# Radio Control and DCC?



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

I'm a newbie with steam. I recently added a second live steamer to my engine pool, presently I have a Accucraft GS-4 (unfired to date) and I just recieved Accucrafts AML 0-6-0. After I get some time under my belt with the 0-6-0 I want to fit the GS4 with radio control and will likely do same with the 0-6-0. 

Outside of your atypical radio control equipment is anyone working with DCC cabs, decoders and servos? If I recall some LGB decoders had the abilty to drive servos, does anyone have any info on this? What I'd like to realize is utiliziation of my NCE Wireless G-Cab to opererate my steamers complete with onbound functions such as lights, bells, whistles and such. I am well versed with the capabilty to perform these functions with RC equipment. I'm unsure what the capabilties of a decoder are with regard to providing a pulsed or PWM signal for servo command control (minimum 0.5mS maximum 2.5mS @ 50Hz). 

Michael


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

Most people in live steam use a 2.4 GHz radio, mostly Spektrum but there are some others out there now. The reason is it is well above the frequency of the noise created by al the metal to metal contact that is present in a live steamer, which leads to terrible glitching!


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes Michael, what you want to do is easily done if you are currently using DCC track power, and a little more complicated if you don't have track power to supply the decoder with the DCC signal. So: 

Case 1 track power: The only decoders I know of that offer true proportional control over servo position using the throttle setting are made by Massoth. I am currently using their small 8FL function decoder to operate my gravel ballasting car using a servo hidden underneath. The 8FL can operate two servos, either proportionally or end-to-end positions. Their regular decoders can also run two servos. You will need to supply the 5V for the servos though since they draw a fair bit of current. So doing it this way you can easily accomplish what you want with the proportional control over the steam regulator and end to end on the reversing gear, etc. Obviously you could run more than one function decoder if you wanted more servos. 

Case 2 no track power: I think you could use the g-wire(?) system or Massoth is coming out with a very slick wireless receiver that will let you plug any decoder into it and then use your Massoth Navigator as a standalone central station. This is what I plan on using for my live steamers as well as my rail crane project. That way you can run either track or battery power and take your navigator and train anywhere and still have DCC functionality. Greg will probably add his comments on how to do it with the NCE system. 

Keith


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Just make sure your LS is insulated if applying track power. Later RJD


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Jeff, 

I'm no expert but me thinks the EMI/RFI or noise created by metal to metal abrasion can't be any worse on a LS than a sparky. That said the wireless Cab/RX operates at 900MHz. 900MHz should provide sufficient headroom, if RFI/EMI exceeds 10KHz I'd be surprised however I'm guessing. 

Keith, 

Thanks for the info, I’ll look into Massoths decoders, I have several loose units I acquired but have yet to go there. 

RJD, 

I haven’t a clue if the Accucraft loco’s I have are insulated or not, thanks for the heads up I’ll be sure and look into this. 

Thanks, 
Michael


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Live steam and clean track--while not necessarily mutually exclusive--are at the least very strange bedfellows. Assuming the wheels are insulated, you'd then need to add some method of electrical pick-up from the rails (likely through the tender) and hope the rails stay clean enough to pass the DCC signal through for reliable control. Even with that, your degree of control with a typical push-button DCC hand-held controller is not going to give you the response time you'll need for live steam. There are some controllers that have knobs or thumbwheels, but I'm still of the opinion that a good digital proportional R/C transmitter is going to give you the best level of control. The new 2.4 gHz stuff is really sweet. 

A further advantage of the 2.4 gHz stuff is that there are a few folks (RCS and G-scale graphics, to promote two advertisers here) who make controls for our sparkies that use the same controller. All you need do is buy another receiver and the controller, and you're now using the same user interface for all your trains, no matter how they're powered. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

My goal is to use a wireless Cab, these work together with an onboard receiver which is coupled to a compatible decoder. So in this regard it matters not the condition of the track. I've looked at Massoth's decoders, while they support PWM for RC servos the functions appear to be assigned to specific function triggers, which may or may not be reassignable or more specifically to throttle and FWD/REV, more to ponder. 

Michael


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Kevin, Michael, 

The massoth function decoder will give you just as good a response time as a regular r/c unit. I can turn my handwheel on the throttle and my gravel hopper gate will move on demand, to limits and at a speed that can be defined. When the DRC-300 is introduced you will be able to use this method with batteries as well. Although the output pins for the servo functions are fixed, every function key is reassignable, and with the navigator you can control two locos simultaneously which would allow you to have two working proportionally for say throttle and whistle valve etc., while still having control over other functions. While I agree with Kevin that a dedicated r/c unit is great for those without DCC, if you already have and like DCC then this method is great fun and has great potential. 
As with most things, the limit is our imagination, and I find that much of the fun in our hobby is figuring out if you can actually do something. 

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

All good info, would add that the Zimo decoders also have servo support. I intend to start powering accessories with servos so am looking forwards to fun. 

You know, if someone had a r/c system and the DCC folk tried to convert him, there would be howls and complaints to the moderators. (Ask me how I know!) 

Let someone ask how to do it in DCC and for sure someone will tell him not to do it, and use R/C, even a moderator. 

Greg 

p.s. Kevin, there are thumbwheels and knobs on DCC controllers... not just buttons.


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

You know, if someone had a r/c system and the DCC folk tried to convert him, there would be howls and complaints to the moderators. (Ask me how I know!) 

