Large Scale Central

Downsizing / Repackaging a 2-Stick 2.4 GHx Transmitter

Electronics Power and Sound
#81

Kevin.
If you think cost is not a factor you are living in LaLa land.
Using off the shelf 2.4 GHz multi channel stick radios is the lowest cost way of achieving reliable proportional control with long range and no “Glitching”.
A 6 x channel EXCEED TX and RX can be delivered to your door for US$45. Compare that to the cost of Revolution, AirWire or G-Wire TX’s.
Extra RX’s are US$15.
Add a 3 amp ESC for say US$80 - $90 and you are ready to go for US$125. The cost of the ESC’s will come down over time.
For this you will get DIGITAL PROPORTIONAL (DP) speed control, four sound triggers and the ability to control a quillable whistle if and when they become available.
To transpose the way it works into a smaller package is doable. Just not with all the levers and buttons on the current stick radios. It is the mechanical hardware that costs the big bucks and takes up the space. Not the electronics.
You will only need DP for speed control and the quillable whistle. No need for any of the complicated multi plane stick mechanisms, trim buttons or servo reversing.
Two pots and four switches will suffice. That is what will make it affordable. Maybe three pots and three switches for live steam.
It would need to sell for less than US$50 to make it viable.

Steve.
The BELTROL ambition was to produce a belt mounted TX that simulated the way the real life BELTPACK system works.
I believe that would actually be easier to do than a miniaturised TX such as we are discussing. But, once again the cost is in the hardware.

#82
Quote:
... If you think cost is not a factor you are living in LaLa land.
Cost is most certainly a factor, but that's where the cheap 2-stick controls come into play. I'm arguing that there are those who will gladly pay a premium for a superior interface, which I think what we're discussing can become. The "2-stick solution" satisfies the cost-conscious end of the market, while the smaller form satisfies the form-factor end of the market. If people weren't willing to pony up money for superior control interfaces, we wouldn't have the $200+ handheld controllers we have on the market. On what premise do you base your opinion that a $200 proportional handheld is not viable when these other systems have proven quite successful at that price point?
Quote:
... It would need to sell for less than US$50 to make it viable.
I simply don't agree. It overlooks the saleability of the form. Why do we pay $100 for a toaster when we can buy one that does the same thing for $20? Why do we spend thousands of dollars on luxury cars when a Chevette will get us where we need to go? People will pay premium prices for products if they feel there's something about it that adds value to them. It's my feeling that a small, handheld, proportional control adds sufficient value to the package to where people will pay that premium over the clunky 2-stick radios.

Let’s draw another parallel. Go back to when you first introduced your Elite transmitter. At that point, the “2-stick solution” was the only game in town, and while not inexpensive, certainly cheaper than the Elite system. Yet people–like me–dropped the clunky for the tiny, even with having to lose the proportional functions. (Heck, in dad’s and my case, our cost was minimal–we had the transmitters, and built our own throttles.) Why? Again, form played a significant role. I have every reason to believe people today would make the same choice.

Later,

K

#83

I guess we have to agree to disagree.
My belief is the only way any one else, other than the big 3, can get any of the available market share is to be different, basic and low cost.
To me there is a quite good market for non DCC based R/C control equipment as long as there is a selection of non DCC sound systems available, and the ESC’s performed all the basic functions such as directional lights. MU’ing and perhaps uncoupling.

I do not see a market for any premium cost stick radios at all, other than what is already available, such as the 9 channel rigs. If they were small and DCC compatible there might be.

Perhaps one day, and assuming finances permit, I will investigate the possibility of having an existing 2.4 GHz 6 channel stick radio manufacturer repackage their TX to more suit our needs.
I certainly will not be re-inventing the wheel.

#84
Quote:
... My belief is the only way any one else, other than the big 3, can get any of the available market share is to be different, basic and low cost.
You've already got that with your current Beltrol product and 2-stick interface. I'm not suggesting abandoning that, rather augmenting it with another option for control for those who want the elegant simplicity of Beltrol, but want a not-quite-so-clunky interface to go along with it.
Quote:
... To me there is a quite good market for non DCC based R/C control equipment as long as there is a selection of non DCC sound systems available, and the ESC's performed all the basic functions such as directional lights. MU'ing and perhaps uncoupling.
Agreed. The more, the merrier. (Well, within reason. You all have to sell enough so you can eat... ;) ) I like the variety of protocols we have on the market right now, from the simple to the complex--something for everyone.

Later,

K

#85

Unless an R/C product can have the same “complexity” of the Big 3 the (so called) “geek” market (those who want all the bells and whistles) will not look at anything else.
A more “advanced” stick type system without the sticks is not likely to happen.

