0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
overhead cameras in the ceiling tracking movements of the trains.
The posts on here are bringing out the asshats. With their asinine no train of though simpleton minds. They are just happy to play with their Brio Thomas the train sets.
How about this then. Go back and reread ALL of my post and responses. Because I have already explained What you are asking. Here's a hint read my response from dem34 and Conrad
The OP seems to be saying that he wants a location system "based on the old current detectors". So, he would be able to tell which block had current, but not where in that block the current was being drawn. If he wants to add a current detector to each drop in each block, he would still need to be able to figure out how much current through each drop means a locomotive is near that drop, because the bus and rails provide multiple current paths to any locomotives in the block. And, there could be more than one train in the large blocks typically used by DCC layouts. Even with sophisticated computer analysis of currents through drops, there is no way that the length of a train could be accurately checked with such a system, even with lighted caboose or end-of-train resistors.Even with locos and caboose/EOT cars transponding their identities through the rails, there is no way to tell where those items are located on the tracks.If we start thinking about some completely separate train location technology, like a mini GPS system, that would need to have really good positioning capability to distinguish which of two or more parallel tracks a train was occupying. Overhead cameras with the type of computer assisted item image tracking that is being used for the aircraft-based crime-fighting areal surveillance system being tested in Baltimore would probably work, but I would not expect that to be anything like "cheap" or simple for a layout operator to set up.This really says something about how much diverse information humans use to operate a layout smoothly, using eyes and ears and logic to integrate all we can can see and hear. Trying to duplicate that with mechanical/electrical automation is like trying to build a prototype positive train control system in miniature. And might cost something like 1/160 what the prototype guys are spending to do that, now.
Current detectors is not the actual design, it is based from this due to computer response and sensing commands and movement on the track. Too much overkill with overhead cameras. Yes, this can be expensive. Though it will be more of a program/software than hardware. Yes, it is based on the positive train control system in miniature no doubt! 1/160 is my speed anyway.
The "asshats" on here actually gained their reputations by making things that work. Saying that people who don't accept your unsupported pronouncements are "asinine no train of though simpleton minds" is not going to cut it here.I challenged you to explain how what you propose would actually work, without referring me to something to read elsewhere [that really doesn't answer the question, either] and you failed the test. All you did was substitute an insult for the requested explanation. A sure sign of somebody who really does not understand what he is talking about. So, please don't bother to ask us to throw money into some Kickstarter project based on your pronouncements. We (at least some of us, not me) just went through that, and learned a lesson about people who talk big with no ability to actually produce.
But how is the response being handled? Under normal circumstances all decoders often do is just transit basic ID data back with most operation accomplished through passively decoding signal data from the base current. How does that data become a readable and trackable sensing command?
Author
Topic: DCC++ to a new level (Read 2918 times)