Let someone ask how to do it in DCC and for sure someone will tell him not to do it, and use R/C, even a moderator. 

LOL! 

Greg, although Zimo decoders can control servos end to end, I'm not sure if they can do the proportional control yet the way the Massoth ones can. I'm sure it's just a matter of time, though, before they can also do it. Zimo makes one that can power the servos with 5V directly, though, which is an advantage in their favour. Now we just need a blend of the two! 

BTW, here is a link to a video of me testing the hopper system:

*Hopper video*

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Keith, I'm not certain they can do exactly the same thing, but I just read page 18 of the manual, seems there are settings for "moves only when activated" and "returns to center when not activated"... It looks like it might have that capability, but I am not an expert in servos (yet! ha!).... sure looks like a lot of fun that can be added. 

Your video is cool! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

After discussing the capabilities of the Zimo product line with Axel at TrainLi, I have determined that Zimo's offerings are in excess of other OEM’s and motr than capable of operating a LS engine with RC servos (in fact they apparently configured their decoders to specifically operate LS engines) three servo drivers, on-board power distribution, full function assignability, proportional control and even some dedicated variables that allow for auto repositioning of FWD-REV valve gear when throttle is at stop. 

I’m going to utilize an HO decoder with sound and AUX functions to drive lights, trigger bells, whistles and the like. My AML USRA 0-6-0 will provide a challenging installation due to space limitations, but I have lots of experience with RC servos more to follow. 

Regards’ 
Michael Glavin


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi Michael, 

Can you find out from Axel which specific Zimo decoder he is recommending? I would really like to see how they implement the proportional control. It sounds like a great decoder. 

Keith


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

p.s. Kevin, there are thumbwheels and knobs on DCC controllers... not just buttons. 

Yeah, I said that. From my post: "There are some controllers that have knobs or thumbwheels, but I'm still of the opinion that a good digital proportional R/C transmitter is going to give you the best level of control." 

In my opinion, a DCC controller needs one of two things in order for it to be as effective in controlling a live steam locomotive as a "traditional" two-stick R/C controller. The first option would be stops at the the end of travel of the knob or thumbwheel. One example would be Zimo's controller. This gives you proportional control. Move the knob halfway, the servo's set to midway in its throw. Michael references the NCE controller which does not have stops of any kind on the thumbwheel. As a result, you could be spinning the knob or thumbwheel without knowing exactly how much it's moving the throttle. Recall, the NCE thumbwheel reacts differently based on how quickly you rotate it. It's not "one click per speed step or such. The faster you rotate it, the more it changes the position. It's _not_ proportional, therefore inferior (again--in my opinion) to a truly proportional controller. 

Alternatively, the throttle servo's position could be equated to a speed step value, so that the user could look at the controller and know that if the display reads 64, the throttle is half-open (assuming 128 speed steps). That gets around the lack of proportionality of the knob/thumbwheel since there's something of a visual reference. The throttle is proportional to the setting displayed, not necessarily the position of the knob. That very well may be inherently the case in the decoders being discussed here. It will be interesting to see. 

Lacking either of those, then the "traditional" R/C control interface would be my preferred method. I like knowing where my throttle is set without having to physically see the throttle in the cab of the locomotive. I've used pushbutton control systems, and that's the biggest drawback. A free-wheeling knob/thumbwheel is a marginal improvement over that, but it's still not "knowing" where the throttle is. 

Let someone ask how to do it in DCC and for sure someone will tell him not to do it, and use R/C, even a moderator. 
Should Michael opt to control his trains with a moderator instead of either DCC or R/C, that's his prerogative. Personally, I'd be happy to oblige. I would advise caution when JJ is nearby, though.  

If you're referring to this particular moderator advising Michael "not to do it," I offered no such advice. There are distinct caveats relative to operating track-based DCC concurrent with live steam, and I pointed them out. (I would emphasize that you've mentioned these same caveats in a related thread recently.) Given those caveats, I offered a popular solution that's proven quite successful to other live steamers. Michael's instead looking to use the G-wire receiver, which also steps completely over those track-power DCC issues, but has the drawback of being untried. If everything works as theorized, there's nothing to suggest anything but success. 

