# G wire TX



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Hey All,
Is the QSI GWIRE PRO CAB WIRELESS THROTTLE available? Has anyone tried it out how does it compare to Airwire?


----------



## Truthman (Dec 13, 2008)

I too am waiting. I hear it is supposed to be quite a bit better than Air Wire and less expensive!


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

I emailed Tony's Trains 2 weeks ago and again today but getting no reply. Hopefully soon or I'm going with the original Airwire. 
Later


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

yeah someone let us know I know a guy who might sell off all the airwire stuff he has if it works better!!!!!!hee hee LOL The Regal Frustrated in West. Ne. 

Truly I guess no gripes other than the range issue i'm having other than that It works for me.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

That throttle will be manufactured by NCE. I talked to them several weeks ago about this. 

It was unintentionally leaked prematurely. 

NCE has a policy of not announcing products until they have firm delivery dates. There is no firm date at this time. 

I have NCE equipment and am very happy with the quality and especially the support from their team and specifically the support they have given me. 

So wait for the announcement from NCE. I have the same form factor throttles for my NCE wireless cabs that run my DCC track powered system. 

I will purchase one just as soon as they are available. I think it will be a killer cab for all AirWire systems. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## K27_463 (Jan 2, 2008)

I tried out the demo unit at the ECLSTS. There is only ONE unit in existence, and the show unit was it.

Jonathan


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Got a reply from Tony's Trains they are saying 3 weeks for release. K27 how did you like it? 
Later Jason


----------



## rpc7271 (Jan 2, 2008)

There is a complete listing of it on the QSI Solutions web site: http://www.qsisolutions.com/news/nce-gwire-procab-021709.html Can't wait to order mine.


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Thanks rpc, can you guys tell me the cheapest place to get airwire tx & rx. New or used any know someone selling a used tx. 
Later Jason


----------



## rpc7271 (Jan 2, 2008)

I would wait until the new QSI GWire ProCab hits the streets. If it works as well as I hope I will be selling my Airwire throttles/transmitters. I suspect a lot of people will.


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

I'll take the throttle. Looking at the new Gwire Procab I don't think I'll like the speed control would rather have a knob vs. the little roller and push buttons. 
Later


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yep some people prefer a knob. I was unsure about this when I bought my NCE system, but with the thumbwheel, one hand operation is easy, you need two hands to use the knob... one to hold the cab, and the other to hold the knob. 

It's all a matter of how well it works for you. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

This was the first I heard of the new throttle. Definetely on my buy list for use with my Airwire equipped locos.
http://tonystrains.com/tonystips/2009/021709.htm


----------



## rpc7271 (Jan 2, 2008)

What I notice is that the new GWire ProCab by NCE looks a lot like th new TE from Aristocraft and the regular Throttle from NCE. Not that I care much.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually, the NCE cabs pre-date the new TE by about 10 years... 

But, I don't see the similarity at all... one looks like an old cell phone with just numbers, the other has many keys labelled for bell, whistle, consisting, speed, loco number, etc. 



Old cordless phone case: Custom designed throttle for trains:

















I showed the procab without the wireless, they have the same buttons...


21 buttons/controls versus 35.... 


Regards, Greg 


Greg


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

No question, the NCE transmitter/throttle has more buttons with specific designations. The alternative with just the numbers does offer a little more flexibility if that is important to someone. My observation is that the NCE does more with specific buttons, for example consisting. The Revolution is more a menu driven operation with the larger LCD screen. I guess it is which you prefer, menu driven operations or specific buttons. I can see merit to both techniques, although personally I kind of like the menu driven operation.

Ed


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually Ed, with an LCD screen you can ALWAYS add menus, the NCE has some menus, and the TE RELIES on menus because it does not have "dedicated" buttons. 

It boils down to how users like to use the system, and how many "levels" of menus you have to go through to "get to" your function. 

On the NCE you need no menus to select a loco... that is NOT true on the TE. 

On the NCE you need no menus to create or add to or delete a loco from a consist, on the TE it is a complex procedure and involves reprogramming of the loco. 

How about ringing the bell or blowing the whistle on the TE? Even someone who has never used an NCE can see how to do it on the NCE. 

No, I strongly disagree, I think that Aristo missed the boat here, and added more features, but "hid them" in menus, and overall make using these features more difficult. 

