My vote goes for Del’s made in the USA R/C controls at GScaleGraphics http://www.gscalegraphics.net/store/c1/Featured_Products.html
A handy, one handed controller.
John
I’m with you John.
Doc Watson
John,
The problem I see with the Railboss system is that you can only have one loco running at a time. In my case I run two and sometimes three trains at a time using my Revolution system. I just tap a button to select which “cab” number I want to control at the moment. From what I just read, at the link you provided, this is not a feature of Railboss. Correct me if I did not understand what I read.
Geeee … I’m going to have a problem running touch screen from my FLIP phone…Uggggggggggggg!
No, you can have one train running on track power and one on R/C. As for running multiple trains at one time, there are at least 2 considerations, one is the average outdoor RR is too small to have multiple trains running, on the same track, at a time and the other is that I believe, to avoid collisions, and other nasty things, there usually should be more than one operator.
Just my thoughts.
Doc
I defy anybody to be able to actually control three trains independently running on the same track all with full R/C, without crashing them.
Getting them running on a separate tracks from each other and left running whilst a third is actually being controlled, is not really controlling them simultaneously.
You can actually control 2 x trains on the same track simultaneously with this TX:
Joe:
I have the RailBoss system and can run multiple trains at the same time. Each transmitter is “paired” with an engine’s receiver. I have multiple engines and multiple transmitters. I just choose two engines that are paired to different transmitters and away I go. I can easily change the pairing by pressing a button on the receiver and the transmitter.
I only have 160 feet of track and 6 switches. I usually start one going around the basic loop portion and then start and stop the other engine to avoid collisions. It is sort of like rubbing my belly, tapping my foot and patting my head simultaneously.
I am a “fan boy” of Del’s system and his support as it meets perfectly my needs.
Greg Elmassian said:
I enjoy running my trains, not looking at the controller.
Buttons and knobs and levers that I can move without looking is important.
When I do need to look at a screen, it needs to be sunlight readable.
Greg
I waited and waited for the Revolution it was what I thought I wanted to be able to run more than one rain at a time. But I’m glade now I bought the NCE system and did not wait to buy the revolution. Simple. I loved my NCE, allow me to run trains, not monitor a smartphone screen. Later RJD
This is a great thread and discussion.
I wish we could have a discussion on what can replace the Crest Revolution though. In terms of capability, the Railboss and RCS systems are not in the same class, really.
There’s really not much out there other than DCC-based systems or some of the new experimental systems though, and then you have the decoder feature issue, especially if you run sound.
The Crest Revolution enjoyed, in my opinion, a pretty unique “mid point” where there were a number of sophisticated DCC-like features, but driven by menus, not setting CV’s. It clearly was not as feature rich as DCC, nor as capable, but did well with consists/mu, start voltage to match locos, ease of handling and remembering multiple locos, etc.
The system will be missed.
Greg
To each their own. I’m a recent convert to R/C battery systems after running track power for the past 18 years, and still do. I’ve converted at least a half dozen trains to battery using the RailBoss system and have never had to take more then about 30 seconds to teach someone how to use them. As for seeking ultimate engine sounds, I’ll leave that to those under the age of 60 who can still hear them.
Doc Watson
All due respect Doc, this thread was about the Crest Revolution, not about track vs. battery, sound vs. no sound, etc.
I could extol the virtues of my personal system too, but it does not follow the original topic, nor does it help find a replacement for this unique system.
Greg
Greg Elmassian said:
This is a great thread and discussion.
I wish we could have a discussion on what can replace the Crest Revolution though. In terms of capability, the Railboss and RCS systems are not in the same class, really.
There’s really not much out there other than DCC-based systems or some of the new experimental systems though, and then you have the decoder feature issue, especially if you run sound.
The Crest Revolution enjoyed, in my opinion, a pretty unique “mid point” where there were a number of sophisticated DCC-like features, but driven by menus, not setting CV’s. It clearly was not as feature rich as DCC, nor as capable, but did well with consists/mu, start voltage to match locos, ease of handling and remembering multiple locos, etc.
The system will be missed.
Greg
I wish we could get the RC part standardized, I really do. That way we couldn’t get orphaned again. And a nice menu-or-icon-driven front end to setting CVs would go a long way toward getting more people less scared of DCC.
Nothing will replace the Revo, get over it. The niche did not support it after Aristo faded… Crest tried.
Now of course DCC won’t come down to it’s level, so maybe those 2 ‘substandard’ methods should be re-introduced as possible substitutes.
Threads are known to be more inclusive than less, get over it. Many of us could care less for the implied insults …well that is how it feels. As if my railroad will never measure up to an around the yard plain track railroad, just because I don’t want DCC.
Let’s see now, if the Revo was 2nd best and we are not allowed to think R/C, then only DCC exists … but for 2 locos DCC is way too expensive for me.
What should I do?
As ever, your friend,
John
You know what I’m gonna say - Xbee 
Martin Sant said:
You know what I’m gonna say - Xbee
Not against that at all, but we’d need manufacturers to step up to the plate and start building. Ive fiddled around with Arduino’s and XBee, but its definitely not end-user friendly.
Actually Crest was doing well, in terms of market penetration. We don’t know (yet) why it failed. I have a theory that perhaps they were keeping the selling price artificially low to garner the market.
Nothing makes sense if it was a profitable operation.
But that’s just a theory of mine.
But my post was not to try to limit thought, just keep on topic, which was a replacement for the Crest system. I think few people that bought the Crest system want to “step down” in terms of features, but it would be good to hear from those people.
The people I have talked to use the features of the Revolution and don’t want to lose them.
Greg
It sure seems to me like Crest sold a lot of Revolutions…but I’m guessing my sample size is pretty small. It did NOT seem all that cheap, although there did seem to be a lot of potential when they were selling the receivers with sound. Too bad they never got to the customizable phase.
I don’t want to “step down”. I want: range, display, control of sound (a built in volume control would have been real nice), real buttons, ease of use, and probably a few other things that I have forgotten. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-foot-in-mouth.gif)
Bob McCown said:
Greg Elmassian said:
This is a great thread and discussion.
I wish we could have a discussion on what can replace the Crest Revolution though. In terms of capability, the Railboss and RCS systems are not in the same class, really.
There’s really not much out there other than DCC-based systems or some of the new experimental systems though, and then you have the decoder feature issue, especially if you run sound.
The Crest Revolution enjoyed, in my opinion, a pretty unique “mid point” where there were a number of sophisticated DCC-like features, but driven by menus, not setting CV’s. It clearly was not as feature rich as DCC, nor as capable, but did well with consists/mu, start voltage to match locos, ease of handling and remembering multiple locos, etc.
The system will be missed.
Greg
I wish we could get the RC part standardized, I really do. That way we couldn’t get orphaned again. And a nice menu-or-icon-driven front end to setting CVs would go a long way toward getting more people less scared of DCC.
Does anybody know if any of the PC driven DCC programmers will work in the wireless/battery world. Since I’m layoutless since my move and am going to rebuild my HO layout with DCC - wondering if I can use the PC programming on the eventual 1:20.3 layout?
Bob- yes, of course, I mean a system built around Xbee. I think it’s the infrastructure part you are looking for. Fast, open protocol, great range, point to multipoint bi-directional network R/C. Indeed the ‘innards’ need to be hidden from the end user, but the potential is there. I have a bunch of stuff working and tested including driving DCC, but it’s one thing to make prototypes in a shop and a whole 'nother thing to ramp up to something you could sell, ie production quality. It takes a team and resources. I got just me and my soldering iron.
Gee, I guess I missed the point altogether. I thought the original topic was that Revolution might be going bye bye and then it turned into a discussion about what could replace it. Then a few more started mentioning the virtues of other systems. Did I really miss something? I’m done now, thank you for your patience.
Doc