I still don't see the proposed NCE/G-wire/Zimo solution as being cost effective relative to the 2.4 gHz equipment, and the operation of the thumbwheel would be subject to the considerations outlined above for me to qualify it as equal in terms of tactile control in my opinion. In other words, yes, you can do it. If it's more expensive and doesn't give me the level of control feedback I get from another system, I'll rank it as inferior to that other system. That's not saying "not to do it," rather I'm saying that I would personally not do it based on my individual wants. It's up to the reader to determine if my criteria for forming my opinion matches their particular values as they look to form their own opinions. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Kevin, I wish you could come to my place so you could witness the servo control with the Massoth controller and 8FL decoder. It's very simple and every bit as good as a regular r/c unit--I know because I've run lots of steamers with regular r/c, including my own. Because you can set the end limit points of the servo travel to suit the steam regulator close/max positions, the middle point is always half throttle. I totally agree that the buttons and spinning wheels with no end points are unsatisfactory when it comes to running a regulator. 
As far as cost goes, since I've already got a DCC setup all I need to add are the servos and the small inexpensive function decoder--much better than having to buy a dedicated r/c unit for every loco. If I wanted to operate it somewhere else without DCC, but still using my DCC controller than I would need the DRC300 wireless receiver (equiv to the g-wire). In that case you're right, it would be a more expensive option than regular r/c, although much more powerful. So in my opinion if you plan on having DCC anyway and the steamer has insulated wheels, you're better off going the function decoder/servo route. If you aren't planning on going track powered DCC or want to run at places where they don't have DCC, then I think you're better off with regular r/c.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 11 Jan 2010 10:43 PM 
Live steam and clean track--while not necessarily mutually exclusive--are at the least very strange bedfellows. (NEGATIVE AND UNHELPFUL) Assuming the wheels are insulated, you'd then need to add some method of electrical pick-up from the rails (TREAT HIM LIKE AN IDIOT) (likely through the tender) and hope the rails stay clean enough to pass the DCC signal through for reliable control (YOU DON'T KNOW SQUAT ABOUT DCC, APPARENTLY YOU AND LEWIS STILL BELIEVE DIRTY TRACK MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE). Even with that, your degree of control with a typical push-button DCC hand-held controller is not going to give you the response time you'll need for live steam. (SO YOU ARE SEE-SAWING THE CONTROLS BACK AND FORTH FASTER THAN THE THROTTLE CAN HANDLE? THEN YOU SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN ANY LOCOMOTIVES, DCC HAS PLENTY OF RESPONSE TIME) There are some controllers that have knobs or thumbwheels, but I'm still of the opinion that a good digital proportional R/C transmitter is going to give you the best level of control. (FINALLY AN OPINION, THAT'S OK) The new 2.4 gHz stuff is really sweet. (IN DCC TOO)

A further advantage of the 2.4 gHz stuff is that there are a few folks (RCS and G-scale graphics, to promote two advertisers here) who make controls for our sparkies that use the same controller. All you need do is buy another receiver and the controller, and you're now using the same user interface for all your trains, no matter how they're powered. (THIS GUY HAS DCC OVER THE AIR AND YOU WANT HIM TO GO BACK TO THE STONE AGES OF WIRELESS CONTROL? (FEATURES?) AGAIN YOU DON'T KNOW SQUAT ABOUT DCC)

Later, 

K 
Kevin, you mount a vociferous and excessively wordy response (as usual).


Simple point, almost everything you said was not helpful and against what the poster asked about... *here is your post for evidence...* There is *NOTHING *in your response that is helpful, answers the question, or is positive.

He already has an NCE throttle, so he understands DCC, he has a 0-6-0 and a G4, he's not an idiot or illiterate... but your response treats him as such. 


So next time, I suggest if this is how you are helpful like _this_, don't bother! Boy, I would hate to see it when you _admit _you wanted to talk someone out of something or attack DCC!



Greg


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Its my belief that as a whole information shared is genuine and heart felt if not emotional. I've been involved in Forums for years, (10 years or so with RC Aircraft). In any event I took know offense to previous posts. I'm sure were all guilty of making comments without a complete understanding and or thorough read of the post in question at initial glance and we all believe in what we share too!


With regard to servos and proportional control as mentioned by Cougar, were able to set end-points or travel arcs (degrees of rotation CC-CCW) neutral or center position and speed. In fact the Zimo's decoder is more capable of controlling servos than your typical RC TX with its limited rudimentary functions (there are more sophisticated TX's that do it all). As I noted previously the Zimo is able to process operations or multiple functions with regard to command input such as automatically moving the FWD-REV servo to neutral when throttled down and again moving in forward or reverse directions. Then there are programmable digital servos, without regard to the TX commanding the servos we can program servo travel limits, neutral, speed, resolution, direction. In this circumstance a very basic TX is utilized without nary a concern for dialing in the servo.


Axel suggested for me as I wanted "sound" the Zimo MX690S, this is a G-scale decoder with sound and if I recall 5A capabilities. Or an HO decoder the MX640 would suffice as were not driving electric motors, this unit is less sound.


Michael


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Michael, I'm still not convinced the Zimo can move the servo proportionally with the throttle the way the Massoth ones can. Unless they have changed something, the last time I read the Zimo manual you could only go end to end and not have full control in between those points. Maybe Axel can confirm this is possible now? 

Thanks, 
Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I read the manual on my Zimo 690V.... it seems that you can control by either going to full stop, or you can incrementally move things in either direction, but I'd want confirmation also... I might just buy a couple of servos and try it... 

After this thread, I have a friend interested in doing this to his live steamer. I guess I will need some recommendations on servos.. I hear you want the ones with metal, not plastic bearings (for heat resistance). 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

I just had a read of the latest manual on the Zimo site, and it looks like CV185 to #2 will indeed provide the proportional control the way you want. Setting CV185 to #1 would be perfect for a live steamer like the Aster/LGB Frank S, which has the combination throttle/fwd/rev. I think the 690V is the one you want because it provides the 5V output for the servo. 

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I have not investigated the servo capabilities in the other Zimo decoders, I bought the 690V because it had "everything" and is going in a brass sparkie. 

Along those lines, on a live steamer, for the units that have an independent reversing lever, do people use "mid positions" on this lever? A friend commented that the Aristo steamer (ok ok, don't yell!) remote just gives you forward or reverse. I would think you would at least want forward, reverse and neutral. I don't know a lot about real steamers, but I thought they adjusted the reversing lever (right term?) to different positions to effectively give more/less power and balance with more/less steam consumption. 