I've been in engineering since 1969, most of the time in software for consumer devices... you CANNOT have a lot of features without complicating the user interface.... you either have more buttons or more menus. 

I'll take the buttons in this one. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

I guess you and I will just have to agree to disagree, Greg. I've been in engineering since 1960, working in electronics and software controlled equipment, and I like the menus better than a myriad of buttons. When I want to activate a horn or bell, I just push one button. And once locomotives on the Revolution TE are set up for consists, adding them and deleting them is a simple process too.

Guess that is why both versions are offered, to take care of different preferences. One isn't better or worse than the other, just different - different strokes for different folks!


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Edit... Oops wrong thread! Post deleted...

Edit again... Here is what I wanted to say in this thread...

I like well thought out logical menus and enough buttons to make them worthwhile. 

I have a new digital TV that has neither! In one menu some buttons do one thing and in another menu the same buttons do something different. Obviously different sections of the software were written by different programmers and none had a clear understanding of what the others were doing to produce a cohesive uniform human interface.

I also have a new security camera that has nice menus, but I cannot get from one to another without working up and down long trains of entries and I find that I want to alter two settings to see how they interact and I have to change one, then go to another menu several levels up and then back down to see how it interacted with another setting, or switch to another entry to see the result. PAINFUL.

What little bit I have seen done with the various toy train controls leaves me wondering just what the person that created them was thinking. Traversing up and down menus to get to commonly desired controls and at the same time disabling access to some other control is not helpful. Having to remember which train is which engine number based on which LED is lit on the control means I can select to stop the wrong train. If I am wanting to blow the whistle on one train I might accidently reverse some other train if I get confused on menu entries and selected trains... 

But on the other hand, if I want to control many functions on multiple trains with one button for each function of each train that would require an awful lot of buttons to fit on something that I can cradle in the fingers of one hand and control with just my thumb wrapped around it.


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

C.T., I think you have summed it up pretty well. There is a balance between menu complexity and number of buttons. THis is where each individual's preferences comes to play. Most of the Beta users on the ARisto Revolution have liked the balance on this unit. Others may not. As I was saying to Greg, this doesn't make one right and the other wrong; it just means we each pick the one we are most comfortable with.

Ed


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

I'll cast my vote for the first one that comes out with a model that consists of a genuine old style striped locomotive engineer's cap, with integrated brain wave sensors connected to a belt-clip transmitter that supports full duplex communication, and has a flip down heads-up display attached to the underside of the caps bill. That way all you'd need to do is think what you want and it would be done, not to mention having both hands free.


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

I think I will reserve my comments until I have one to play with. Other than the Beta testers for Aristo,neither one is on the market to the masses yet so all this back and forth seems a little premature. I have both types of Airwire transmitters and looking forward to this new one by NCE. I have one preordered.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Looks like you may have to wait longer than you anticipated. Everyone is backing off till the economy picks up. later RJD


----------



## Jerryj (Jul 29, 2008)

I have the new NCE on order also I did not like the airwire I had. I like to know why AC did not make the new TX work with the QSI PnP make for their Eng. 
Jerry


----------



## Bill Swindell (Jan 2, 2008)

Aristo-Craft claims their new system is better than DCC







. That is why the none of their stuff works with the DCC capable decoders.


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

Bill, Aristo really hasn't said they think their system is better than DCC. What they said, as far as I can find, is that the speed control can be made in 1000 increments, which is "far more than is available in DCC". If anyone can find any other reference to being "better than DCC" I would really like to read it, because I can't find it.

As far as working with DCC decoders, there is no question, it is not a DCC system. Just like the earlier 27 MHz system was a unique radio control system, so is the new Revolution Train Engineer. Granted they included a lot of features that DCC provides. Greg doesn't like the way they implemented them, and that is fine. It is interesting though, there must be some market for the product. As far as I can tell, of the 100 beta test users, myself included, everyone has found it very easy to install and is very happy with what it does. The directions are well thought out and easy to follow, and if you look at the details of what it promises, it delivers on those promises.

Ed


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Ed, yes they have, and Lewis made the statement "beyond DCC".... Read your insider for more claims. He also put down DCC many times, and that BEMF was not done well by DCC people, and on and on. 

Read the "45 reasons thing".... it is on pages 9 and 10 of your nov/dec 2008 Aristo Insider. 

