Steam: Double or triple headed, each locomotive crewed. A pusher might be assigned to push from the rear, also crewed.
Diesel: Consist.
Juicers: Multiple unit. (MU)
Recent terminology: Distributed Power. Since 1985 or so. Did not apply earlier. Refers to putting power at the head and on the end of a train, and/or somewhere in the middle, i.e. distributed.
Greg Elmassian said:
Kevin, nothing is wrong with bringing back the non-sound version, EXCEPT you are making the assumption that it would be a lot cheaper.
I haven’t a clue about differences in production costs, but I’d accept that they’d be similar. The difference–as you say–lies in the profit margins. A “no frills” board would be similar to a loss leader (though not a “loss,” just lower profit margin) designed to get folks in the door and establish market share. Once they’re hooked on your product, it’s an easy upsell to the higher-functioning, higher-profit-margin product. Look at what Soundtraxx is doing with their “Econami” and “Tsunami2” line of decoders. I can’t imagine the first is any cheaper to produce than the second, but the first is selling about 30% cheaper than the latter, and–more importantly–cheaper than the competition. They certainly got my attention with it, and hooked me to the higher-end Tsunami2 on my next purchase, too.
Greg Elmassian said:
Smart move on their part. So even the sound units are a good deal. If you don’t need sound, then you most likely don’t need anything as sophisticated, we’re right back at my previous statements and suggestions.
I wouldn’t characterize folks who “don’t need sound” as not needing sophisticated control. It’s much more nuanced. The Revolution’s user interface is very good. Even someone who just wants to run trains in circles can take tremendous benefit from the Revo’s handheld throttle, especially with regard to the graphic feedback. I’ve used the pushbutton controls from G Scale Graphics, RCS, and others. I definitely prefer the Revolution’s interface. How much above the cost of these other systems would one be willing to pay just for that user interface?
There’s also the notion that “not needing sound” could mean “not wanting the Revolution’s sound.” Let’s be realistic–the current Revo sound doesn’t hold a candle to Phoenix. Those users (and I count myself among that crowd) have very sophisticated needs, to the point where controlling the sound actually takes priority over controlling the motor. At that point, the cost of the Revolution receiver becomes part of a larger equation. It makes sense to pay $80 for a Revo receiver and $170 for a Phoenix board. It doesn’t make much sense to pay $120 for the Revo and $170 for the Phoenix. At that point, I’m much better served getting a Tam Valley Depot receiver (Airwire compatible) and a QSI, Zimo, Soundtraxx, etc. decoder.
Along that vein, though, one must also consider the idea that the latest DCC sound decoders are fast outpacing Phoenix in terms of sound quality, thus making the Revo/Phoenix combination somewhat antiquated in its own right. Given that, is the Revolution–at any price–going to be a viable option for the true sound aficionado? I doubt the sound and function revisions the Revolution is said to be undergoing are going to bring its sound quality up to that level; at least not in this generation of the product.
Greg Elmassian said:
In any case, while I can almost guarantee that you come out with comments that are contrary to me just as a knee-jerk reaction, there is an explanation of why you won’t see non-sound Revo units.
Characterize the expression of my opinion as you will. I fear you’re ultimately correct in that we won’t see non-sound Revos; I just think it’s a mistake that will result in lost market share for them. I worry they may ultimately price themselves out of the niche they created. There are emerging technologies (not just bluetooth) needing just that little spark to really take off. That’s not a bad thing, really, just unfortunate that the Revolution may suffer in the process.
Personally, I think most of our current control systems will be obsolete in 5 years anyway, so I’ll not get too wrapped up in what happens to “Brand X.” As I wrote above, my preferences towards uber-sophisticated sound/motor control has led me beyond the capacity of the Revolution anyway. I’d like to be able to continue to recommend the system for others, as I feel it’s a quality system, but if it fades into the sunset, another will rise in its place.
Later,
K
Null
Greg Elmassian said:
Kevin said:
“There’s also the notion that “not needing sound” could mean “not wanting the Revolution’s sound.” Let’s be realistic–the current Revo sound doesn’t hold a candle to Phoenix. Those users (and I count myself among that crowd) have very sophisticated needs, to the point where controlling the sound actually takes priority over controlling the motor. At that point, the cost of the Revolution receiver becomes part of a larger equation. It makes sense to pay $80 for a Revo receiver and $170 for a Phoenix board. It doesn’t make much sense to pay $120 for the Revo and $170 for the Phoenix. At that point, I’m much better served getting a Tam Valley Depot receiver (Airwire compatible) and a QSI, Zimo, Soundtraxx, etc. decoder.”
Yes, I completely agree, this is the evolution in my opinion. I believe the days are long gone for a sound only decoder costing over $100 and I mean a top of the line, high quality sound system with plenty of amp power, a big sound library, and it goes without saying, true polyphonic sound.
So, I see the evolution to control the cost must shift to sound and motor decoders, and then an inexpensive add-on to add wireless control.
Again, the key is to piggy-back on the huge volumes of HO scale to make a large scale version with minimum engineering changes and cost. With everyone using power FET transistors, this is really a simple job of just using larger FETs, not even changing the circuit design.
The concept of deadrail is simple, and the key is that it is a TRANSPARENT BRIDGE from wired to wireless DCC. Since it is transparent, it can be added to virtually any DCC system.
Now the user has a wide range of DCC systems and throttles and sound/motor units. Clearly this also encourages competition between the manufacturers and helps keep the prices reasonable.
