 | | 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 (...) (18 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 (...) (18 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) Hi Jordan, while this sounds like an interesting solution, it also sounds like a very expensive one as opposed to going for RF in the first place (yep, I know that RF remote controls have their own issues, power consumption being a significant (...) (18 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO 9V Train Communication II
|
|
(...) HiTechnic / LEGO now offer an "Infrared Link" for the NXT that seems to be exactly the sort of thing you're describing here - and it is advertised as being compatible with the Power Functions and train IR protocol. This would mean that no (...) (18 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | 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" (...) (18 years ago, 19-Dec-07, to lugnet.trains)
|