You especially need to read reasons 1,3,4,6,7,24,33,45, which specifically address the TE in comparison to DCC... 

You need to go back and read your forum. I left there because I could not agree to play the game. I was put on probation, then given the opportunity to come back if I never said anything bad. 

Read your forum on what Lewis has said. He has publicly stated that his target is DCC. Some of his statements to are patently absurd: (from the above referenced insider) 

7. Long trails of wiring to the track are not necessary as all transmission is through the air. Have you ever looked at the miles of wiring under a DCC HO layout? 
33. Speed settings are programmable up to 1,024 steps for incremental control beyond anything conceived in DCC and allows for totally prototypical switching techniques. 

Ed, maybe Lewis thinks that he is "beyond DCC", but not many others do, based on facts... The new system does a FEW things LIKE DCC... 

Regards, Greg


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

Greg, DCC has 1024 incremental steps in speed control???

Also, I still stand on my second paragraph above.

Ed


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

No, although many DCC decoders interpolate the 128 steps to 1024... but I will not *CLAIM *that these are "really" 1024.... 

Can you REALLY see the 1024 steps from your control, i.e. can you "command" the speed to 357? 1011? 36? .... but the absurd statement is "beyond anything conceived in DCC" and many others.... The control of a motor is way more than just the number of speed steps, it is BEMF, start, stop, mid voltages, momentum BOTH accelerating and decelerating, and custom speed curves where the "voltage" can be set for each step... and there is MORE... (there are 3 PID parameters you can set in 4 speed ranges on a QSI, for example).

This capability in DCC makes the Aristo TE look like something from the Flintstones if you look at the big picture of all the things you can do..... 
*
Look at the big picture, and all the slamming he has done while comparing his system to DCC*... Miles of wiring? That is pure c**p, completely untrue, misleading, etc... 

Come on Ed, you haven't been drinking the Kool Aid all the time have you?









Don't make me pull more quotes from the forum... it will just be embarrassing... all those statements are _still _on the Aristo site... (I figure I do this enough times they will be deleted... of course I have copies)

Here's another DCC slam from a post by Lewis in January: " Our plan is to add a “Cruise Control” shortly, so that the trains maintain an even speed going up or down grades. This is the equivalent result of back EMF control, except that it works. " 

So he is saying back EMF control does not work, and *his *cruise control does, even though it's not in the product. 

Absurd... just whacked out... I suppose you will now tell me that ALL the other manufacturers that use BEMF are _wrong _and Lewis is right? They should all just junk their electronics, fire their engineers? BEMF is a communist conspiracy?

There's a ton of this junk Ed... a ton... you don't have to agree, but argue this point with me, and I'll use Lewis' own words to prove you wrong. He is after DCC and constantly compares his system to DCC. 

Greg 

p.s. Ed, you were the first to reply to the post above... you MUST have read this stuff.


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

Greg, your lack of objectivity with regards to Ariso definitely detracts from your presentation. You are so intent on discrediting Lewis Polk and Aristocraft you look for "lies" in everything that is posted.

Let's talk about the Nov-Dec. Insider that you referred to, and the 45 reasons why one should love the Revolution Train Engineer.

1. There is no reference to DCC per se. This is an argument that was used for the earlier Train Engineers - and touts the advantages of not using track power. One can agree or disagree with it.

3. What is the frequency of the signals going through track for systems such as DCC. It isn't 2.4 GHz, is that several hundreds times faster?? Is it necessary? I don't know, and don't care, but it is definitely a feature of the system.

4. I think that the statement that no power converter or base station is required is correct, whether you are using DCC or DC or any kind of track power.

6. You obviously don't need CV's or other codes. This is true. Is this a good thing?? Well that is certainly arguable.

7. Track wiring definitely is not required. A marketer thinks this is a good thing. Is this exagerated? Could be, but so what???

24. No special programming track section is required - true. Does any other system require this?? Don't know, but I certainly don't see any reference to DCC here.

33. Speed settings are definitely in .1% increments, and yes, you can select any one of them by scrolling up to the desired one. Is this necessary? Is this better than BEMF?? Don't know, but in 33 he doesn't say anthing about that, just that the TE has more steps than DCC. You have agreed that is true.

