To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.trainsOpen lugnet.trains in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Trains / 26526
Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:44:15 GMT
Viewed: 
6849 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:

6. The IR unit is built into a 30-stud long base plate.

   Note that for the strong of heart, this might still allow smaller trolleys...
with some ABS shavings. But hacking the motor to allow RP and IR controlability
seems a likely direction in any event.

So, the new BPIR system isn't all wine an roses, but what can
metal-railers get out of the new system?
1. Since the plastic wheels insulate the train motor from the track and
each engine carries its own power supply, using BPIR trains is an easy
way to get a second, third or fourth train on the same loop as an RP
train. I think this is cool because I could get a trolley running on a
layout without interfering with the train, well… as long as I am paying
attention.

   Or even when you aren't. The biggest news to me at BrickFest on this was IR
control - the RCX can transmit IR, and we've already got it running things like
Manas (that may use a very similar protocol). So multiple, RCX-controled (but
not powered) trains become a possibility, with the RCX inputs and outputs
dedicated to just controling layout features (points, animation, train sensing).
And this requires no modification whatsoever, just careful coding of the RCX for
IR control.
   One RCX, controling multiple trains, switching tracks, and loading &
unloading stations. If the train folks don't enjoy this, I assure you there's
some mindstorms types that are chomping at the bit.

4. When a BPIR train derails it won’t stop. I consider this an advantage
because, really, doesn’t everyone just love a spectacular LEGO train
accident?

   I like the way you think. Scary, that.

--
Brian Davis


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:18:40 GMT
Viewed: 
7034 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Brian Davis wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:

6. The IR unit is built into a 30-stud long base plate.

   Note that for the strong of heart, this might still allow smaller trolleys...
with some ABS shavings. But hacking the motor to allow RP and IR controlability
seems a likely direction in any event.

Also, for locomotices, the IR plate could be used on rolling stock pulled by a
shorter loco (this is how most of the old 4.5v trains worked). Doesn't wor for
trolleys though :(

So, the new BPIR system isn't all wine an roses, but what can
metal-railers get out of the new system?
1. Since the plastic wheels insulate the train motor from the track and
each engine carries its own power supply, using BPIR trains is an easy
way to get a second, third or fourth train on the same loop as an RP
train. I think this is cool because I could get a trolley running on a
layout without interfering with the train, well… as long as I am paying
attention.

   Or even when you aren't. The biggest news to me at BrickFest on this was IR
control - the RCX can transmit IR, and we've already got it running things like
Manas (that may use a very similar protocol). So multiple, RCX-controled (but
not powered) trains become a possibility, with the RCX inputs and outputs
dedicated to just controling layout features (points, animation, train sensing).
And this requires no modification whatsoever, just careful coding of the RCX for
IR control.
   One RCX, controling multiple trains, switching tracks, and loading &
unloading stations. If the train folks don't enjoy this, I assure you there's
some mindstorms types that are chomping at the bit.

Except the RCX will be obsolete in 6 months, and the NXT doesn't have IR. Maybe
all the mindstorms fans can pay for their NXT by selling their RCXs to train
builders???? :)

ROSCO


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:29:47 GMT
Viewed: 
7159 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:
   In lugnet.trains, Brian Davis wrote:
   In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:
   6. The IR unit is built into a 30-stud long base plate.
Note that for the strong of heart, this might still allow smaller trolleys...
with some ABS shavings. But hacking the motor to allow RP and IR controlability
seems a likely direction in any event.
Also, for locomotices, the IR plate could be used on rolling stock pulled by a
shorter loco (this is how most of the old 4.5v trains worked). Doesn’t wor for
trolleys though :(

It’d be a nice nostalgic moment to see a battery tender version of the IR system, based on a short wheelbase. If you take a hacksaw to this one, your wheelbase is still going to be a minimum of 14 studs long, if you have the wheels right at the end. At that size you’d really want three axles to make it look good.

