Large Scale Central

Manufacturers of '(DCC) Super Plug' Compatible Control Systems?

Electronics Power and Sound
#1

One of the recurring claims being posted by the proponent of forcing a “DCC for all” standard on LS locomotive manufacturers and users is that all control, sound and accessory manufacturers will quickly move to providing solutions that are plug compatible with the standard socket. This statement is used to help justify the costs, complexity and (most importantly) space that is required for his ‘standard’. To prove this, he claims to have already convinced Bachmann and AristoCraft to adopt his standard, so it looks as if we are going to have it whether required or not.

Questions for the small providers of R/C, sound and other items we purchase and install in our locomotives:

  1. When will you have these plugin solutions available?

  2. Will your controller fit and operate in the designated real estate without further space or wiring?

  3. Since you will have reduced manufacturing costs (according to the ‘inventor’), will the price of these plug compatible units be less than your current prices?

  4. What is your plan to accommodate the fact that the R/C, sound, lights, and any other accessory units will all need to plug into the single 24 pin socket? For example, will an R/C unit just occupy the pins it requires and someone else’s sound unit just occupy its necessary pins, or will R/C, sound, etc be ‘piggybacked’ to each other with only one unit plugging into the super socket? How is this ‘octopus’ problem being addressed, including the space and wiring requirements for the individual units?

Thanks & Happy RRing,

Jerry

#2

Jerry,

Going by what has been happening so far in the Euro DCC field, where people always had to cope with what LGB considered the cat’s meow, it will be make up a harness to fit J1 and J2 for whatever ready to use functions they provide.

As someone reminded me - I tend to forget these details :wink: :slight_smile: - there will be plenty of questions from those who are looking for plug-in parts because they want to do their own.
But like everything else this too shall be solved and it will all pass. When “those who know best” tell you that you really should get with the program there will always be one routine to make use of what you like in their scheme and bypass all the rest. :wink: :slight_smile:

#3

Aristocraft has been using a 12 and 10 pin arrangement for some years. No one else. Bachman may put Stan’s proposal in their K. QSI made a 12/10 board to fit Aristo locos (and it works well).

I think standardizing is good, actually great, but making a change just to add 2 pins is not necessary.

Aristo DOES NOT LIKE the idea to change from the existing 12 & 10 to 12 & 12 (it’s 2 sockets on .1" centers).

Aristo did the 12 & 10 so it was very clear which way the board goes. The new proposal does not have this clarity, since, at first glance both sockets are identical. Yes, one hole on one socket will be plugged. How good are everyone’s eyes?

Two IDENTICAL sockets is not obvious as the difference in the 12 & 10 design that already out there, and has proven not to create confusion.

With the 12 & 12 people WILL try to shove the board in backwards. Since the plug in the socket is typically a small sliver of nylon, they will probably succeed in getting the board in part way and damaging something.

I also have some issues with the pin assignments. I think that every spare pin available should be connected as a possible function output pin. I think SUSI is cute, but why put it on this connector? The only thing it could be used for is instead of a speaker connector, i.e. SUSI to a DEITZ sound decoder. The idea is to minimize the work to wire up a loco. Anyone want to trade the wires to marker lights for the SUSI interface that is connected to nothing?

Just use the existing SUSI decoder on the DCC decoder.

Use the interface board to INTERFACE, i.e. connect all the lights, motor, track pickups etc, that are IN THE LOCO, not some computer interface bus to run 6 inches to another decoder board somewhere else.

Regards, Greg

#4

For us guys that are not as into electronics I would think it would be a big mistake to go 12 and 12 as it sure could get confusing and screw up a lot of equipment. Later RJD

#5
R.J. DeBerg said:
For us guys that are not as into electronics I would think it would be a big mistake to go 12 and 12 as it sure could get confusing and screw up a lot of equipment. Later RJD
I would agree with this which then leads to the question: "Who's gonna pay for the repair or should I say replacement?" How many people are going to be calling Bachmann and Aristocraft (just to name two) needing to send in their locomotive for repairs because of this? Who's gonna pay for it? I'm serious! It's not quite the no-brainer that it first seems! Since this stuff is (presumably) being force-fed to us as OEM components then shouldn't it fall under factory warranty?
#6

I think it will get sorted out when a modeler who doesn’t know crap about electronics saps his locomotive pretty good and sues the manufacturer for producing a faulty product.

Did I say this modeler just happened to be a pretty darn good trial lawyer…but crappy electronics technician :confused:

#7
steve stockham said:
R.J. DeBerg said:
For us guys that are not as into electronics I would think it would be a big mistake to go 12 and 12 as it sure could get confusing and screw up a lot of equipment. Later RJD
I would agree with this which then leads to the question: "Who's gonna pay for the repair or should I say replacement?" How many people are going to be calling Bachmann and Aristocraft (just to name two) needing to send in their locomotive for repairs because of this? Who's gonna pay for it? I'm serious! It's not quite the no-brainer that it first seems! Since this stuff is (presumably) being force-fed to us as OEM components then shouldn't it fall under factory warranty?
Yeh right!!!!

You believe they will warrant anything I have a bridge for sale…

I am willing to predict the current proposal will not see the light of day as longs as it is plug compatible with the current AC sockets.
Here is just another reason why Mr Ames is going to have trouble getting it past anyone. http://www.mylargescale.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=49026
AC have screwed up again.
There is no way RCS is going to make anything plug compatible with the existing AC socket and therefore the new proposal.
I think the powers that be are now well aware of this and are in the process of a rethink of the whole idea.
something that does incorporate screw terminals will result.

#8

If one follows Mister Ames original thread on the Soap, you will see he has already convinced them of the brilliance of his design.
Photos on the Bachmann Forum already show this in place.

However, it is already obsolete, and will not be usable with any decoders/control boards produced to plug into it.
Why?
Unless they caught the assembly line early enough for the latest “update” to Gold Plate, those are tin sockets, and you cannot mix the two.

This is what happens when you develop a secret standard, in secret, no input from other than those with a vested interest, and leak the announcement of the existence in a locomotive already on the production line if not already done, and the public gets to see what you have done.

You know, he asked my almost a year ago, and the next I heard was his bragging on the Soap about the “electronics”.

Just wait for door # 2 to open.

#9

If anyone wants to know why we have the issues we have, why other “scales” tend not to take us seriously:

http://naphotos.nerail.org/showpic/?photo=200710251234137578.jpg&order=bydate&page=5&key=

#10

Is the large coal car for bigger batterys , is that one you added RCS to ? he he he

But a hobby is about having fun and relaxing .

#11

Look like an lgb Mikado tender stuck backwards behind an LGB Mogul.

But, that’s not the only thing.
This is like one of them “teasers” in the comics section.
Find six differences…

So, in that consist, we have a small Mogul, a large tender stuck on backwards (and, I do all radio/battery/sound on-board in the original loco and tender on Moguls), a euro 2-axle boxcar…the steel bridge seems to be collapsing under the flatcar…how many times you see a big steel deck girder bridge on wood supports anymore…but the last one I’m going to tell you about is directly below #2 and #3 drivers.

Look at the trolley track.
Tell me how far you think said track goes with absolutely no support…

How many others do you see?

#12

I thought we all built layouts like that! :smiley: :stuck_out_tongue: :wink:

#13

Picture looks like it might have been taken on Mr.Ames’ pike !!!

#14

There ya go, Ferd!
Tender had to be oriented that way as the “front” tags were installed backwards, and Lord knows you have to be “compliant”.

Looks like some bridges I have seen photos of…

#15

I imagine that just about now, Mr. Ames, Esq., is receiving his copy of a “K”, with the request for a review for GR.
There may be some other kid on the same block, doing a review for MRN, and some other friend of Stanley’s doing one for MR, and who knows; maybe young Kevin is in line to do a review also. Kevin is still in B’mann’s good books as he hasn’t said much about the whole affair, thus keeping his fingers clean.

Dave, will have a “K” in his little hands very soon, when a customer wants to get his model converted from whatever system Stanley has talked them into; to R/C/Battery. I HOPE DAVE POSTS HIS OBSERVATIONS HERE FIRST, rather than some other place.

It will be interesting to examine the entrails, that Dave extracts from the "K"....we should be able to figure the plans for the future, and maybe even how much money has been invested in a much talked about programme.

It's noteworthy to remember that many facts of life have been discovered when examining the entrails of dead animules  !!!!

Onward and upward…Let’s hear the latest reports as they happen…HERE on LSC Forums.

We are all sitting with our legs crossed and great expectations…er, aren’t we ?

#16

#17
Fred Mills said:
We are all sitting with our legs crossed and great expectations......er, aren't we ?
No :D
#18

Fr. Fred

As far as I’m concerned on this one I don’t sweat the details. Whatever Mr. Stan Ames may cook up this side of the pond is of little consequence in Europe AND chances that Bachmann (or any of the others who think the Ames socket is wonderful) will make any RhB equipment are ZILCH.
Sooooooo it still is: order as desired and install what’s required. :wink: :slight_smile:

#19

Fred,

“We are all sitting with our legs crossed and great expectations”

from the reports coming out, you have penty of time to relieve yourself.

THEY said it would be out by Christmas, but THEY did not say what year. When I see one running on your layout, when Dave has dissected and corrected, when they are weathered and in use, then I will decide if I need one.

Fluff is fluff and stuff is stuff. I’ll wait for Dave’s review.

#20
Fred Mills said:
I imagine that just about now, Mr. Ames, Esq., is receiving his copy of a "K", with the request for a review for GR.
Fred The above is not a correct statement.

Because my wife is in the model railroad business, it would be totally inappropriate for me to review any model railroad product for GR.

I do not know how these rumors start but I would ask that perhaps you check first before posting such rumors.

Stan Ames