, the worse it gets.  At least, as I understand it.  And if you become detached from the rails altogether, and run on an alternate power source or a backup source, well, then you're dead in the water [aka runaway] because you cannot communicate directly with the decoder in the engine.

Now, if you added a small voltage cell to your engines and then RCC, you could run these units using track power without any issue whatsoever on "normal" track where you have feeders on ever section of rail [this is simply good EP practice].  Once you get to a switch, one of the MOST common places where locomotives stall [you can see this most prominently with Sound decodered engines], the onboard power circuit would allow your engine to progress without ever once knowing track power has been disrupted.

As I see it, the movement is NOT to get us to 100% Battery operation - even though this extreme seems to be what Deeply entrenched people think the goal is.  No, the Goal here is a Powerboost to get through those places on the layout where stalls are common, particularly for things like small wheelbase engines.

If the power reverser is inside the locomotive, you will NEVER need a reverse loop power reverser again.

If the power source inside the locomotive is enough to provide 3-10 seconds of solid movement with the sound blaring, you will never need a Frog Juicer again either.

Again, Switches are the single most common place for stalls.  So if there's a continual powersupply in the locomotive at all times, that provides backup for up to ten seconds, we will never see one of those stalls at a switch again.  And this means, at least in my experience, a much more satisfying model railroading experience. PARTICULARLY if we don't hear sound equipped engines starting and stalling at ever switch point.  There's nothing more detractive from this hobby during an Ops session...

With Ring's interface, you will never need read another DCC/RCC manual either, EVER AGAIN, unless you so desire to go that deep.  Seriously, it's as easy to use as Windows - and as much as programmers like to yank at windows [pray tell, again, why Window's "so bad," when it is what has allowed the Planet to seize the internet!  yes, you have NO knowledge about the programming running in the backgorund, but seriously, why do you need to know that in the first place?  You DON'T!] - windows based programming allows users like you and me to get to the nitty gritty of what We want to do without ever having to put any more effort into the system beyond turning it on...

There's issues that have to be worked out between Ring and the known universe, but I think if they are worked out, and Ring does not try to be another "DCS," there will be a very positive revolution in model railroad handhedl control.

RailPros & Cons

Ok, I have to say I really like the idea. Since I haven't yet started building my layout, I might actually end up going with this system. For people who just like to run trains, this really seems like the way to go.

Things I like:

Touch screen buttons - they seem to be completely programmable so that I can put functions on the controller where I like them, and call them whatever I want. The controller adjusts to me, not the other way around.

Acquiring of locomotives - Touch the locomotives button, choose the loco you want to control (using a picture of the loco), and go. Very simple. The same with turnouts and accessories.

MUing - I really like the fact the the locos talk to each other through the interface. You MU them, and they run together without adjustments. This means you can easily put 6 or 8 locos on a single train at the front, middle and back, and it should work fine, it doesn't matter what locos they are. It also means that you can create and break consists easily, so that it could become a part of the Ops Session.

Downloadable upgrades - When a new function or sound comes out, you download it to the controller, and it works.

Less track cleaning - Since it's DC power to the rails, running trains doesn't build up gunk.

Intiuitive, User Friendly Interface -  You don't have to be a programmer to set up new and run equipment on your railroad.

Large control knob - If is has some weight to it, the tactile feedback should be great.

Things I don't like:

While you can run RailPro locos on some DCC layouts (they don't specify which), you basically have to "start over" and buy their RailPro systems to get all the benefits, and it isn't compliant in any way with DCC standards.

They are patenting all their technology - Unless they give the patents to the NMRA as was done with DCC, or in some way cheaply license the technology to other manufacturers, this will never become a standard. The great thing about DCC is that when you by something that is DCC compliant from any manufacturer, you know it will work on your command station, no matter who made the command station.

As far as I can tell, I won't be able to tinker. I can't rearrange menus, or what's on them, nor can I add my own hacks to the system.

Things I have questions about:

Can I set up so that sounding the horn will activate flashing ditch lights?

Is there any way to detect where a locomotive is on the layout, so that signaling or real-time tracking can be used?

Can I create and edit my own sounds to add to a locomotive?

How many sounds for various locomotives (and other effects) are available, and how big of a library do they intend to have?

Do they have directional lighting effects?

Can I customize the system beyond what they may have thought of? (Momentum, speed tables, etc...)

Can I manually switch turnouts that are controlled by the system from fascia mounted buttons?

Can I route several turnouts?

These are all things I can do with DCC currently.

What's the limit of how many locos I can run, or that the system can be aware of at a time?

How do you link a picture of a locomotive to that specific unit? Can I create & load my own pictures? I'll be running a freelanced road, so there won't be any pictures of paint scheme or road name already created for me.

If the touch screen is like my Droid, sometimes it doesn't work so well. I'd hate to be running trains and miss a turnout, or worse, hit another train because I couldn't get the touch screen to respond.

What kind of interference issues might I run into? Is someone dialing a phone, or playing with an RC car going to cause frequency issues?