I understand the IR base has a large 4-wide lump in the middle of the top which actually houses the electrics (only the batteries hang below), so maybe a taller version could have batteries on top, but still be narrow enough to build up the sides of a tender. I’d have to practice my in-line SNOT though...

;-)

Jason Railton


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:44:21 GMT
Viewed: 
7099 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:

   One RCX, controling multiple trains, switching tracks, and loading &
unloading stations. If the train folks don't enjoy this, I assure you there's
some mindstorms types that are chomping at the bit.

Except the RCX will be obsolete in 6 months, and the NXT doesn't have
IR. Maybe all the mindstorms fans can pay for their NXT by selling their
RCXs to train builders???? :)

   I'm saving up to buy an NXT - at Developer's Special, or full retail, I'll
likely get one the first chance I get. But I'm not remotely thinking the RCX
will be "obsolete" in 6 months. One, the NXT doesn't have IR... yet. It wouldn't
surprise me at all that somebody makes a 3rd party "IR code box" to allow theNXT
to send IR data. Second, there's a lot that an RCX can do, so I see no reason to
abandon it.
   Heck, were Manas created so that RCX hackers could control them? I suspect
this was not a major motivating factor, but yet another "interface" an AFOL came
up with... because they could.

--
Brian Davis


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 00:31:25 GMT
Viewed: 
7109 times
  
Also if the RCX is NOT directly powering the trains then the RCX 1.0 (with AC
jack) isn't manditory. I would love to see the IR train be controled by the RCX.

Is reverse engineering the IR codes for the IR train hard to do? Should I try to
get the IR control codes spec and post it on ILTCO web site? Who knows how to
program the RCX with new IR codes? (Is it that easy???)

SteveB


The biggest news to me at BrickFest on this was IR control - the RCX can
transmit IR, and we've already got it running things like Manas (that may use a
very similar protocol). So multiple, RCX-controled (but not powered) trains
become a possibility, with the RCX inputs and outputs dedicated to just
controling layout features (points, animation, train sensing).

And this requires no modification whatsoever, just careful coding of the RCX for
IR control. One RCX, controling multiple trains, switching tracks, and loading &
unloading stations. If the train folks don't enjoy this, I assure you there's
some mindstorms types that are chomping at the bit.


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:03:36 GMT
Viewed: 
7228 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Steven Barile wrote:
The biggest news to me at BrickFest on this was IR control - the RCX can
transmit IR, and we've already got it running things like Manas (that may use a
very similar protocol). So multiple, RCX-controled (but not powered) trains
become a possibility, with the RCX inputs and outputs dedicated to just
controling layout features (points, animation, train sensing).

And this requires no modification whatsoever, just careful coding of the RCX for
IR control. One RCX, controling multiple trains, switching tracks, and loading &
unloading stations. If the train folks don't enjoy this, I assure you there's
some mindstorms types that are chomping at the bit.

The problem you're gonna find is that the RCX can only point in 1 direction at
once. Unless you have many spaced around your layout, you're not gonna be able
to control the trains at every point on the layout. That may not be a problem -
if the trains continue running when they lose their IR signal (we don't know
that yet) you may be able to have significant chunks that don't need coverage,
but you're still probably gonna end up needing multiple RCXs - and how do they
communicate with each other if they're using IR to communicate with trains?

ROSCO


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:08:14 GMT
Reply-To: 
CJMASI@*NOGARBAGEPLEASE*RCNspamcake.COM
Viewed: 
2786 times
  
Ross Crawford wrote:
[...]

Except the RCX will be obsolete in 6 months, and the NXT doesn't have IR. Maybe
all the mindstorms fans can pay for their NXT by selling their RCXs to train
builders???? :)

ROSCO

RCX Obsolete in 6 months? I program my RCX 1.0 with a 7 year old Mac.
Write now I am typing on a 5 year old Mac. Obsolescence is just a point
of view :)*

Chris

*You are correct, I cannot use LEGO Factory on either of these dinosuars :(
--
http://users.rcn.com/cjmasi/lego/

Learn about brittle bone disease
http://www.oif.org/


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:04:02 GMT
Viewed: 
7193 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Steven Barile wrote:
Also if the RCX is NOT directly powering the trains then the RCX 1.0 (with AC
jack) isn't manditory. I would love to see the IR train be controled by the RCX.