45. I don't think there is anything untrue in this paragraph. Again, he isn't talking specifically about DCC - doesn't even mention it. 

Most of these statements could be comparing the new TE to older TE's or basic track power, other than the comments about CV's and incremental speed control.

You are so busy trying to bash Aristo that you just distort everything that comes out of Aristo. I know you say, and may believe that you aren't bashing Aristo, but you do with almost every statement you make, and you will have a very difficult time convincing me otherwise. Do I think Aristo is perfect, or the end all of all end alls? Of course not. They screw up as often as any other company and sometimes maybe more so, but in my limited experience they own up to it and let it all hang out, which gives you lots of opportunities to jump on them. Sometimes you are correct, and sometimes like in the above paragraphs you overshoot the mark

Ed


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Ed, I'll send you the information by private email if you are open to understanding.. but I suspect you are not. 

1. There is no reference to DCC per se. This is an argument that was used for the earlier Train Engineers - and touts the advantages of not using track power. One can agree or disagree with it. 
Ed, is there any other system that sends signals through the rails? DCC is the main target. The MTH DCS system does also, but which of the two do you think he is talking about? Yes, the word DCC is not in the sentence, but that is what he is talking about. 

3. What is the frequency of the signals going through track for systems such as DCC. It isn't 2.4 GHz, is that several hundreds times faster?? Is it necessary? I don't know, and don't care, but it is definitely a feature of the system. 
No, you are being bamboozled... the frequency of the signal is not necessarily the true data rate of information. You have a cordless phone? Is your voice 2.4 GHz? No. A higher frequency does not mean a higher data rate. This is misleading. In wireless technology you have to send extra data as error correction due to the wireless losses. Here's one you will understand... wireless computer interfaces, 802.11g, it transmits at 2.4 Gigahertz... that is NOT the rate of data, it is not 2.4 billion bits of data through the system, it is 54 megabits, but there is a 50% overhead in the data packets for error correction, so you have 27 megabits, but it turns out it is half duplex, so the true data rate is really half of that... 

So, the entire thing about 2.4 GHz being faster is misleading... not to mention what the real data rate needed is... but it is all pointed at DCC, the only major system with the signal over the rails. 

4. Is a correct assessement of DCC vs a system that no centralized control, and the TE system costs more per loco with sound.. but it is a correct comparision. 

6. Is a correct characterization, DCC uses CV's... in the TE system the data is stored where you can only get it through menus... really same difference... but DCC uses CV's 

7. YES IT IS EXAGGERATED!!! MILES OF WIRES?? It is a lie, you only need 2 wires to run DCC... so he tells a lie and many people believe it because he owns a company. 

24. Yes DCC has a programming track, but it is hardly ever used anymore, virtually all locos can be programmed on the rails, WITHOUT drilling a hole in your loco and using a "binding switch"... but DCC has a programming track... 

33. I objected, and was very CLEAR to what I objected about... and he compares it to DCC, in fact "beyond anything conceived in DCC" .... not an attack? huh? 

45. It is a comparision to DCC again... 


Ed the point was that (here it is again):* Look at the big picture, and all the slamming he has done while comparing his system to DCC *
*
I listed the points where he compared to DCC... I did not say they were all untrue (only about half)*... . 

Here are *YOUR *words Ed: Bill, Aristo really hasn't said they think their system is better than DCC. 

You stick to this statement? After all those items above? If you cannot admit that this is what he is comparing to in this document and others, and all he has said publicly, then no amount of reasoning will help you.

Greg


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

I emailed Lewis about it's dcc comparisons and how revolution is better for people wanting dcc type functions. Giong on 2 weeks and no reply. Sent another about 3 day's ago and nothing from aristo.


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

Hmm, this Revolution TE discussion can go on for ever, but we certainly have derailed this thread. I apologize to the originator of the thread.

Ed


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Ed,
This did get a bit derailed.

Gregg,
When it comes to Aristo,you do tend to go a bit overborad. 

ALL I WANT IS MY NEW G-WIRE CAB. And any more info on it. I don't' care about all the other garbage talk.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Does not take much to derail a subject. one word about a System form AC and all goes south from there. Yikes. One thing I can say is Lewis did make some bold statements about his system which he was way off base. Later RJD


----------



## Truthman (Dec 13, 2008)

I personally have no interest in the Revolution system ESPECIALLY since I am INVESTED on QSI sound/decoders and WILL use battery R/C. Since I have already begun the process of converting all my ARISTO units to QSI and the new Revolution doesn't support then I am not going to look back or switch to something new now. QSI, NCE, G WiRE and BATTERY for me.