Is this advisable/possible in live steam models? Maybe this is a big DOH! ha ha! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

The valve gear on most of the live steamers is not sophisticated enough to provide the timing changes you are thinking about, Greg, so you really only need full forward and full reverse, with 100% of the steam consumption controlled by the throttle. With the right locomotive, though, it would indeed be possible. I think some of the Regner compound engines have the ability to switch from compound to simple on the fly once the cylinders are warmed up...lots of possibilities out there. I would suggest in programming that you keep the f/r control separate from the throttle, since there are times when you will want to have the throttle open but with the f/r in neutral (blowing out the lubricator after a run for example). 

Keith


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Of course the ZIMO MX620 (not an engine decoder/no sound/2 servo control, MX 640 (small engine decoder with sound for 2 servos) and the 690 (large engine decoder with sound for 4 servos) as well as the non sound decoder versions all offer *proportional* control.  And this is not a matter of believe but a matter of reading the documentation.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Thanks Keith, I was getting the impression it was full fwd or reverse. Yes, completely agree on keeping it separate from throttle, keep the knob/slider for the throttle, and set up function or maybe the direction button for fwd/reverse... I'm getting the impression that neutral, if possible, would be a nice thing. 

So Axel, does it appear that the servo functions are all the same between those decoders? 

Is the 690 the only one to have the 5 volt output for the servos? 

Do you sell servos or have any recommendations? 

Thanks, Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, on the servo front, I wouldn't worry too much about having metal gears--if it is hot enough to affect the gears it's too close or needs a thin film of insulation. Also, be aware that at least one manufacturer makes different steam regulators depending on whether or not it is manual or r/c. For example, the Roundhouse r/c regulator has a much shorter throw for use with servos. You may even want to retrofit their regulator to someone else's boiler. I don't think accucraft makes a separate regulator, since theirs are already short throw and very (too) touchy under manual control. 

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I may be getting the cart ahead of the horse here, but I saw some setups where two gears and a miniature chain was used to provide very fine control to a steam valve that had a "short throw". 

Sounds like opportunities for the mechanically inclined. Sounds like a challenge. Sounds like fun. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Sounds like opportunities for the mechanically inclined. Sounds like a challenge. Sounds like fun. 

Exactly what makes this the best hobby in the world!


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, I believe you are now ready for me to plant the next seed: 

http://www.firgelli.com/ 

LOL 

Keith


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Not our scale, 7mm to the foot in fact, but Zimo running servos for brakes and reversing lever:




Regards, Gregf


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Good stuff now to figure out how to go about doing one. Later RJD


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

In this case, it would be track power to control the DCC controller. Now, if I could adapt the Gwire receiver to the Zimo, then it could be track powered DCC control or "airwire style" wireless... 

That would be cool for people who already have airwire or track powered DCC... 

Hmm... 

Regards, Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

1. Has anyone done a survey of exactly which live steam locos have insulated wheel sets? No insulation = no DCC via the track. 

2. How well do the DCC R/C systems work in an all metal box? 

I know of at least one brand of 2.4 GHz stick radio that will work just fine with the RX totally enclosed in metal such as a water side tank.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Agreed... not many insulated LS locos... 

People do leave antennas sticking up out of a coal load, so if someone got that far, then I think seeing a single short wire would not be catastrophic. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes but........

The ultra short antennas on the 2.4 Ghz stick radios can be inside the body and still work just fine.









Stilll I suppose if cost is no barrier.........


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

1/4 wave 900 is short too... 

not expensive 

Greg


----------



## Dwight Ennis (Jan 2, 2008)

The ultra short antennas on the 2.4 Ghz stick radios can be inside the body and still work just fine.During an installation, I tested my Spektrum's range and was able to control the servos from all the way across the court I live on. This was with the loco was sitting on the bench not running, so no metal-to-metal interference isses. I've never had any problems in normal operations, either from glitching or from range issues. Also, the Rx is completely enclosed in the cab, which being brass, may not present the EM barrier that a ferrous metal might (not at all sure of that).


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The shorter wavelength of 2.4 "gets out" of smaller "apertures" than lower frequencies. 

So small gaps that might not "pass" a lower frequency will "pass" a higher one. 

Brass or any other conductive metal will block signals, ferrous is not an issue in electromagnetic waves. It does block magnetic waves. 

The higher frequencies also "bounce around" more than lower frequencies. 

There's not a huge difference between 900 and 2.4... there is between 27 MHz and 900 though. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## HMeinhold (Jan 2, 2008)

Michael, 
if you are adventurous, you can build your own DCC decoder with servo control. Before I ventured into live steam, I designed DCC systems for my own applications. One of them was a version with servo control for a road/rail bus with servo steering and motor control. I also solved the problem of intermittent contact to the rails, see 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm5UCQbDH3U 

If you are interested, send me a PM for schematics/SW. 
Regards


----------



## zubi (May 14, 2009)

Posted By Dwight Ennis on 15 Jan 2010 09:19 PM 
The ultra short antennas on the 2.4 Ghz stick radios can be inside the body and still work just fine.During an installation, I tested my Spektrum's range and was able to control the servos from all the way across the court I live on. This was with the loco was sitting on the bench not running, so no metal-to-metal interference isses. I've never had any problems in normal operations, either from glitching or from range issues. Also, the Rx is completely enclosed in the cab, which being brass, may not present the EM barrier that a ferrous metal might (not at all sure of that). 
Dwight, the cab is not a complete enclosure, windows, doors etc are sufficient for GHz RF to reach the antenna. As Greg points out, at RF frequencies any conductive metal shields, provided the holes are (substantially) smaller than the wavelength. This is why you can see what you are cooking in your microwave oven;-)... At 2.4Ghz the full wavelength is 125mm. At 27Mhz the wavelength is 11 meters, so it is better fully to expose the antenna... Best, Zubi


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

A few thoughts... 

