 | | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) Brian, the more I read this, the more I am with you. I think I really need to re-think my LEGO budget for next year... Three trains sounds like fair enough to me, since our house is not supposed to grow and the trains need some space to be (...) (17 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure the RCX could be programmed to throw PF control messages... and while this would be a lot cheaper from a HW standpoint at the moment, I'm not sure it would be long-term. Right now the RCX is cheap(er) on eBay, but as they (...) (17 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) On second thought, that doesn't look all that bad actually. Provided there is a way to eventually control more than one train and set up several IR interfaces (for positions where the optical link would otherwise fail) with a single RCX, the (...) (17 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (17 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) Hi Jerry, I certainly agree that this might not be a cost-effective solution or a very efficient way to implement DCC (although there are surely those out there who will pursue it anyway). I was just trying to emphasize that there isn't reall (...) (17 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
