Large Scale Central

Large Scale Interface Version 0.0.0.0.0.1

Electronics Power and Sound
#1

Okay, let’s discuss the question and this particular answer.
The question is, what kind of interface do you envision for Large Scale and why?

The answer was, for this post anyway, screw terminals.
To be useful to all, it is the only way.

Why?

Okay.
Let’s for a moment ignore the smaller percentage that uses dcc outdoors in poor weather on a regular basis.
For those doing radio/battery (a facet not generally found in smaller scales), space for batteries is a must, often the larger the better, but not always.

The “other” proposal uses a circuit board with a pair of sockets, which then requires a mating plug on the control board.
Anybody calculate the additional height requirements?
Rough guess, about 1/2" of vertical space lost.

Some of us who do this professionally have specific protocols for placement of components and batteries, usually trying to balance a load fore, aft, and athwartships.
To remove that ability by using a mandated board that removes our ability to be “creative” is not in the best interests of the majority.

A simple set of screw terminals will do all you need, be compliant with all, and take up a whole lot less room, plus allow “creative” placement of components.

Next issue is that suddenly, it’s a mandated “get on board or get left behind”, which means all previous iterations of control systems are obsolete.
Sure, you can solder them onto pads, or locate plugs to make your own.

Gold plate on sockets means MANDATORY gold plate on plugs to function.

The question then arises, what is the current standard?

I know NCE uses screw terminals.
One person has stated Lenz uses wires.
Soundtraxx uses 4 port screw terminal and a plug for “accessories”.
Zimo uses screw terminals.
RCS uses screw terminals.

Anybody want to add to that listing?

What we have works for EVERYBODY, and does not add to the space reduction.

The original discussion almost a year ago centered around CnT electronics, specifically the need to remove huge, unnecessary boards to allow battery placement.
When asked what I envisioned for a LS interface, without even pausing to take a breath, I replied “screw terminals”.
Didn’t even have to think about an answer, as I have been working this issue for 11 years.

Take a look at the dcc manufactures on-board with the “other” proposal.
They know nmra…indoors…mandated standards…but have not grasped the issues of sometimes really heavy current draw, nor have they calculated battery use, as they don’t care for the most part.
Their expertise is track-powered dcc.

One can just imagine the threat of the weight of the nmra being brought to bear if they don’t “get on board”.

So, we’re open for discussion on what will work for EVERYBODY, not just a small group.

Everybody is what I am fighting for here.
Not what may become OEM in some future locomotive.

Mylar identification strips on the floor at the terminals will identify each terminal.
If you cannot figure out how to remove the jumper and put the wires in, well, maybe there is a place for those “high-priced installers”.

TOC

#2

What I’ve seen in N scale DCC components is that the decoders come with either 1) a ‘standard plug’ or 2) consistently color coded wires. Using something like #2 for large scale, with screw terminals, is, IMHO, the easiest and most flexible way.

#3

I’ll second that!

Makes you wonder if those NMRA guys are really familiar enough with LS to know the practical difference between screw terminals - funny all the ZIMO LS decoders that I use have them - and some chiseled in stone PC board.

#4

I think everyone should be required to buy a laptop to connect with the computerized interace I propose. It will allow you to control the expressions on the face of the engineer, which is what we have all been waiting for. Everyone knows that this is essential to full enjoyment of the hobby.

V2.3 will allow you to control the expressions on the face of the fireman. It will be so kewl.

P.S. I have NO financial interest in this. (Capital, yes. Interest, no.)

#5

Phoenix 2K2 has screw terminals for functions.
Plug in for battery.
P5 has screw terminals.

Airwire has screw terminals.

#6

The name I wouldn’t post on the Soap is “suppository”.
He can insert it into his rectal cavity…

#7

Don’t hold back. Tell us how you really feel.

#8

You REALLY don’t want me to do that.
REALLY you don’t.

I am about a split RCH away from unloading, and it isn’t gonna be pretty.

#9

See, now I’ve got to go back to the other site to see what is going on. :wink:

#10

Sure is getting nasty over there.

Now we have folks claiming it’s the Battery Mafia wanting “their way”.

Funny.
WE didn’t recommend a plug usable by only a few, did we?

#11

It’s also funny that “Spero” thought it was a good idea to rip the traction tires off his Mac or whatever to get under 3 amps so he didn’t blow his little decoder. What does that pertain to other than little wires and plugs don’t work for high amps.