Is reverse engineering the IR codes for the IR train hard to do? Should I try to
get the IR control codes spec and post it on ILTCO web site? Who knows how to
program the RCX with new IR codes? (Is it that easy???)


I cracked the Manas codes in ten minutes with a photodiode and an oscilloscope.

Turned out they were very easy to transmit from the RCX.

I suppose TLG could go to the trouble of inventing an entirely new scheme, but
why?

The only scary thing is how easy it will be for naughty little kids to go to
train shows armed with Lego train IR remotes hidden in their jackets.

Personally, I cannot wait for the IR trains to show up. I can see myself modding
a few to use RF (418MHz ?) instead of IR. This would make it immune to that kind
of problem. And a simple RS232 - 418MHz PC gizmo would make PC control easy too.

JB


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 02:38:41 GMT
Viewed: 
7412 times
  
In lugnet.trains, John Barnes wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Steven Barile wrote:
Also if the RCX is NOT directly powering the trains then the RCX 1.0 (with AC
jack) isn't manditory. I would love to see the IR train be controled by the RCX.

Is reverse engineering the IR codes for the IR train hard to do? Should I try to
get the IR control codes spec and post it on ILTCO web site? Who knows how to
program the RCX with new IR codes? (Is it that easy???)


I cracked the Manas codes in ten minutes with a photodiode and an oscilloscope.

Turned out they were very easy to transmit from the RCX.

I suppose TLG could go to the trouble of inventing an entirely new scheme, but
why?

The only scary thing is how easy it will be for naughty little kids to go to
train shows armed with Lego train IR remotes hidden in their jackets.

Personally, I cannot wait for the IR trains to show up. I can see myself modding
a few to use RF (418MHz ?) instead of IR. This would make it immune to that kind
of problem. And a simple RS232 - 418MHz PC gizmo would make PC control easy too.

JB

how difficult do you think it's going to be to convert from IR to RC? this is
one of the many things i wouldn't mind trying but i honestly hadn't thought of
it before your post. another option is to somehow offset the frequency that the
IR trains work off of to add additional channels. granted the user would need to
have 2 controlers but it would be a huge advantage over only 3 channels.
ondrew


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 03:26:47 GMT
Viewed: 
7364 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Ondrew Hartigan wrote:

how difficult do you think it's going to be to convert from IR to RC? this is
one of the many things i wouldn't mind trying but i honestly hadn't thought of
it before your post. another option is to somehow offset the frequency that the
IR trains work off of to add additional channels. granted the user would need to
have 2 controlers but it would be a huge advantage over only 3 channels.

Well, until I buy one and dig into it, I am not going to know how much space
there is within the housing.

I like RF 'cos it works out of line of sight.

As far as different sub-carrier frequencies for IR, there are a number between
25KHz and 76KHz for which you can obtain integrated IR receivers. This is an
obvious alternative, but if you are going to go to the trouble to modify the
train module to swap out the IR receiver and replace the transmitter (becuase
you know the subcarrier frequency is going to be embedded in the microcontroller
in the Lego transmitter), I figured it would be best to jump straight to RF. TLG
don't like RF because they have to obtain certification for their transmtter in
every country they plan to sell it in, whereas IR has no such regulatory
control. But for us, we can build what ever we want.

JB


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:19:54 GMT
Viewed: 
7249 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Steven Barile wrote:
The biggest news to me at BrickFest on this was IR control - the RCX can
transmit IR, and we've already got it running things like Manas (that may use a
very similar protocol). So multiple, RCX-controled (but not powered) trains
become a possibility, with the RCX inputs and outputs dedicated to just
controling layout features (points, animation, train sensing).

And this requires no modification whatsoever, just careful coding of the RCX for
IR control. One RCX, controling multiple trains, switching tracks, and loading &
unloading stations. If the train folks don't enjoy this, I assure you there's
some mindstorms types that are chomping at the bit.

