 | | Re: Future GBCs
|
| Since I couldn't build tonight because I don't have a tv to watch the colts at my lego table, I worked on trying to figure out how to reduce the number of RCXs we need to control 2 GBC loading & unloading spurs. I came up with this (when it goes (...) (19 years ago, 18-Oct-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: Future GBCs
|
| (...) Things were not looking good when Payton first touched the ball and the score was 10-0... But, it all worked out in the end. (...) Yes, this will work. It looks like a good way to divide the tasks between RCXs. We can NOT connect 1 light (...) (19 years ago, 18-Oct-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: Future GBCs
|
| (...) (OK, I've got to say my first impression was of an octopus on LSD, but actually after looking at it a bit that's a good diagram for this stuff. Thanks, John!). (...) Also, it means that RCX #2 is completely independant of RCX #3, meaning each (...) (19 years ago, 18-Oct-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: Future GBCs
|
| (...) ... (...) I was just thinking about this. For non-GBC train loops, one RCX could control the whole siding (detect train, throw switch, power track, watch for oncoming trains...) (...) At the train show last weekend, my train had 2 GBC cars, (...) (19 years ago, 18-Oct-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: Future GBCs
|
| (...) Yes, although I was hoping to come up with a way of doing it using the switching RCX's "spare" in/outputs. (...) I was thinking more along the lines of identifying GBC trains. If there were three trains along the mainline, two non-GBC with 6 & (...) (19 years ago, 18-Oct-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| |