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

AMEN BROTHER!!!!!!! The REGAL WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE NCE

I THINK THE TE STANDS FOR TRULY ENTERTAINING


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

So reading all of this I conclude: 

Aristo TE Revolution = Proprietary (Buy my system and you are hooked on me and my decoder)


DCC = Open architecture (Open is just that... decoder open architecture, pick a supplier as you see fit and enjoy the opportunity to dump one if you don't like it. )


MTH / DCS = Proprietary (Buy my system and you are hooked on me and my decoder)


Battery = will run either DCC or DCS or Aristo TE onboard decoders and locos. using manufacturer proprietary controllers. Power supply is on-board.



Looking for to be corrected. 

thx

gg


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

That's the way I read it, GG.

Ed


----------



## GG (Jan 1, 2009)

Posted By eheading on 04/12/2009 5:57 PM
That's the way I read it, GG.

Ed





Very cool, at last I am sorting out this blinking technology mess. 

I will stick with MTH for now and slowly integrate DCC for flexibility. 


Room for both. 

And yes apply KISS here. My biggest issue once the railway is set up is the "garden" that will be the crowning glory. 



gg


edit: You guys are really going to laugh at my install of track.... soon to be posted on a separate forum...







oops... thread...


----------



## eheading (Jan 5, 2008)

GG Some of us would NEVER laugh at anyone's track laying!!

Ed


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Derail the thread I don't care. It's good amusement. -


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Anymore updates on a release date for the new Pro Cab?


----------



## veejo (Apr 16, 2009)

Does the NCE Gwire work on 2.4 GHZ ? If I get one into Australia, I'd hate to find it works on a reserved licensed spectrum. 
Are frequecny hopping, so at a club you can have a few of these, turn them on and no clashes? 
Do you bind the receiver to a transmitter, or are is free for all and it depends on the DCC addresses to determine what locos are controlled by what controller (a crash waiting to happen)? 
I'm thinking of getting one as I already have a power cab for my HO, and then I can use the power cab pro with gwire as a normal dcc power cab iff I want. 
I seem to read alot of threads about receiver voltage problems, are the airwire receivers better then the gwire receivers ? 

Is there a better controller tha the NCE based upon a bangs per buch and also the cost of receivers, eg "toatl cost of ownership"


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Both the AirWire and NCE systems work on the 900Mhz band which is a telephone frequency in Australia. 
As I understand it, it is not legal to use them here.


----------



## veejo (Apr 16, 2009)

I was afraid of it being 900Mhz, I remember reading it somewhere but wasn't sure, as I reckon why would somebody make something that would live in a licensed radio spectrum, instead of using 2.4Ghz like they do for radio controlled model airplanes and cars, eg companies such as Futaba, JR/Spektrum, etc. Coming from the model airplane and car arena, this RC train control gear doesn't seem to be evolving as fast as othe RC hobby markets.
Love my DCC in HO, and hope for my G scale to be the same .


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Whether you actually need to go with 2.4 Ghz depends on exactly what you want to do with your Large Scale trains. 

You could of course wait until the new Crest REVOLUTION R/C becomes available. 
That may be perfectly adequate for your purposes. After all, the maker claims it goes "Beyond DCC". 
Or, you could use the 2.4 Ghz Futaba/Hi-Tec/JR Spektrum R/C to run your trains. 

Perhaps working out exactly what it is you want to do and using that as the basis for your decision on the type of control system that suits you, would be advisable.