I would simply not contemplate producing any type of smaller hybrid DP TX handpiece unless it could be sold at roughly the same price as the budget stick radios now on the market.
Others may.

#86
Quote:
... Unless an R/C product can have the same "complexity" of the Big 3 the (so called) "geek" market (those who want all the bells and whistles) will not look at anything else. A more "advanced" stick type system without the sticks is not likely to happen.
Is Beltrol marketed towards the "geek" market, though? While you compare it to the other "geek" systems on your site, it's inherently limited in terms of the number of functions it can control simply because of the number of channels available. And that's fine; the lion's share of the market will be very adequately served by it. In terms of functions, it's on the low end of the spectrum. In terms of user-friendliness, it's on the high end--and that's precisely where you're marketing it, at least from my inference. I don't think that distinction inherently means the user demands low cost. It's certainly a nice attribute, but I also think there will be a segment of the market that appreciates the value of a much smaller transmitter, and will pay for the "best of both worlds" so to speak. Simple interface plus small handheld controller.
Quote:
... I would simply not contemplate producing any type of smaller hybrid DP TX handpiece unless it could be sold at roughly the same price as the budget stick radios now on the market. Others may.
You're saying you wouldn't do anything unless it could compete with a $45 mass-produced-by-the-thousands transmitter? Forgive me, but I think that's absolutely absurd to think you could bring [i]any[/i] small-quantity, customized transmitter to the market for near that price regardless of how it controls your trains. Your Elite transmitter costs almost twice that.

I’m not arguing that you need to step up and do anything. I’m making the case that a premium can be charged for a small handheld Digital Proportional transmitter, and people who want something smaller than a standard 2-stick controller to run their simple-to-use Beltrol, RailBoss, or whatever, will purchase it. I’m convinced that (a) it can be done, (b) can be done at a price point that’s competitive with other handheld controllers on the market, and © can be done in such a way to be useful across platforms–electric and live steam. If I had money to put where my mouth is, I’d put it there. For the time being, it’ll have to be up to someone else or you’ll just have to wait until my kids are no longer in day care.

Later,

K

#87

Now you understand why it is unlikely to happen.

In the meantime I feel entirely justified in comparing my RCS - BELTROL with anything and everything else on the market.
I find your comment “In terms of functions, it’s on the low end of the spectrum.” a bit strange given the RCS - BELTROL ESC specs.
There isn’t much it cannot do.
Perhaps not being DCC compatible could be considered on the low end of the functions spectrum. But then neither is the REVOLUTION DCC compatible, and that is gaining market acceptance.
Other than that, the RCS - BELTROL ESC’s have all the basic operation features of the mainstream systems.
I can guarantee you that four programmable (for latch ON - OFF or momentary action) sound triggers are enough for the average Large Scaler.
Plus you can have a choice of at least four different brands of 2.4 GHz 5/6 channel stick radios.
Now, I grant you the TX is not to everyones liking but considering using such equipment makes the price highly attractive, I see no real reason why it would be absurd to expect a comparable price for having the innards of an existing TX rejigged and stuffed into a smaller box. There would be way fewer parts and the market would be Worldwide and have no actual competition.

It may happen by me. It may not.

I really do look forward to your offspring growing up and the subsequent appearance of your ideal system. :wink:

#88
Quote:
... I find your comment "In terms of functions, it's on the low end of the spectrum." a bit strange given the RCS - BELTROL ESC specs. There isn't much it cannot do...
When compared to the "geek" systems to which you refer, a "mere" four functions is the bottom end of the spectrum in terms of the extra functions that can be controlled. That's specifically the comparison I'm making there, nothing more. "Geeks," or "power users" generally hold the number of extra functions a system can control to be paramount, accepting that all control systems cover the basics of speed and direction. You're absolutely correct--four functions is more than adequate for the lion's share of the market. I've always maintained that. Recall that I grew up using a nearly identical system, albeit on 75mHz and without the consisting, etc. and it was quite sufficient. I still seldom use more than 4 functions myself, and when I do, it's only "because I can." The ability to do so is not a requirement for me.
Quote:
... I see no real reason why it would be absurd to expect a comparable price for having the innards of an existing TX rejigged and stuffed into a smaller box.
If you're making them in the numbers the 2-stick systems are being made, I agree. In theory if they can stuff the innards in one box, they can just as easily stuff them in another and sold for the same price. But we're not talking anywhere near those numbers. Yes, the market would be worldwide, but it's still a niche market. I'd think its far more comparable to the Elite system's production numbers--another niche transmitter that can operate both electric and live steam locos. Compare how many of those you've sold over the years to how many of the $45 units likely get churned out annually. I'm betting there's a significant gap. If you build a new cabinet for the electronics, you've now got tooling costs that have to be amortized over the production run. That--alone--would probably be enough to push the process over budget. You could go with a generic case and save some money, but I'd still warrant that if you're contracting to someone else to produce these for you, you're per-unit cost will make a $45 retail price unrealistic.