First, I know that DCC can operate over dirty track. That's the premise behind Lenz's hybrid system and Henner's example above. (Greg, you have to know I understand that, given the work that both you and I did on the "socket" a few years back and our conversations with Stan and Lenz as part of that process. His hybrid drive was very much at the core of those discussions.) The issue isn't the ability to do so, but the practicality of it. By controlling your live steamer via the track, you're inherently limiting yourself to running your steamer on your own track or presumably someone else's DCC railroad. That pretty much rules out taking your loco to the local steam-up. Live steam is very much a social hobby, and steam-ups are very much part of the fun. If you're cool with _not_ being able to run at most live steam venues, then go for it. The servo drivers from Zimo and Massoth look to do exactly what would be needed, and allow you some cool sounds/lights should you so desire. If you want to run on anyone's track, you've got to buy the G-wire receiver and wire the decoder to it. (The latest G-wire receiver has the appropriate solder pads for doing so.) At that point, it's no different than any other means of R/C, and you could run on anything. 

How much of the "cool stuff" of DCC control becomes moot in a live steam environment? With no electric motor to control, all of the motor-control aspects don't do squat. Speed curves, start voltages, consisting, BEMF feedback for constant speed and for sound systems... all perfectly worthless. At that point, your DCC decoder becomes a sound and light control board. I don't see that as being all that different from something like a Phoenix or Sierra board which steamers have been using for quite some time. I'm not saying that makes DCC control inferior in any way, rather the playing field is quite equal. 

In the end, I think it really comes down to preference of interface, and what you want to be able to control. If you don't want to bother with sounds, lights, or anything of that nature, then the traditional R/C systems are definitely the way to go. $100 for a complete 5-channel R/C set-up and you're off and running. I don't see DCC being economically viable at that level, but the reality is that if you're playing only at that level, then you're not looking at DCC anyway. When you add the bells and whistles, then DCC becomes viable, both in terms of cost and functionality. At that point, depending on which components you choose, you could probably get either system cheaper than the other. If you've already got either transmitter, then you'd probably do well to stick with compatible components either way. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It's OK, although you do not need hybrid drive to run DCC outdoors, and people with track power do not insist on having dirty track. "dirty track" is one of the scare tactics of certain techniques. How can you quantify dirty track. Why are we even talking about it if we are trying to answer the question instead of shoot an idea down? 

This guy runs DCC already and has a $4,000 steamer... continuing to insult his intelligence is not my method of help. 

Now you down talk DCC because you cannot use all the "cool stuff"? 

This is another fundamental misunderstanding of DCC... 

People go to great lengths to put DCC down because it's "too complicated" and has "too many features". 

The precise thing that is cool is that there are features for everyone, but you ONLY need to use the ones you want. 

The DCC police aren't going to jump out of trees to attack you because you did not use all the features possible. 

This is another "attitude" that is prevalent in the anti-DCC crowd. I don't think your post was intended to be anti-DCC, you just don't understand and look at the big picture. 

The point of the thread, if you go back and respect the original poster, is to see if he could use a DCC control on his steamer. 

Why is that upsetting you so much all you can do is fight every little bit tooth and nail? 

Instead of this being a fun thread investigating some new ideas, it's a battle. 

It's really too bad. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

I think maybe what Greg is getting at is that many of us DCC guys chose DCC not only because it was functional, but because it has such huge potential. Investigating, experimenting, and overcoming challenges we create for ourselves is a major part of the hobby. At least it is for me. Sure we could plug in an r/c unit and we know that would work, but what if....? It's the same thing with scratchbuilding. You can get a week of satisfaction with a new train you bought, or a lifetime of satisfaction out of one you built yourself after conquering the many challenges along the way. 

Keith


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

*sigh* 

The point of the thread, if you go back and respect the original poster, is to see if he could use a DCC control on his steamer. 

And we're both in agreement that it is most decidedly possible. It's a very valid way to control your live steamer and operate--literally--the bells and whistles (and lights). My argument is with your contention that anything other than DCC relative to live steam is going back to the "stone age." When you take all the DCC features that are not applicable to live steam, what you're left with is also easily controlled by the more "traditional" control methods. DCC in a live steam environment inherently has one hand tied behind its back in terms of available features, thus loses the competitive, functional advantages it enjoys in the electric world. That's not bad, nor a slam on DCC, just the reality of the application. 

Someone with DCC equipment can very easily continue to use their DCC stuff to run both their steamers and electric mice. For someone who is not already invested in DCC, it is every bit a viable path to follow in order to get "the most" out of their live steamers in terms of controlling bells, whistles, and lights, but it is not the mandatory path that it is in electric locos. You can potentially control the same bells, whistles, and lights on a live steamer with "traditional" controls. If they've already got that equipment for whatever purposes (trains, planes, automobiles), they're not losing any potential by sticking with it for live steam. 

The fact that DCC controllers are a viable option for live steam may, in fact, open more people's eyes to the benefits of DCC in electric applications, and go a long ways towards busting many of the myths that have plagued DCC. (I know you're reluctant to believe me, but I enjoy DCC, and find it a very cool way to control my electric mice.) Once someone tries running a live steamer with an NCE controller, there's a very good chance they'll go out and buy a QSI board for their next electric loco. I don't know, but I see that as a positive thing... 