It’s getting better and better, bit by bit.
Greg
Fascinating. 5 or 6 years ago, I was taken to task by Greg for daring to suggest that Airwire was Radio Controlled DCC, and now, this. 
Its fun to be prescient.
I agree Steve.
I too can remember not so long ago the vehement attitude by some, that it can only be true DCC if it is powered through the rails.
How attitudes change to fit the circumstances.
There is a fantastic variety of R/C systems for trains now available since I was the first to make a stand alone system way back before Train Engineer first appeared. The Revolution, if it does actually re-appear, will be facing way stiffer competition than it used to. Sound or no sound.
I will stay out of the cut throat market as it exists today. Especially as Locolinc has an ad in GR proclaiming they too will be going to 2.4 Ghz.
For me it was back to the future when 2.4 GHz started to be available in stick radios. Deltang made life a lot easier by making it possible to stick up to seven channels into a pocket sized case. Fortunately for me no other manufacturer seems to worry about specific R/C for the Live Steam market. There are many R/C users who like the feel of a decent sized knob for linear Digital Proportional speed control that my current generation RCS R/C can offer. RCS is no longer restricted to pushbutton only R/C.
You can’t stop the signal, Mal.
Null
“Deadrail” isn’t limited to wireless DCC. “Deadrail” means just that–no voltage flowing through the rails; onboard power and control. The Revolution is a deadrail system, as are all the other flavors of onboard battery R/C control systems (as they’re more familiarly called in large scale). The majority of the folks doing deadrail in the smaller scales are using the wireless DCC systems because folks in the small scales are most familiar with DCC already, though new protocols like BlueRail and RailPro are currently aimed specifically at the small scalers. For large scalers, DCC is largely unfamiliar territory, hence the preponderance of alternative (proprietary) systems in the deadrail environment.
To Greg’s point drawing a distinction between Airwire and wireless DCC, there is none. There are currently two manufacturers making wireless DCC receivers for deadrail applications–Airwire and Tam Valley Depot. I use them both. They are 100% interchangeable. Battery power in, DCC out. I’ve used them with decoders from QSI, Zimo, Soundtraxx, Massoth, Piko, TCS, and LGB with no issues. To control the decoders attached to the DCC output of either manufacturers’ receviers, you have two options. Either you can use an Airwire throttle, or you can use your existing DCC command station (if you have one) and attach a Tam Valley Depot transmitter to the track output. Note that if you use the TVD transmitter and wish to switch from ops mode to service mode programming, you must physically move the transmitter from the main to the program track output of the command station if so equipped. The Airwire throttle outputs either mode depending on which mode you select for programming.
I use MRC and Piko command stations to program and test decoders as part of my normal installation process. Once they’re installed in my locos with the batteries and receivers, I use Airwire throttles to fine-tune the programming and run the locos outside on the railroad (or indoors with my On30 stuff). I have yet to encounter any operational or programming differences between platforms. It is “a transparent bridge.”
Later,
K
Null
Final thought: I guess this thread is officially derailed vs. the original post.
How about those Cubs?
There is no global warming, it’s just getting hotter.
Greg
Officially derailed? I still have not heard anything officially…just lots of rumors, but that’s what was asked for…so I gather it served its purpose.
Getting colder here…but it’s coming on winter…that might have something to do with it, I guess.
Deadrail means just that. No power to the rails. No matter what scale. Deltang for example, make 2.4 Ghz DSM2 R/C for onboard battery power in N Scale usually with just one Li-Po cell stepped up to the required voltage.
Deadrail is not necessarily using DCC, but it can be.
For those that want more information on the subject of deadrail can visit here; http://www.freerails.com/
Site is down at the moment for maintenance but should be up and running again soon.
So deadrail to you means battery power and some form of remote control.
How about the deadrail society: http://www.deadrailsociety.com/ this web site is NOT down.
Who’s definition of deadrail is right, by now I don’t give a rat’s patoot… when I talk about it, I mean DCC over wireless like the Tam Valley stuff.
If no one understands me, great, it will be quieter.
Greg
Greg, the front page of the deadrailsociety.com even says “battery power and radio control, the future of model railroading.”. It seem that we are on the same page. Whisky Tango Foxtrot, over?
Hey, I’m not biased, i.e. I don’t just select information to make me right, believe it or not.
But you will also notice on the left side, the headlines are about CVP, which is sending mostly DCC through the air.
Remote control is another ambiguous term.
Anyway, my rails are live, I could not possibly afford to go dead rail.
Greg
So is there really a major difference here, or are we just picking nits? Radio signals to control a locomotive with a self contained power source, and no power on the rails. Besides the coding of the radio signals, the different systems sound like they accomplish the same result.
So yea Greg, I don’t completely understand you.
Does anyone? 
Re-read the 3:04 pm post … I stated my thinking.
Greg
Greg Elmassian said:
Hey, I’m not biased, i.e. I don’t just select information to make me right, believe it or not.
But you will also notice on the left side, the headlines are about CVP, which is sending mostly DCC through the air.
Remote control is another ambiguous term.
Anyway, my rails are live, I could not possibly afford to go dead rail.
Greg
So, then, Airwire is DCC, right?
That webpage also discusses bluetooth operation as well, so Greg’s definition of deadrail is likely just his… I wonder what TOC thinks about this…(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-tongue-out.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-undecided.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-foot-in-mouth.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-yell.gif)