If–on the other hand–you accept the premise that such a small form factor can command a premium price over the bulky, clunky 2-stick transmitters, then you’ve got a fair deal more wiggle room in your production costs. You can much more easily accommodate the small production numbers we’re talking about for this market and still leave room for a reasonable profit.

Quote:
... I really do look forward to your offspring growing up and the subsequent appearance of your ideal system.
I'll make sure to add it to the list. ;) I am probably going to buy a 3- or 4- channel pistol grip system for my live steamers at some point this summer. I know I'm going to modify it to take the centering springs out of the mix. Perhaps I'll see about repackaging it at that point.

Later,

K

#89

I have found this thread very interesting. I must give kudos to Tony’s Beltrol system as it is simple, and perhaps the most prototypical for real locomotive radio control (i.e. sticks!) out there. While I don’t personally like sticks and therefore made my own system I am always impressed by Tony’s “leading edge” systems, dedication to the hobby, and amazing installation writeups. While I don’t expect him to offer a prototypical transmitter I KNOW one could be made and wouldn’t be surprised if he secretly used one he made up! C’mon put up some pics… :slight_smile:

#90

I know nussing. Nussing I tell you. NUSSING!!! :wink:

#91

I’m counting on Jon to come up with a nice how-to article. :wink:

#92

Well… As I sat here today using my Microsoft Comfort Mouse to scroll sideways I realized that the parts exist to do a thumb size pot integrated with two switches. Problem is the scroll mouse wheel is really just a digital switch, not a pot, so there are no end stops. That might still be able to be worked out. Hmmmm… I wonder if there is a ‘broken’ mouse at work I can cannibalize for experiments :smiley:

Better yet… mount the transmitter electronics in the mouse case! 3 finger activated switches plus a wheel that also has two switches !!!

#93

For those of us who have “The RailDriver,” that game controller made for MS Trainsim, the one that looks like the cockpit of a Dash 9, how much of a problem would it be to hook it to a transmitter to control our locomotives?

(http://www.trainsim.com/advert/raildriver200.jpg)

#94

Steve,
We’re thinking SMALLER controllers. Not bigger! :wink:

#95

Really! That thing would need a cart!

#96
Jon Radder said:
Well... As I sat here today using my Microsoft Comfort Mouse to scroll sideways I realized that the parts exist to do a thumb size pot integrated with two switches. Problem is the scroll mouse wheel is really just a digital switch, not a pot, so there are no end stops. That might still be able to be worked out. Hmmmm.... I wonder if there is a 'broken' mouse at work I can cannibalize for experiments :D

Better yet… mount the transmitter electronics in the mouse case! 3 finger activated switches plus a wheel that also has two switches !!!


You never know what ideas you come up with when you let your mind wander. We all need to have a couple of beers and think about this. :smiley:

But, I still like the idea of a throttle with limits…

#97
Jon Radder said:
Really! That thing would need a cart!
Bruce said:
You never know what ideas you come up with when you let your mind wander. We all need to have a couple of beers and think about this. big_smile

But, I still like the idea of a throttle with limits…


Not really. Mebbe a strap like the real BELTROL.

#98

5.5 pounds? No thanks…

#99

It is great to see minds at work. Good things can come from the exercise.

In the mean time, my old Aristo 27Mh minis are doing the job very well, with enough range that I don’t have any problems.

If I wanted a fine system with noise, right off the shelf; available now with no fuss; I’d just purchase a Revolution.
Around here they are performing Very Well. The speed control seems to give as slow a speed that could be wanted for any switching moves, and the speed range seems as good as anything on the market. (Or as great as will ever be needed for any movements slow or fast that I can imagine) (As good as anything I see in HO, or S, on the DCC controled pikes I operate on)

Yes, we all would like a R/C control system that would cost no more than a $29 silly phone, but I sure don't want something hanging around my neck, or needing both my hands to operate.....but there is the "Catch"...operation.....how many persons contributing to this thread actually have the weekly experience of model railroad operations.

To compare them to real life railroad, remote control locomotive operation is not a good example.

#100

Dear Padre, this is a thread about modifying stick radios. Not about how wonderful the REVOLUTION is. We already know that. AC have spent squillions of $$$ to keep telling us.

Oh No!!! The good Friar has joined the Kool Aide brigade.

Steve.

I toyed with that idea. Problem is the labour costs installing the TX etc in the hardware would make it prohibitively expensive, even though it could be quite easily fitted with a belt mount arrangement.