Later, 

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It's OK Kevin, I will you have the last word. 

Greg


----------



## StanleyAmes (Jan 3, 2008)

I hate to interrupt this most interesting discussion but please remember a few points.

1) DCC is a protocol that has been agreed upon by a variety of manufacturers world wide. 
2) DCC will work on the track or via the the air (for example Q wire and Airwire). 
3) Even in the DCC world there are still a few advantages to controlling a locomotive via track power and that has to do with the latency of getting a command to the locomotive. This can be an issue in fine control of a whistle.
4) Getting nearly 100% packet reception even on dirty track or poor electrical pickup is no big deal. Most of the time track power for a Live Steam locomotive will rely on tender pickup so a technique that works well on dirty track is a real advantage if one desires to utilize track power for this application.
5) One big disadvantage of Live Steam using track power is that some live steam locomotives do hot have insulated wheels. (mine does so for me its no problem)
6) If one decides to use radio controlo vis the air then the use of a DCC product to control the servos is not all that different then using any other RC product.
7) The decision of Air vrs track power is not a one or the other decision. I have locomotives that have a switch that choses one or the other depending on where the locomotive is at the current time.
8) There are indeed DCC products in the market that control servos and do so very well. These products were developed for the Live Steam Market.

Personally I find the control device in your hand with a DCC system controls the servos much better then the aircraft joy sticks for RC contro that some use and I also like the DCC feature set available for this application. But then I have done this so this is first hand experience rather than speculation or theory.

Stan Ames


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, 
With respect. 
If the originator of this thread wants to try DCC to run his live steam loco, then good luck to him. He did ask for opinions. That means points of view that don't necessarily coincide with yours. 
Your tirade against those that do not like, need or understand DCC, is starting to seem like paranoia, even getting a trifle boring. It seems from a casual observer that you, and a lot of other DCC aficionados, cannot understand why the whole of mankind has not seriously embraced DCC for every possible use in model trains. 
There is a place for DCC. Even in live steam. 
The problem is, DCC for Live Steam is in many cases totally impractical for use with track power because very few Live Steam locos have insulated wheel sets. 
That leaves battery powered DCC. Which, when compared to the low cost of super reliable battery powered 5/6 channel 2.4 GHz, has no hope of competing on cost. 
Maybe on potential features, but definitely not on cost. 
I take it you do understand the attraction of a 5/6 channel digital proportional radio TX & RX for US$50 delivered? Extra RX's cost US$15 each. Servos that cost less than US$10 each. A suitable battery pack that is less than US$10. Minimum total = US$100 to fully equip a Live Steamer with 2.4 GHz stick radios. Plus it has guaranteed great range. Even with the RX buried inside the metal box. 
Compare that to what? 
I don't know what the actual cost of setting up a live steamer with battery DCC would be, but I am willing to bet it would cost a lot more than US$100. A "G Wire" RX on its own is around US$100. 
I can speak with the experience of making a non Digital Proportional radio control system for Live Steam. It worked well and had all sorts of features such as directional lights and sound triggers. There were two problems with it. 
1. The range was problematic and could not be improved by any simple means. 
2. The control was by pushbutton. Something that was acceptable because the system eliminated glitching. However, it was definitely not a stick control. 
Nevertheless i sold about 500 of them and many are still in use. I stopped making them when the new low cost Park Flyer 2.4 GHz systems came out. They solved all the glitching problems and had the added advantage of antenna placement not being all that important.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Stanley. 
Also with respect. 

I think you will find that it is *MOST* live steamers, not some, that do not have insulated wheels sets. 
Perhaps you could provide readers with a list of Live Steam locos that *do* have insulated wheels.

Far from being *".....the aircraft joy sticks for RC contro that some use." * *Most* Live Steamers use stick type radios. 
Now, that may not play well with the DCC sensibilities but, it is a fact, and fact that is unlikely to change in the short term.


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

Tony - With all due respect ... You've got it exactly right on both counts.







It's getting old


----------



## zubi (May 14, 2009)

Tony, The awful truth is, that most live steamers do not want remote control of any sort... Best, Zubi


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Michael Glavin on 11 Jan 2010 04:15 PM 
I'm a newbie with steam. I recently added a second live steamer to my engine pool, presently I have a Accucraft GS-4 (unfired to date) and I just recieved Accucrafts AML 0-6-0. After I get some time under my belt with the 0-6-0 I want to fit the GS4 with radio control and will likely do same with the 0-6-0. 

Outside of your atypical radio control equipment is anyone working with DCC cabs, decoders and servos? If I recall some LGB decoders had the abilty to drive servos, does anyone have any info on this? What I'd like to realize is utiliziation of my NCE Wireless G-Cab to opererate my steamers complete with onbound functions such as lights, bells, whistles and such. I am well versed with the capabilty to perform these functions with RC equipment. I'm unsure what the capabilties of a decoder are with regard to providing a pulsed or PWM signal for servo command control (minimum 0.5mS maximum 2.5mS @ 50Hz). 

Michael

[*]I don't see anywhere where he asked for opinions. Read the words above. He asked how to use his NCE cab to operate his steamers, and specifically said "*outside of your atypical rc equipment*".That means he did *NOT *ask to hear about an RC solution, which he understands. So, I disagree with the basic premises of the last posts of Kevin and Tony.
[/list][*]He did not ask for a lecture on why his idea is no good.[/list][*]He did not ask to compare or weigh the benefits of DCC vs. RC.[/list][*]He did say he understood DCC.[/list][*]He did say he understood how to do this with RC.[/list] 
So, this is my big objection to the Kevin's and now Tony's posts... 


As I stated before, instead of this being an exploration of how to do this, it's turned into a battle of telling him why RC is better, the "bad side of DCC" and a lot of unhelpful information that he DID NOT ASK FOR.


Using the term respect, and then accusing someone of paranoia is not respect, it's BS. I'm operating on respecting what the originator of the thread asked, it was clear, concise, and specifically asked NOT to explore RC solutions. 


So, with a _modicum _of respect, why don't all the detractors just be quiet (you've had your say) and we can continue to be *positive*, and investigate this interesting idea? 


Regards, Greg


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

Sorry Greg, but you're the one that starts all this stuff with the poor me, why is everyone bashing DCC. If you want to be the king of advice on this forum, always being right, and always having the last word is probably not the way to win the election.You are obviously a smart guy, and have a lot to offer. If you could just lose the "moderator" attitude, and quite telling everyone else how to post, it would be much appreciated. This post now has nothing to do with the topic, only about you having your way and wanting to maintain control of the thread.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I guess you did not read the original post, nor the quoted part of it. 

No moderator attitude, just answering what was asked, and it was concise and clear and specifically asked not for RC people. 

I'm not maintaining control of the thread, I'm being (again) battered with tons of text by a moderator, and called names by Tony. 

Boy, if I came into an RC thread and espoused DCC I would be shot. 

But come into a DCC thread (which this is), and start going on about how bad DCC is and how much better RC is.. what a double standard! 

You need to read the original post over, unless you don't even respect the wishes of the person asking the question. 

The English is clear. 

Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

I thought everything was going along great in this thread until the "why r/c is better" chants started. Like Greg says, if we poked our noses into the battery section like this we'd be shot at! I'm personally getting very tired of the constant product pushing by all the vested interest groups around here. 

Keith


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

Sorry. Thought the topic was "Radio Control ...". And I have said nothing about DCC. We actually have 1 guy in our club that runs DCC, and we still like him.









Come on Greg. These are, and could be even better topics, if you could just lighten up a bit. Let someone else have an opinion, or even make a statement you don't agree with without dropping the hammer on them, saying they are bashing DCC, and they are not responding to the questions the way you think they should respond.









Family feuds ... aren't they fun? I would guess if we were all face to face, things would be much different. We'd probably get along just great


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

OK. 
DCC rules. 
Unless it isn't capable of doing what you want it to do. 

Fact # 1. DCC through the track to control a Live Steamer could work and does. But only if the the loco wheels are insulated, and *MOST* Live Steamers are not. 

Fact # 2. DCC powered by batteries in a Live Steamer could also work. The radios may or may not work in a Live Steam environment. Has anyone actually done it? 

Fact # 3. A battery DCC solution is expensive compared to the more common Digital Proportional Stick type 2.4 GHz radios. 

Succinct and to the point. N'est-pas?


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By zubi on 17 Jan 2010 05:26 PM 
Tony, The awful truth is, that most live steamers do not want remote control of any sort... Best, Zubi 

Zubi. For once you are correct. 
I was of course referring to those Live Steamers who choose to R/C their pride and joy. 

I didn't spell that out, so I stand corrected.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Cougar Rock Rail on 17 Jan 2010 06:01 PM 
I thought everything was going along great in this thread until the "why r/c is better" chants started. Like Greg says, if we poked our noses into the battery section like this we'd be shot at! I'm personally getting very tired of the constant product pushing by all the vested interest groups around here. 

Keith 

Keith.

That is what this thread is about.
R/C with DCC. 
The second line of the original post reads:

*"I get some time under my belt with the 0-6-0 I want to fit the GS4 with radio control and will likely do same with the 0-6-0". *

As it happens the only way you can get that to happen for all Live Steam locos is with battery powered R/C.
So I would thank you to get the facts right.

BTW. If you are including me amongst your (so called) "vested interest groups", you are mistaken.
I have no real interest in promoting one method of control of Live Steam locos over another.
I did have once because I made a digital R/C system for Live Steam, but not any more.

I do happen to sell 2.4 Ghz stick radios in Australia. 
I would be equally delighted to promote battery powered R/C + DCC for Live Steam, once someone has demonstrated to us all that the idea is successful and cost effective in practice. Not just in theory.


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Tony, it was clear to me in the original post that the poster was totally familiar with regular r/c, so there doesn't seem to me to be a need to replay the old r/c sales pitches over and over. Pointing out that some locos don't have insulated wheels is fair game, but it should stop there. It isn't about which is cheapest, most common or even which makes the most sense. It's about running a steamer with DCC, in theory or otherwise. 
And for the record, I run my live steamers manually, but one is equipped as a digital test platform. 
Oh..and I do include you as someone having a vested interest...but then we all do, really, in that if we believe in something we tend to want to share it. 

Keith


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Keith, 
Bear in mind that this is a Live Steam forum and not the DCC one. 
It has become clear that, unless the loco wheels are insulated, then the only way you can use battery DCC is with battery R/C[/b]. Period. Then from the point of view of other interested parties reading these pages, the discussion of necessity becomes about the various forms of DCC R/C. A subject which was only briefly explored. The enquirer may very well be very conversant with stick type R/C, others may not be. So I see nothing wrong with pointing out to any one interested the other possible methods of control. Also I beg to differ that it isn't about cost. Like any discussion that involves the various forms of locomotive control, cost is ALWAYS[/b] taken into consideration.


