Subject:
|
Re: 8879 no more?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:27:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
19147 times
|
| |
|
|
Dave Curtis wrote:
> > > What it did have was, the
> > > 8885 remote controller, which in fact gives absolute throttle command, but it's
> > > still line-of-sight (LOS), and continuous application (you have to push it 'on'
> > > all the time). I think I'd like the incremental better, especially if I could
> > > pretty much set it and forget it. I guess I'll never know now.
> > >
> > > Rich
>
> But, is the 8885 proportional? I thought it was just on/off. I have a couple
> so I guess I should go test :)
>
> The issue with incremental commands is that if the receiver misses one,
> everthing is now offset. IR is too unreliable for any protocol that requires
> 100% reception. With absolute throttle, the control unit can send redundant
> commands and there is no harm in extra ones and only delayed response from
> missing ones. I find it completely unfathomable that an engineer could walk
> into a design review with an incremental IR-based protocol and exit the room
> again with his hide still on his body.... but I'm old school that way :)
I'd say it's no biggie since you can just keep turning the orange knob
until you're happy with the speed. A bigger problem would be that the
8879 I had a chance to play with a while back (I'm still waiting for mine,
ordered within 12 hours of release...) sometimes misinterpreted the
direction I was turning the knob in, or though that I turned it back and
forth when I turned it slowly. I suppose it takes some practice to get
used to it.
> The specs are all out there and have been for a long time. Maybe it's time to
> crank out a homebrew throttle. I'm pretty sure the receiver supports absolute
> throttle commands. If not, my rant will look pretty silly... I guess I should
> go re-read the spec before launching any more flames :)
You could use an RCX. I'm planning to try that at some point. It might
be possible to do something clever with three touch sensors and the
seven ways to press them, or one could do something even cleverer that
includes a light sensor.
//Carl
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 8879 no more?
|
| (...) I had the train reverse on me too, but it was only when the speed was close to zero. So, I assumed I had just clicked twice, and gone from +1 to -1. The issue about losing signals due to line-of-site communication has another side to it. If (...) (15 years ago, 24-Jun-09, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 8879 no more?
|
| (...) Hi Jordan, Thanks, that's good to know. At least it will be coming back reasonably soon. Presumably the collection will come back along with it. (...) Rich, But, is the 8885 proportional? I thought it was just on/off. I have a couple so I (...) (15 years ago, 3-Jun-09, to lugnet.trains)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
