Nice to see you getting this up an running again.
JohnGaltLine posted:
The questions I need a consensus on before advancing in development are as follows:
1. What is the price point people would find reasonable for this product? In the simplest implementation I can do right now the bridge would allow control of up to three LC/+ locomotives from your Cab1/2. the hardware needed to accomplish that, however leaves plenty of room for expandability. to that end...
I would think this would have to retail for about $150 on the high end. I think I'm probably the one with the highest guestimate but your time and effort are worth more than some give you credit for. Plus this is a nice addition for those wanting to run LC and LC+ from TMCC. I think they'll pay.
2. Is it worth while to increase the initial cost of the bridge to make it expandable to control more than three LC/+ engines? I am not entirely certain, but expect that it would add around $10 to the cost to provide for expandability. In exchange it will cost about half as much as the first bridge to add another module to control three more engines.
YES. Unfortunately if you set it for 3, someone will want 6. Someone will want more so you might as well plan for it. Again I think you're pricing yourself low. LC and LC+ was originally developed for those not wanting the complexity of TMCC Legacy but once it was out everyone wanted to run them from...Legacy and TMCC.
3. If an expandable design is chosen, how many LC/+ in total should it be capable of supporting? I think I can manage up to 24 total LC/+ engines from a fully expanded bridge before another "master" unit is needed. I won't know for sure until the code is written, but may run into other issues with a single master device controlling so many engines. Would a unit that can only be expanded to control 12, or 6 total engines be acceptable?
I would say 12 but as I stated above everyone wants more so I would MAX it out to start. I hate to be the pessimist but again once they control 3 they'll want 6 and so on.
4. Are tactile, physical buttons and switches on the device for programing preferred or wanted? The implementation i'm currently working with uses the cab1/2 remote for most programing with perhaps 2 buttons on the bridge it's self. Do people prefer to use buttons or switches on the bridge to program it, or is it ok to program from the Cab remote?
If it's simple from CAB1 or Cab 2 then I would do it that way. If it's too complicated then add the buttons to the bridge. LC was made to be simple, it shouldn't be over complicated when adding TMCC interface to it.
5. Is there anyone in the Metro Detroit area that has a functional layout with Legacy AND LCS that might be willing to volunteer some time to help do some testing to insure the bridge is fully compatible with those systems? (DCS as well would be nice.) It is my intention for the bridge to be installed with the 9-pin serial port on the command base, and for any additional serial devices to then plug into a second serial port on the bridge device. I can think of no reason this won't work, but need to test it. It would also be nice to test the bridge with Legacy and DCS for compatibility. Once any obvious bugs are worked out, I'll probably look for a couple "beta testers" to try the device on their layouts.
Can't help you there but will keep an eye on the thread in case I have any thoughts. I would imagine you'll need to work with a SER2 which may require you to join the LCS partner program. @Railsounds maybe able to help you there.
I'm sure I'll have more questions, or forgot some of the ones I was thinking of and will add them, but thanks for whatever input can be offered.
JGL