----------



## StanleyAmes (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 17 Jan 2010 07:08 PM 
OK. 
DCC rules. 
Unless it isn't capable of doing what you want it to do. 

Fact # 1. DCC through the track to control a Live Steamer could work and does. But only if the the loco wheels are insulated, and *MOST* Live Steamers are not. 

Fact # 2. DCC powered by batteries in a Live Steamer could also work. The radios may or may not work in a Live Steam environment. Has anyone actually done it? 

Fact # 3. A battery DCC solution is expensive compared to the more common Digital Proportional Stick type 2.4 GHz radios. 

Succinct and to the point. N'est-pas? Tony 

No system or type of control rules. They all have advantages ad disadvantages.

Fact 1 - very true. I have a Pierce 2-6-0 and its wheels are insulated. In the US most Live steam is Accucraft and most to date Accucraft do not have insulated wheels. Several years back Deb and I decided to purchase a large Accucraft large steam locomotive and were writing the check when I asked about the wheels. We were most disapointed. I have been told by them that in the future they will indeed be insulated and I believe they said the K36 wheels were insulated but we will have to wait and see. Those of us that use the track for power or communication can not use locomotives that do not have insulated wheels and a live steam manufacturer wants to support that market then the manufacturers will have to have insulated wheels for their locomotives.

Fact 2 - My Live steam has RC at present, It was track power for a time but the tender wheel pickup was not up to what I desired and I did not have a hybrid drive solution. New trucks with better pickup are on the way.
The antena for the Pierce is in the tool box on the top of the tender and works well. I also have an electric Acucraft C16 that has had RC and no problem with that installation either.

Fact 3 depends. The least cost solution is manual control. After that it depends on what you are trying to accomplish and what you want to control the locomotive.

Stan Ames


----------



## Dwight Ennis (Jan 2, 2008)

I'll bet ya 10 to 1 the poor guy who originated this thread is damn sorry he asked.


----------



## zubi (May 14, 2009)

For those few who would like to control all the functions, lights, whistles and bells on their live steamers, DCC potentially makes a perfect sense. Wheel insulation depends on the market. Most UK or German outline offers insulated wheels as a standard or as an option. That includes Accucraft UK and Accucraft Germany - I believe all of their models have wheels insulated per default. Roundhouse offers wheel insulation as an option. So does Reppingen. Pearse did too. Aster provided wheel insulation on over 3000 Frank S's and some 500 C&S Moguls. Essentially, the philosophy is that these models often operate on the same track as electric locomotives, and when this is the case, it makes a perfect sense to use the same DCC to control your live steamer. The BIG advantage of this is that you do not need the most awkward component of the R/C installation and that is, the battery, usually large and difficult to place. The BIG disadvantage is that you need a power pickup. As with all things, the fundamental law of the conservation of nuisance works in this case too. Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I do have some helpful input. 

Checking the thread's original post, all those people worried about insulated wheels can relax, he states he is using the Gwire throttle, which is wireless direct to the locomotive. 

"What I'd like to realize is utiliziation of my NCE Wireless G-Cab to opererate my steamers complete with onbound functions such as lights, bells, whistles and such." 

Thus, the requested solution has nothing to do whatsoever with track power. 

Thus insulated wheels are not an issue. 

The solution would be similar to the experiments that Stan Ames did, with a G-wire receiver connected to a traditional DCC decoder. 

Unfortunately, this point was missed by most. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Perhaps that point was missed originally, but the ensuing discussion came back to it, illustrating quite clearly that yes it could be done, and done effectively. Along the way, it also examined the possibilities of doing so in a track-powered environment (possible, with conditions), and took a look at alternatives. As a result, the discussion not only has value in terms of answering the original question, but has equal value to the next newbie who comes along looking for general information on various ways he might want to consider controlling his steamer. Perhaps I'm alone in this thought, but I find such comprehensive discussions to be of a greater good to the forum community at large. I know when I'm searching, rarely are my questions exactly those of the individuals who started the topics that came up in the search. The majority of the time, my questions are answered as a result of the developing discussion. To me, that's the most fundamental value of any forum. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

I've decided to use the Zimo MX640 HO sound decoder together with QSI's G-wire RX, Hitec HS-5065MG digital/programable metal gear servos and a 6.0V NiCd RX battery pack. The servos fit nicely in the cab and offer 28oz/in torque with 5.0V input. 

The AML USRA has insulated drivers and lots of room in the tender. So straight DCC is plausible as well as wirelss DCC or RC of the decoder functions.

Thanks for all the help gents... I'll start a new thread detailing the installation in the near future.

Michael


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Let me know how it turns out Michael, will be interested in if you have to do any tricks to adjust signal levels between the G-wire and the Zimo. From what I have seen, you shouldn't have to. 

Maybe I could put some pictures of your install on my site? 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Greg, 

Look for a new thread in the future, if you want to use my info your welcome to same. 

Michael


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Will check with you first, of course, thanks Michael, sounds like a fun project. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Dwight Ennis on 18 Jan 2010 07:25 AM 
I'll bet ya 10 to 1 the poor guy who originated this thread is damn sorry he asked.













At least he did'nt ask about steam oil.


----------

