Subject:
|
Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:30:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
14298 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Dave Curtis wrote:
> > have the remote send commands that change the state of the train,
> > but not need to continuously send a "go forward" command or
> > similar. That would solve the "long dark tunnel" problem as well.
>
> Ummm.... except that you lose control when the train goes into a
> tunnel, or you have areas of unreliable control... Personally, its
> the "unreliable control" aspect of IR that concerns me.
If there are "dead zones" that could be a problem, but we also get to run
doglegs this way. There are trade-offs, and I know where I'd like to be:
LEGO-certified DDC built-in that is usable with anything from a regular train
controller, to a remote, to full automation with the NXT supplying the commands.
But, I suspect that's not going to happen, so I'm looking for advantages to the
system that I can brainstorm into a neat feature.
> One thought that comes to mind is that if we can reverse engineer the
> IR protocol, there is no reason we can't build repeaters or our own
> controllers.
Sure. As another person pointed out, we've actually already got that, in the
form of the Hitechnic IRLink and the NXT. No, it's not a "cheap" solution, but
one costing about $250 all told (just an NXT, Li-ion battery pack to run it from
a wall source, and the IRLink). And with all the expandability I want - add
sensors, more NXTs in BT connectivity, etc. The biggest drawback of this would
be the IR system currently only allows four channels (8 motors). That's not
enough for everyone I'd guess, but it would be enough to do an awful lot.
> You could sprinkle IR transmitters throughout the layout and wire
> them all in parallel.
Perhaps. Only if they were clearly out of interference range, so you didn't get
cross-talk issues.
> An IR controlled turn-out motor would also be on my wish list.
Huh. Again, we have that: and NXT with the IRLink, and a normal PF motor driving
the point. The entry costs for this route might seem a bit steep (the NXT), but
the possible flexibility it provides is substantial.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
| (...) Ummm.... except that you lose control when the train goes into a tunnel, or you have areas of unreliable control on your layout. Losing control in a tunnel would be a big deal for "serious" model railroaders that like off-stage "staging" (...) (16 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