The problem you're gonna find is that the RCX can only point in 1 direction at
once. Unless you have many spaced around your layout, you're not gonna be able
to control the trains at every point on the layout. That may not be a problem -
if the trains continue running when they lose their IR signal (we don't know
that yet) you may be able to have significant chunks that don't need coverage,
but you're still probably gonna end up needing multiple RCXs - and how do they
communicate with each other if they're using IR to communicate with trains?

ROSCO

Surely the automated sections of the layout can be as complicated and widespread
as you have RCXs? You only have one?, that just controls passing at a second
station with control on the rest of the layout being down by you, manually (for
example).
From the things people have said my guess is that the trains will continue
without signal from the control handset. While a lot of what has been written is
speculation I'm sure I have seen it mentioned that there is an 'All trains
Emergency Stop' function, unnecessary otherwise.
Do multiple RCXs need to communicate to run a layout? Surely if they can sense a
train has come in to their 'section' they just deal with it without reference to
other areas of the layout (planning IS required tho!). The problem actually
comes with the need to:
A: deal with multiple trains simultaneously
B: recognise trains to allow signals to be send using the correct channel (to
avoid interference with other passing trains)

Tim


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:24:35 GMT
Viewed: 
2847 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:
Ross Crawford wrote:
[...]

Except the RCX will be obsolete in 6 months, and the NXT doesn't have IR. Maybe
all the mindstorms fans can pay for their NXT by selling their RCXs to train
builders???? :)

ROSCO

RCX Obsolete in 6 months? I program my RCX 1.0 with a 7 year old Mac.
Write now I am typing on a 5 year old Mac. Obsolescence is just a point
of view :)*

Who makes people believe that old stuff is obsolete as soon as a successor
becomes available? To stay ontopic in this .trains area, I'm still using
blue tracks and motors and remote controled points (yes blue points!).
Still working beautifully.

The best change Lego ever made, making the old stuff obsolete is the change
from CA to ABS. Although I have built a house with CA bricks that doesn't
collapse when I breath or a fly lands on it :-)

Niels


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 12:48:23 GMT
Viewed: 
7386 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:

The problem you're gonna find is that the RCX can only point in
1 direction at once.

   Actualy, so can a remote. The IR signal from the RCX is fairly "bright"
(i.e.- you don't need the RCX pointed right into the Manas IR receive units to
function, it can be bounced off other objects).

if the trains continue running when they lose their IR signal
(we don't know that yet)

   We don't, although I suspect strongly they do.

you're still probably gonna end up needing multiple RCXs - and how
do they communicate with each other if they're using IR to communicate
with trains?

   Right off the bat, I can think of two ways: wire connection (connecting
together two RCX input ports and interpreting if the RCX has set them to powered
or unpowered status), or using IR. The standard RCX firmware can transmit and
receive RCX messages (they appear in the firmware as numbers from 0 to 255) or
transmit (not recieve... wel, not in an easy to locate way) "raw" serial data;
the Manas codes are implemented using serial data, while RCX-to-RCX message
passing is via IR messages. There's the risk of RCX messages being overwritten
by serial "noise", but that just means you need some handshaking between the
RCXs.
   I wouldn't have predicted LDCC - that took a *Lot* more work than this is
likely to. And with the IR trains, no hardware mods at all for this. Well, until
John makes us all beg for RF :-)

--
Brian Davis


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:35:56 GMT
Viewed: 
2804 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Niels Karsdorp wrote:
Who makes people believe that old stuff is obsolete as soon as a successor
becomes available? To stay ontopic in this .trains area, I'm still using
blue tracks and motors and remote controled points (yes blue points!).
Still working beautifully.

A lot of people are still building their collection, and don't want supplies to
dwindle and the price of their hobby to go any higher than it already is.

That is to say, I don't want my mains trains to be obsolete, but you Mindstorms
lot can lump it, 'cos I like the look of the new ones! ;-)  It would be nice if
they'd made the three motor limit obsolete though...