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

YouTube - how to behave on an internet forum LOL nuff said


----------



## veejo (Apr 16, 2009)

Don't really need to go beyond DCC, just DCC with no wires. DCC has enough flexiblity for me to control lights, sound, speed, etc,etc. It would just be nice to have a system that uses the RF to just link the controller to the train, that way I could use whatever DCC decoder I want, add what sound card I want. AND hopefully be able to use the controller and decoder as DCC off the track, if I'm on a track that is clean enough. DCC decoders are an established technology, the last thing I want is for a company to develop somthing new and I buy serial number 00003. I like the idea of the NCE becasue I can still use it as a normal controller without the Gwire, so the concept is good. But if it isn't 2.4Ghz, or doesn't allows me to use a decoder of my choice eg add sound card of my choice with DCC codes, then .......... 
The problem with using the futaba or spektrum or JR (although they seem to have the RF bit sorted out) is that they are made for cars, planes, etc, so the number of chanels, and their type is more targetted towards servo controls.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually my system works on 900 MHz and I could not be more pleased.... 900 MHz used to be full of "stuff" like cordless phones, wireless cameras, etc. 

Now, all the cordless phones are 2.4 gig or 5.x gig, the laptop wireless is 2.4 Gig, my bluetooth headset and other bluetooth stuff is 2.4 gig, my wireless camera is 2.4 gig, and my microwave emits interference around 2.4 gig... and no more cellular near that freq in my area. 

so, 900 MHz is perfect for me, there's nothing else on it in my neighborhood, and there's tons of stuff on 2.4. Sure, there's 10 channels, and all kinds of spread spectrum techniques, but there is no substitute for "clear air".... progress has really helped me! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

900 mhz is working perfectly for me--lots of range, reception has been faultless


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

OK Veejo. 
In that case you have a problem. 
As I understand it 900 Mhz is not legal for use in OZ and the only proprietary 2.4 GHz system designed for trains is not DCC compatible.


----------



## veejo (Apr 16, 2009)

I've seen a few sets opertaing at 900Mhz, it's popular, possibly becasue of the LINX chipsets (wonder what chipset gwire use on the receiver ??). I think there is a small slither of spectrum in the 900 in Australia that is unlicensed, as I've see equipment of use in data collection inside buildings, not sure, but 2.4Ghz seems easier.
Yes, it's hard to beat clean air. I think it's more a licensing issue than interference, some people would say it works use it, others would form a committee and only use approved devices. They're all digital signals anyway (not like an AM carrier type interference), eg your cordless phone, radio control, and wirelss LAN all work OK together.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The Gwire is Linx: 










Regards, Greg


----------



## gjoynes (Apr 13, 2009)

I on the other hand have a completely different reason to go to Gwire. I waited for some time till the TE Revolution came out. I was very disappointed to hear that the QSI modules were not supported. That was what forced my decision to go to Gwire though I have no remote controls at present. I know the difference between good sound quality and poor sound quality, and for me Dalee does not make the grade. So while there may be a huge difference for some over menus or buttons neither of those things drove my decision. While I have been a fan of AC for a long time and purchase a lot of their products, I will take myself down a different path for remote control. I have never owned any DCC but am looking forward to learning more about it. Any Suggestions are appreciated.


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

The NCE G-Wire cab has been released. There was one retailer at the BTS that had them at the show. Our own Stan Cedarleaf has one. I should have one in a few days and will report back after using it for awhile with my Airwire installs.


----------



## gjoynes (Apr 13, 2009)

Thanks Paul. Looking forward to your report.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Note there is a special CV programming mode that "understands" the QSI index registers and programs them for you, saves a lot of time. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## gjoynes (Apr 13, 2009)

Thanks Greg.


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Hey Guys, 
Anyone want to trade a Airwire T9000 TX ,a RX either Airwire or Gwire, and maybe a QSI decoder? I have a Conrail SD45 to trade. Think it's been ran maybe 30 mins. Or maybe 2 USAT GP7/9'S used is good.
Thx Bull


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Also have the electronics from a Aristo GP40 that I'll include. 
Bull


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

$180.00 Last I looked at RLD. $189 at John's Hobbies. Check em out. The Regal


----------



## bull (Jan 28, 2008)

Hey Regal, 
I say them on RLD. I was hopeing to trade the SD45 for the Airwire stuff money's tight. It's to big for what I am planning to have when I can build my layout decided to have just 4 axle power. I figured some of you guys got the knew G-wire TX and would posibly want to part with T9000 TX and RX or 2. 
Bull


----------



## rmcintir (Apr 24, 2009)

Posted By blueregal on 18 Apr 2009 10:23 AM 
YouTube - how to behave on an internet forum LOL nuff said  

Is it me or did this board just add an extra star to everyone that had theirs maxed out? Love this video, sometimes there is a little troll in all of us...


----------