#12
Marc Bergmueller said:
It's also funny that "Spero" thought it was a good idea to rip the traction tires off his Mac or whatever to get under 3 amps so he didn't blow his little decoder. What does that pertain to other than little wires and plugs don't work for high amps.
Marc,

The problem is: That principle is almost like Black Magic to some people, can’t figure it out.

#13

That’s why they want a plug.
So every time they blow it up, they can plop in a new one.
I do believe a charge on my batteries sometimes lasts longer than some decoders.

I’ve known of folks who pulled one motor out of their Bachmann Shays to extend run time.
Right.

Reminds me of the “kits” that came out late '73 to make a V-8 into a 4.

Anyway, I’ll just let them dig a deeper hole all by themselves for a while.

#14

In my opinion, the primary reasons for the “forced DCC for all” socket are: 1) Requires most manufacturers to employ a consultant to get their locomotives equipped with the ‘new technology’; 2) When the crappy DCC board(s) the original manufacturer supplies give out or are inadequate, it makes it easy for the DCC after-market manufacturers to provide something that will be touted as a zero effort replacement. Just send in your dollars. What a great way to increase the DCC market with a ‘screw anyone not interested’ attitude.

Stan Ames has repeatedly written that he doesn’t know if Lenz has a ‘standard socket’ compliant solution waiting in the wings. Since his wife is the U.S. importer, I suggested that he simply ask her across the breakfast table. If you believe he is that dumb, I have a large golden bridge for sale out here in N. California.

If a person and his wife are heavily involved in the DCC business as consultant / technician / installer and importer, adoption of a standard that forces all manufacturers to provide a DCC compatible socket would seem to be to their significant financial benefit. All the DCC manufacturers would welcome the opportunity afforded by #2 in the first paragraph above. These two severe conflicts of interest should make the current “get on board or get left behind” attitude that is being spouted by Stan Ames and his “working group” a non-starter.

If you don’t believe the above, take a look at the list of proponents. Virtually all are DCC manufacturers. Read Stan’s description of who has taken the lead in forcing this down our throats: “. . . the topic leader for the new PlusX 22 pin connector is AJ Ireland of Digitrax and the principle developer of the proposal is Dr Grünig of Fleischmann. Manufacturers that work on the development normally do so because they have an interest in the topic.” Does anyone think Digitrax might have a vested interest in forcing DCC components into every LS locomotive, with other rolling stock, turnouts and accessories to follow? How many of you operate a LS Fleischmann locomotive? What is their interest?

I’ve seen this compared to the H0 scale X2f coupler, but I believe it’s way different. First, the proponents of the coupler standard (which BTW, was NEVER ADOPTED by the NMRA) were not in the coupler business. They weren’t going into the coupler business nor were they importing couplers. However misguided or absurd the design, it DID NOT benefit some designers and provider(s) of an existing or future coupler. Second, it helped the H0 market by bringing some kind of standardization to couplers. Even though the modelers usually changed to something else, the kids and casual operators could run what they bought. This actually helped expand the hobby without putting a financial burden on, or ignoring others. Not so with the Stan Ames ‘forced DCC for all’ program.

Now folks in the DCC community are attacking those of us who are trying to stop this farce by claiming we are the ones creating the problem. Not selling well here!

Breakfast, airplanes (the full size kind) and model train operations are calling!

Happy RRing,

Jerry Bowers

#15

Tonight was the voting for the Ames Super Socket by the WG he put together.
Now we enter the “comment” phase.
I, as of tonight, am the contact point for manufacturers, installers, and users to make said comments.
Please submit any commentary on why you do or do not want the mes Super Socket, or the Screw Terminals.
Be as specific as you want to be, experientially.

I will need a name and contact phone for submittal.

This, BTW, bypasses the Ames Super Socket WG.

#16
Bob McCown said:
What I've seen in N scale DCC components is that the decoders come with either 1) a 'standard plug' or 2) consistently color coded wires. Using something like #2 for large scale, with screw terminals, is, IMHO, the easiest and most flexible way.
Bob, I think you are missing the point. If we don't have a mandatory universal plug developed by one company, they can't control the market. ;-)

Terminal screw strips are too easy and universal and already developed. No porofit in that. :wink:

#17
Ric Golding said:
Bob McCown said:
What I've seen in N scale DCC components is that the decoders come with either 1) a 'standard plug' or 2) consistently color coded wires. Using something like #2 for large scale, with screw terminals, is, IMHO, the easiest and most flexible way.
Bob, I think you are missing the point. If we don't have a mandatory universal plug developed by one company, they can't control the market. ;-)

Terminal screw strips are too easy and universal and already developed. No porofit in that. :wink:


My last few locomotives from Bachmann had consistently colored coded wire. All black. :wink:

Plug and play sounds pretty neat; then you recall how much fun it was in Windoze. :frowning:

Screw terminals offer a lot of flexibility to accomodate all sorts of new ideas. True color coding can eliminate confusion; and there just aren’t that many wires to hook up. On my last loco, I had to hook up lights, motor, power, and chuff. It wasn’t exactly rocket science.