Jason Railton


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:36:26 GMT
Viewed: 
7230 times
  
What about ripping out the IR and jumping right to Blue Tooth. This way the NXT
can directly control 3 or 4 trains wirelessly (more if you use a hierarchy), as
well as many laptops and smart phones!

I know tha Blue Tooth is designed to be low power and inexpensive; for cell
phone/headsets, mice and keyboards etc.

SteveB



In lugnet.trains, John Barnes wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Steven Barile wrote:
Also if the RCX is NOT directly powering the trains then the RCX 1.0 (with AC
jack) isn't manditory. I would love to see the IR train be controled by the RCX.

Is reverse engineering the IR codes for the IR train hard to do? Should I try to
get the IR control codes spec and post it on ILTCO web site? Who knows how to
program the RCX with new IR codes? (Is it that easy???)


I cracked the Manas codes in ten minutes with a photodiode and an oscilloscope.

Turned out they were very easy to transmit from the RCX.

I suppose TLG could go to the trouble of inventing an entirely new scheme, but
why?

The only scary thing is how easy it will be for naughty little kids to go to
train shows armed with Lego train IR remotes hidden in their jackets.

Personally, I cannot wait for the IR trains to show up. I can see myself modding
a few to use RF (418MHz ?) instead of IR. This would make it immune to that kind
of problem. And a simple RS232 - 418MHz PC gizmo would make PC control easy too.

JB


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:42:16 GMT
Viewed: 
3031 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Brian Davis wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:

The problem you're gonna find is that the RCX can only point in
1 direction at once.

   Actualy, so can a remote. The IR signal from the RCX is fairly "bright"
(i.e.- you don't need the RCX pointed right into the Manas IR receive units
to function, it can be bounced off other objects).

Using the Manas as a practical example, because I can't imagine they're going to
completely revamp the IR system...

The signal from the Mana remotes works GREAT in a small room with white wall.
You can point it in just about any direction and get the signal through.  But in
a large open room like at a typical show, controlling a device on a table,
they're terrible.  You have to stand within a couple of feet and point the
device in the right direction.  If you've got anything in the way at all, you
will have to hold the device way over your head.

if the trains continue running when they lose their IR signal
(we don't know that yet)

We don't, although I suspect strongly they do.

It's not like Lego has never made a mistake, but it would be a horrific design
problem if you have to point the thing at the train the whole time.

--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com


Subject: 
Addressable IR signal space?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 18:43:35 GMT
Viewed: 
2902 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Brian Davis wrote:
The standard RCX firmware can transmit and receive RCX messages (they
appear in the firmware as numbers from 0 to 255) or transmit (not
recieve... wel, not in an easy to locate way) "raw" serial data;
the Manas codes are implemented using serial data...

I've got a question along these lines:

Is there any "addressable space" left over in the messaging system for Manas?
In other words, they've already got 3 "channels" implemented as different sets
of codes for the Manas.  Have they used up all of the available messages, or
could they easily fit in three new channels?

My hope is that the trains don't use the same signals as the Manas, and so you
could still use Mana devices on the layout.

--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:54:21 GMT
Viewed: 
7466 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Brian Davis wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:

The problem you're gonna find is that the RCX can only point in
1 direction at once.

   Actualy, so can a remote. The IR signal from the RCX is fairly "bright"
(i.e.- you don't need the RCX pointed right into the Manas IR receive units to
function, it can be bounced off other objects).

Plus a remote is usually in the hands of the controller, so can be re-targetted
as necessary - whereas an RCX controller would most likely be fixed to the
layout somewhere, and disguised as an object of some kind on the layout.
Otherwise you lose the advantage of mains power.

if the trains continue running when they lose their IR signal
(we don't know that yet)

We don't, although I suspect strongly they do.

Me too.

I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it isn't as easy as it might sound.
For instance, I would probably work out a few critical points on the layout, and
place an RCX at each, making sure it gets good coverage of all trains going past
(assuming "blind" running is possible). It would also allow time "gaps" where
I'm not directly talking to trains, so I can use IR to talk to other RCXs, but
it may not be easy to place them for best train coverage and still be able to
communicate with each other. I'm sure these problems are not insurmountable, but
it's gonna take some dedication to get it to work right in a show situation. I
would also need sensors to tell me when a train was going past, and logic to
know when there *should* be one - now I'm running multiple trains, my "network"
needs to know when there's been a derailment, otherwise my emergency rescue figs
are gonna start complaining of overwork ;)

ROSCO


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:00:06 GMT
Viewed: 
3044 times
  
"Tony Hafner" <lego@NOSPAM.hafhead.com> wrote in message
news:It1nyG.13w1@lugnet.com...

[ ... snipped ... ]


It's not like Lego has never made a mistake, but it would be a horrific
design
problem if you have to point the thing at the train the whole time.


[ ... snipped ... ]

You definitely do not need to point it at the train the whole time.

Mike

--
Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring.com
http://www.ncltc.cc - North Carolina LEGO Train Club
http://www.carolinatrainbuilders.com - Carolina Train Builders
http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=mpw - CTB/Brick Depot


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:45:50 GMT
Viewed: 
7559 times
  
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it isn't as easy as it might sound.
For instance, I would probably work out a few critical points on the layout, and
place an RCX at each, making sure it gets good coverage of all trains going past
(assuming "blind" running is possible). It would also allow time "gaps" where
I'm not directly talking to trains, so I can use IR to talk to other RCXs, but
it may not be easy to place them for best train coverage and still be able to
communicate with each other. I'm sure these problems are not insurmountable, but
it's gonna take some dedication to get it to work right in a show situation. I
would also need sensors to tell me when a train was going past, and logic to
know when there *should* be one - now I'm running multiple trains, my "network"
needs to know when there's been a derailment, otherwise my emergency rescue figs
are gonna start complaining of overwork ;)

You've also got the problem that if they work like the volume control on a TV
remote (which is likely) the signals are "speed up" and "slow down", not
absolute speed values.  Since you have no way of knowing whether the train
received a particular signal or not, you have no way to tell what speed it is
travelling at.


Jason Railton


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:54:06 GMT
Viewed: 
7637 times
  
In lugnet.dear-lego, Jason J. Railton wrote:
In lugnet.trains, Ross Crawford wrote:
I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it isn't as easy as it might sound.
For instance, I would probably work out a few critical points on the layout, and
place an RCX at each, making sure it gets good coverage of all trains going past
(assuming "blind" running is possible). It would also allow time "gaps" where
I'm not directly talking to trains, so I can use IR to talk to other RCXs, but
it may not be easy to place them for best train coverage and still be able to
communicate with each other. I'm sure these problems are not insurmountable, but
it's gonna take some dedication to get it to work right in a show situation. I
would also need sensors to tell me when a train was going past, and logic to
know when there *should* be one - now I'm running multiple trains, my "network"
needs to know when there's been a derailment, otherwise my emergency rescue figs
are gonna start complaining of overwork ;)

You've also got the problem that if they work like the volume control on a TV
remote (which is likely) the signals are "speed up" and "slow down", not
absolute speed values.  Since you have no way of knowing whether the train
received a particular signal or not, you have no way to tell what speed it is
travelling at.

Agreed, and even if your RCXs can tell each other "I sent XX speed signals to
the train" there's no guarantee it received them. I would be surprised if the
control doesn't have a "stop" button though.

ROSCO


Subject: 
Re: Thoughts on Battery-powered IR-controlled trains
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:49:16 GMT
Viewed: 
7529 times
  
what if the operating system was something like the rokenbok line? they have a
central hub with hand controllers that use miniature 'walkie talkies' to control
individual units.

although, commands are only delivered while communication is maintained with a
specific unit. if the actual train receiver maintained the speed after
communication was lost, you could operate numerous trains simultaneously.
this would be great with no real hardward mods required, but the main control
hub could be pricey.

i guess we'll have to WAIT and see:( I HATE WAITING!!!!!


©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR