Is it time for a new way to control and power our trains?

Whatever is developed today...will be obsolete tomorrow.  That's the way electronics is.

You guys seem to want something that will last forever.  DCS (and TMCC) was the end all for 3 decades, now MTH will be gone soon.  I've tried to look at DCC, but the reams of paperwork necessary to get it going (same could be said about DCS, TMCC was fairly simple) just seem to be too much trouble.

Even the BPRC system I used will become obsolete (may already be), until then I'm going to enjoy running my trains on battery power.  RC planes and cars go thru the same cycle, but they simply pop the old unit out and slap the newest generation in, it's really that simple.

I'm glad I went BPRC 5 years ago and never looked back.

@Bob Delbridge posted:

Whatever is developed today...will be obsolete tomorrow.  That's the way electronics is.

 

Depends on what the desired use is.  All my PW trains run 100% and are ridiculously simple and reliable.  No they can't do the fun stuff that the PS locos or TMCC do.  But it is almost undeniably a technology that is NOT obsolete.  And it's 100 years old.

What kind of technology can be invented that will be the next open-fame AC motor and mechanical E-unit?  I don't know, but I bet something someday will be invented.

Perhaps, as someone stated above, conventional operation with minimal bell and whistle sounds, is indeed the "standard" which already includes TMCC, DCS and Legacy locos. The obvious electronic wizards (NO disrespect intended) on this thread have largely customized  their equipment beyond the capabitities of most of us in this fine hobby and that works for them. My point is there is currently no, and likely will be no, universal control system for the O gauge hobby. What works for you as individuals is the bottom line.

@Jeff_the_Coaster_Guy posted:

Depends on what the desired use is. 

What kind of technology can be invented that will be the next open-fame AC motor and mechanical E-unit?  I don't know, but I bet something someday will be invented.

The next step is more efficient brushless can motors with ball bearings.

Rusty

No. How many ways to do we need to make toy trains go in circle? We have too many as it is it. We just need to get on the same sheet of music. Fortunately the NMRA developed a standard to follow. Just because it is old doesn't mean it is not useful anymore. I haven't heard anyone in any scale that uses DCC complain about not having enough control over their trains, sounds or layouts. Really, what is to be gained by coming up with another control option? What do you want to do with your trains that any system on the market doesn't allow? How is powering trains with batteries an improvement or advancement? Having been in RC for a while I can say that all batteries do is give you limited run time, the chore of charging them and replacing them when they fail and you have to add some more equipment to contain them in or add a battery module to your layout. I don't see that as better.

Excellent points, Mike.

One more point: Having tried DCC with my LGB digital locos, that system has it own set of "bugaboos" and is not without unintended consequences!

This is actually one of the fairest battle of the eras I can recall. Tons of good points on both sides.... though I'm not ready to "roll" with Rusty yet, lol.

LGB  Nice but most of the euro techs seem to have incompatibility down to a fine art.

@mike d  Some folk HATE track issues, wiring, and cleaning. Others like outdoor running and rusty dirty track is inevitable unless you go with very pricey metal for rails. They also need much more track as a rule.

So I can see the appeal for some folk. But the rest of us indoor, non-copper fearing Felix Ungar's are content, I agree.  (Felix was a clean freak on tv/film you young whippersnappers).

The situation I encountered with so-called "universal" DCC was this: I was advised to and tried a PIKO DCC system with several LGB digital locos only to find that the LGB proprietary DCC system had several non-mesh issues with the PIKO DCC system. Some functions worked while some cancelled out others! So frustrating, my dealer thankfully gave me a return credit on both the PIKO system and the LGB digital locos. Universal, NOT!

BTW, I am also an indoor "Felix" operator of both conventional standard gauge and conventional LGB and PIKO. I am not averse to voltage-fed copper wire, brass track and tinplate track! 

@Tinplate Art posted:

The situation I encountered with so-called "universal" DCC was this: I was told and I tried a PIKO DCC system with several LGB digital locos only to find that the LGB proprietary DCC system had several non-mesh issues with the PIKO DCC system. Some functions worked while some cancelled out others! So frustrating, my dealer thankfully gave me a return credit on both the PIKO system and the LGB digital locos. Universal, NOT!

In America, the system is very universal.  In Europe, they have a few different standards.  Too bad your exposure to it was with some weird foreign stuff  

Brendan

@Mike D posted:

No. How many ways to do we need to make toy trains go in circle? We have too many as it is it. We just need to get on the same sheet of music. Fortunately the NMRA developed a standard to follow. Just because it is old doesn't mean it is not useful anymore. I haven't heard anyone in any scale that uses DCC complain about not having enough control over their trains, sounds or layouts. Really, what is to be gained by coming up with another control option? What do you want to do with your trains that any system on the market doesn't allow? How is powering trains with batteries an improvement or advancement? Having been in RC for a while I can say that all batteries do is give you limited run time, the chore of charging them and replacing them when they fail and you have to add some more equipment to contain them in or add a battery module to your layout. I don't see that as better.

All batteries do?  You missed one. No more track cleaning. Actually you missed a few. No more voltage drops or dead spots. In fact batteries would almost be like going full circle back to wind up trains, but with sounds and lights and smoke. As for run time, how long ago were you in RC? Batteries have changed a lot and will continue to get better.

@Will posted:

Batteries have changed a lot and will continue to get better.

That's an understatement and a half. And, excluding how beneficial today's battery tech would be on its own, battery tech in the next 10 years is going to make exponential leaps.

All the things @will posted are true, PLUS

- batteries can run the same equipment on 2 or 3 rail interchangeably without issues

-no wiring glitches and birds nests of terminal blocks, block wires, etc. How big is that all by itself? And would allow much greater flexibility to change track plans organically without being tied to insulated blocks, switch locations, etc.

-you would easily be able to power a locomotive  for 10 or so hour long sessions without recharge using the battery tech that will be available in 10 years. Recharging could be as simple as parking on a dedicated spur with a smart charging circuit.

-no more damaging shorts across rails. No more voltage spikes due to flaky source juice.

I suspect that the"electricity through the tracks" was just the best solution available to engineers in the 1930s when contemplating making their small trains run around. I bet if we showed Lionel techs today's batteries back in 1946 they would immediately abandon 18VAC through the tracks. At least, they would have if they were smart. Power distribution through a 2 or 3 rail bus for an application like trains is just so... Last century. 

Edit: another data point: there is a currently active thread where a member can't get his GP7 to run in command mode and there's an utterly ridiculous (unironically serious) discussion about the merits of taping aluminum foil to the underside of elevated tracks to fix something called "ground plane interference". Really? We gotta tape tin foil to random parts of our layouts just to run an engine around in a circle? C'mon, if the benefits of getting rid of all sorts of current through tracks isn't obvious, I don't know what else to say. 

What Jeff the Coaster Guy said!

It's been over a decade since I got out of aircraft RC. I still have a couple of cars. I am fairly certain the batteries are about the same size these days and that run times are still about the same. With electrics getting popular I do know that battery tech did improve but there aren't any planes or cars running for much longer than they were in the past.

There is no perfect solution, each power source has it's pros and cons and I am just not buying the battery is the best way to power trains mantra just yet. I am sure battery tech will improve. Only time will tell if it gets to the point where it is practical to power a layout. As far as tracking cleaning goes, sorry, that isn't going away. Wheels don't get traction on oily/greasy track and if you are going to use track sections to charge batteries then your track has to be clean.

@Mike D: I haven't operated a large layout ever, but my understanding about track cleaning was that it's usually done to reduce problems with conductivity between pickups, ground wheels and track,  and not usually because of a loss of traction (save for the random times you accidentally spill some oil on the rails). So batteries would significantly reduce time associated with cleaning tracks.  Tracks could be completely rusted and still work fine (maybe opens up more chances for modeling old Rusty yards and spurs that still can be used?)

And I'm not an RC person, but I do have to follow tech somewhat and I've spent some time with battery manufacturers. Your assertion that batteriy capacities haven't significantly changed in the past 10 years is simply incorrect. Maybe RC had been slow to adopt new technologies (and given the content of this thread, not surprising), but believe me batteries are worlds different today.

A 2000 Mah, 9.6v, NiMh battery gives me 2.5 hours of run time. Takes 2 hours to recharge at 1A/hr. Been over 5 years now and None of the 18 battery powered engines I own have quit working and no batteries have needed replacing.

I’ve gone close to 9 months without recharging some of the batteries and they still had enough juice to run for 10-15 minutes. I keep a charge log of when each engine goes on the charger, at one time I was running trains daily so I had to charge them frequently, past 2 years not as much (other hobby got in the way).

I’d trade having to charge a battery any day over the troubles I had with DCS and TMCC (and reading the Bible’s on them) and I honestly didn’t have anywhere near the issues some of you guys have had.

The Deltang system I use doesn’t have smoke or sound, but the BLueRail units I was using had sound. It came out of my Ipad but it was there. Plus, with the help of Bob Walker, I was able to install a Bluetooth speaker in all 3 of the engines that had the BlueRail board install. Made the sound a lot louder and it came out of the engine vice the Ipad. There’s some YouTube videos showing the Weaver RS3 and Williams E7 that had them installed. Also put it in a Bachmann G scale 4-6-0 Annie.

 The new BlueRail/DCC boards have sound, not sure about smoke and are rated for higher amperage than the ones I have.

Jeff, I still clean my track, although not nearly as often, maybe once/year. I do try to clean the wheels on the engines and rolling stock more often.  Engines are easy, just put them upside down in a cradle, turn on the transmitter, then receiver, and start cleaning.

Jeff, I did not assert that batteries haven't improved in the last decade. I actually stated that I know it has improved. I am just not seeing the significant change you assert has occurred during that time. Batteries and battery packs are basically still the same size and have similar capacities. I am an Avionics Tech. I deal with batteries regularly. Believe me when I say I haven't seen any real change in aviation batteries in the 26 years I have been doing this. Weight is critical in an airframe. If there was a way to get a one pound battery to do what a 30 pound battery can you better believe those 30 pounders would be gone in a flash. If you look at a power tool battery pack today, it is about 2/3 the size of a pack from a decade ago and it only lasts a little longer under use before it requires a recharge. I don't see that as significant. The only way I am going to run a multiple powered unit consist with a few dozen cars in tow with today's batteries is if I place a Schnabel behind the locos with an Optima yellow top on it. Not really practical. The OP asked if it is time for a new way. I stand behind my original statement. No. You are speculating about what batteries may like a decade from now. While you may be correct and batteries may be advanced enough later to be practical for trains, that simply isn't the case now. I get the feeling that you and Will are seeing me as closed minded or stuck in the past. That is not the case. If battery tech improves enough to be practical at some time in the future, I am game. Another issue is that the control boards are going to have to get smaller also to allow a battery of sufficient capacity to fit. The space available for batteries right now is only enough for a 9V.

@Tinplate Art posted:

BTW, I am also an indoor "Felix" operator of both conventional standard gauge and conventional LGB and PIKO. I am not averse to voltage-fed copper wire, brass track and tinplate track! 

I wouldn't be able to resist pulling that "corded" wood train if it was near enough 😂

Corded...pull.

Corded...wood.

Corded...electric

I keep pitching um, and You keep missin' um.Pay attention Son.

I build up to Oscar level anymore really, but do clean like Felix once able. It used to be easier.  I was being dramatic to contrast, not trying to poke anything but dimples into a smile

On the other hand, I am amazed at the slender, long-life Lithium battery in my 2014 Samsung Galaxy S5 cellphone which has been recharged thousands of times, has been dropped maybe half a dozen times and still provides needed power to my device. True, we are talking MA here and not AMPS, but I am impressed with the resilience and small size of this Lithium battery. What about the ability of a sport model Tesla to accelerate to 150 mph in a matter of seconds? How many pounds of batteries are necessary to perform such torque? Have these not gotten smaller, lighter and more powerful for their use in such high performance vehicles?

Priced a Tesla lately?

Also, batteries are made of substances which are not easy to get, refine, put together, or dispose.  Also many can cause cancer.  

Batteries and capacitors are nowhete where they need to be in terms of costs.  

Nevertheless, battery technology has advanced and has been more commonly and successfully used among G gaugers combined with RC. Interestingly, cosmologists have learned that Lithium was formed third after the elements Hydrogen and Helium after the Big Bang, hence their position in the Periodic Table. Hopefully, used Lithium batteries can be recycled so as to reduce pollution.

This (new control system, including battery operation) WILL happen.  It's only dependent on battery technology offering safe, recyclable, rechargeable packs of enough capacity. The 2.0 amp (2000 mAh) average draw of a locomotive means today's RC packs  would run your train for up to an hour.   2000 mAh might be enough already- now to  find the space for them in a locomotive and/or tender already crowded w/ circuit boards!   

The radio control (2.4 gHz) technology is there already, used in RC cars, boats and planes.  With that will come the smaller hand held controllers (the Lion Chief ones already exist as do the larger Legacy and CAB-1).

So, what is the barrier to the widespread launching of this "dead rail" technology??  As always- "the market".  IF the two major manufacturers' sales totaled something like $200 million a year, is/was that enough of a market to support what will be for a time a second product line?   And- we cannot forget that the vast majority of model train sales is in HO and N- and today's batteries in a suitable size to those do not offer enough capacity, I don't believe.

What will happen (I think) is that if/ when the technology is released, WE (those in O using powered rail) will simply adopt it - after all powered rail COULD e a part of the new system, used for switches or recharging).  And something has to power our lighting and accessories.

All will be OK in time.

Give me an ozone belching ZW...works every time....

You all may want to consider the NEW "T.I.S." RC boards. Very simple and almost bullet proof.  

http://lbrenterprisesllc.homes...m/UP-GRADE-PAGE.html

Dave

1. I like the BlueRailDCC design. I liked it when word came out a few years back that Bachmann was going to be integrating it into their trains. 

2. For those who do not like Battery discharge/recharge times. It would be a simple matter to keep "live" tracks but have it feed a battery charging circuit instead of directly providing power. 

3. The last time I checked, there is no patents on how the motors/lights/speakers/etc are connected to either DCS or Lionel Command-Control-Of-The-Month systems. Opportunity for someone to come up with Plug and Play Bluetooth receivers of track or battery power designs. 

@Mike D posted:

Jeff, I did not assert that batteries haven't improved in the last decade. I actually stated that I know it has improved. I am just not seeing the significant change you assert has occurred during that time. Batteries and battery packs are basically still the same size and have similar capacities. I am an Avionics Tech. I deal with batteries regularly. Believe me when I say I haven't seen any real change in aviation batteries in the 26 years I have been doing this. Weight is critical in an airframe. If there was a way to get a one pound battery to do what a 30 pound battery can you better believe those 30 pounders would be gone in a flash. If you look at a power tool battery pack today, it is about 2/3 the size of a pack from a decade ago and it only lasts a little longer under use before it requires a recharge. I don't see that as significant. The only way I am going to run a multiple powered unit consist with a few dozen cars in tow with today's batteries is if I place a Schnabel behind the locos with an Optima yellow top on it. Not really practical. The OP asked if it is time for a new way. I stand behind my original statement. No. You are speculating about what batteries may like a decade from now. While you may be correct and batteries may be advanced enough later to be practical for trains, that simply isn't the case now. I get the feeling that you and Will are seeing me as closed minded or stuck in the past. That is not the case. If battery tech improves enough to be practical at some time in the future, I am game. Another issue is that the control boards are going to have to get smaller also to allow a battery of sufficient capacity to fit. The space available for batteries right now is only enough for a 9V.

I yield the area of battery expertise to you and Jeff. I only responded to your original post which was " all batteries do is give you limited run time, the chore of charging them and replacing them when they fail." I thought I'd point out the positives. As for track cleaning, occasional wiping for traction vs. regular cleaning for conductivity? Not really comparable.

I think the big positives that Jeff pointed out are eliminating all that wiring under the layout and the ability to change track layout easily. That alone is a game changer. Not to mention transformers. That's a lot of money saved. Think of Christmas and floor loops with no wire.

Certainly if we can fly planes with batteries, which require small, light batteries, O gauge trains should be no problem. I agree with Mike Wyatt, that this is driven more by market than anything else. The market just isn't big enough to underwrite new technologies. One of the positives of MTH closing up is it may give Lionel, or some other start up the time and freedom to work on this. Just pure speculation.

BlueRailDCC has a 3 A continuous / 5 A max board that can be powered with AC or DC track power or battery for O and S gauge trains.

@Greg Nagy posted:

 

2. For those who do not like Battery discharge/recharge times. It would be a simple matter to keep "live" tracks but have it feed a battery charging circuit instead of directly providing power. 

 

 

That is exactly what I do in my HO gauge battery powered Bluerail locos.  Bluerail boards are in the Bachmann locos.  The early Bluerail boards were bluetooth only.  I have one of the new DCC ones on order.  I am not sure if they require a DCC decoder to work.  If so, that makes the cost go up, especially if you want sound.  The Bluerail boards are already $95+  

Brendan

@Tinplate Art posted:

On the other hand, I am amazed at the slender, long-life Lithium battery in my 2014 Samsung Galaxy S5 cellphone which has been recharged thousands of times, has been dropped maybe half a dozen times and still provides needed power to my device. True, we are talking MA here and not AMPS, but I am impressed with the resilience and small size of this Lithium battery. What about the ability of a sport model Tesla to accelerate to 150 mph in a matter of seconds? How many pounds of batteries are necessary to perform such torque? Have these not gotten smaller, lighter and more powerful for their use in such high performance vehicles?

A 85kWh Tesla Battery weighs 1200 pounds and contains 7104 Lithium-ion battery cells in 16 modules wired in series.

Rusty

WOWSA! That be a heavy and heavy duty power source! Also pricey I am sure! Does that Tesla battery require a cooling system? Fans?

For what it's worth, all LiPo batteries sold for R/C car, boat and airplane usage state "do not charge unattended." Small but not zero chance of a fire.  This is true with wall AC systems too, for electrical fires, but most of us don't want to live without light, heat, A/C, refrigerator, coffee maker, etc. .

I think it will be many decades, if not longer, before battery powered O gauge trains are produced by Lionel or whoever is still around in 2050.  This is still a tinkerer's approach to the hobby, or less than 1% of all hobbyists, if you consider a train around the tree person a hobbyist, and I do.  So have fun, but don't expect it to be mainstream, for many reasons.

As much as I enjoy three rail, for the look itself and the fine associated memories, I can see no reason we haven't switched to all battery. It would eliminate dead spots, and one could finally crawl over switches.

The battery pack could fit in the tender, or a second tender, which is prototypical on large steam power. How many of us run trains for hours and hours anyway? What do you all think?

RTR off-the-shelf battery powered O gauge trains likely will not be a reality anytime soon. Custom modified by end-user will probably be the norm for the near future. There are many battery/RC options (mostly for G scale trains) which can be adapted by talented and creative electronic folks in O gauge.

I am afraid we are building a tower of babble with so many standards that it will be difficult to take your trains to a friends house and clubs will have to be established that are dedicated to a specific control system. I have over 100 locomotives and most are stuffed with electronics particularly steam locos. No possible way to add a battery so assuming the new tech would be much smaller in order to make room for a battery that means I would have to rip out thousands of dollars worth of control systems to update my fleet. If you have five or ten locos great you can change systems every year. Not to forget that batteries have a shelf life so are we going to change them every five or so years and pray they don't leak.   All this in the face of a diminishing market shall we divide that market more ?         j 

@Atlas O dad posted:

As much as I enjoy three rail, for the look itself and the fine associated memories, I can see no reason we haven't switched to all battery. It would eliminate dead spots, and one could finally crawl over switches.

The battery pack could fit in the tender, or a second tender, which is prototypical on large steam power. How many of us run trains for hours and hours anyway? What do you all think?

Just curious.  Are you an operator?  Or a loop runner?

During operating sessions I have gone over an hour with one engine switching cars in/out of sidings from the yard. Most switches were powered with the controls trackside (Z-1000s back then).  Most uncoupling was done by electromagnets, but we could switch to kadees.  I'm building my current layout the same way, so there are already wires everywhere.

So I guess I'm asking during operating sessions how do you handle lots of switching movements?  All manually?

Thanks.

@Atlas O dad posted:

As much as I enjoy three rail, for the look itself and the fine associated memories, I can see no reason we haven't switched to all battery. It would eliminate dead spots, and one could finally crawl over switches.

The battery pack could fit in the tender, or a second tender, which is prototypical on large steam power. How many of us run trains for hours and hours anyway? What do you all think?

It would also eliminate the need for the center rail, except for prewar and postwar and other vintage operators ( Which I guess will include the contemporary collectors of today) The only advantage to the third rail was wiring.

@Jeff_the_Coaster_Guy posted:

 

I suspect that the"electricity through the tracks" was just the best solution available to engineers in the 1930s when contemplating making their small trains run around. I bet if we showed Lionel techs today's batteries back in 1946 they would immediately abandon 18VAC through the tracks. At least, they would have if they were smart. Power distribution through a 2 or 3 rail bus for an application like trains is just so... Last century. 

 

Actually, if I remember correctly, the original product Joshua Cowan Lionel produced in 1900 was a flat car with a battery powered motor, interestingly enough.  I vaguely recall he did that because in 1900 a lot of people still did not have electric service in their houses so this made sense.