#18

The first thing that any sensible individual will find with a small bit of research is, that DCC is great for model railroading in a controled enviorment. It is the way most model railroads will be controled for a long time “INDOORS”.

The second thing that any sensible individual will find, with a small bit of research, is that electrical contact with the track, is and always will be a very un-dependable one. Even the real pikes have varying degrees of problems there, in signalling circuits. More-so for OUTDOOR small scale model railroading.

When you depend on your power source, along with your control signal to be “Track contact dependent”…you create problems, which you just don’t need.

So…DCC is NOT the way to go, out of doors…common sense would tell you.

…get over the fact that DCC is starting to rule…understand that “TWITS” don’t have any common sense, and it is very uncommon these days.

If; and I say it in capitol letters; “IF” I ever buy another large scale locomotive; it will have it’s guts removed and I will install whatever the heck R/C battery system I want, in it.

At a street price of $750 US, (And the Canadian Dollar being worth around $1.05 US) I would gladly buy a B’mann K series loco, and not sweat the few dollars worth of univited crap I rip from her innards.

I’ll bet the crap, if sent postage due back to “*****” Ames, would send a message of some sort; coming from about 500 persons of “Sensibly minded, Common Sense”.

No…the only people that insist on the great need for DCC out-of-doors, generally are the ones that insist on 6 or more unit 50 car modern freights that go roundy-roundy…straight out of the box.
Mindless twits, represented wildly at the other place.

I VOTE WHOLE HEARTEDLY AGAINST THE INSTALATION OF ALL THIS CRAP IN ANY NEW LOCOMOTIVE.

FRED MILLS (613) 723-1911

#19

Hey! My railroad’s indoors, and I don’t want the damn thing either. I like my Sierra and Phoenix, my occasional RCS, and being able to fix something when it breaks. Oh, and btw … Sierra and Dallee both have screw terminals. It’s not the lack of fresh air … even some of we indoor types get it.

Matthew (OV)

#20
Fred Mills said:
The first thing that any sensible individual will find with a small bit of research is, that DCC is great for model railroading in a controled enviorment. It is the way most model railroads will be controled for a long time "INDOORS".

The second thing that any sensible individual will find, with a small bit of research, is that electrical contact with the track, is and always will be a very un-dependable one. Even the real pikes have varying degrees of problems there, in signalling circuits. More-so for OUTDOOR small scale model railroading.

When you depend on your power source, along with your control signal to be “Track contact dependent”…you create problems, which you just don’t need.

So…DCC is NOT the way to go, out of doors…common sense would tell you.

…get over the fact that DCC is starting to rule…understand that “TWITS” don’t have any common sense, and it is very uncommon these days.

If; and I say it in capitol letters; “IF” I ever buy another large scale locomotive; it will have it’s guts removed and I will install whatever the heck R/C battery system I want, in it.

At a street price of $750 US, (And the Canadian Dollar being worth around $1.05 US) I would gladly buy a B’mann K series loco, and not sweat the few dollars worth of univited crap I rip from her innards.

I’ll bet the crap, if sent postage due back to “*****” Ames, would send a message of some sort; coming from about 500 persons of “Sensibly minded, Common Sense”.

No…the only people that insist on the great need for DCC out-of-doors, generally are the ones that insist on 6 or more unit 50 car modern freights that go roundy-roundy…straight out of the box.
Mindless twits, represented wildly at the other place.

I VOTE WHOLE HEARTEDLY AGAINST THE INSTALATION OF ALL THIS CRAP IN ANY NEW LOCOMOTIVE.

FRED MILLS (613) 723-1911


Sheesh Fr. Fred; did something happen at the Sundance last night???

Just to stir the pot a bit - really needs that :wink: :slight_smile: - I bought Code215 Nickelsilver rail from TOC, it’s all intended for running DCC in the garden. :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley: :stuck_out_tongue:
Dave probably figured at least it will look good once I convert to battery R/C. :wink: :lol: :lol:

PS There’s a lot of Euro-Trash that operates on outdoor DCC. :slight_smile: