Atlas GP-7/9 announcement

[Cajonpassfan]

Thank you for the responses, much appreciated!
Oh, and the truck hardwiring seems to have become the new normal....sigh.
Otto

[peteski]

Thank you for the responses, much appreciated!
Oh, and the truck hardwiring seems to have become the new normal....sigh.
Otto

Some modelers think this is an improvement, but I'm with you.  I prefer Kato-style electric pickup strips.  No wires please!

[Angus Shops]

After my experience with a simple body shell replacement I have to agree with the Peteski et al; it was so easy to sever that wire… I suppose without the expected split frame arrangement that wires are are the only other option, but really fragile with those hair thin wires.

[tehachapifan]

I also agree that it is a significantly inferior design to the tried-and-true contact strip design. I would tend to think that no matter how careful you are when handling the model, truck wires are only going to be able to bend back and forth with routine truck swing around curves a certain number of times before something breaks (probably the solder joint). Plus, now the wires could also interfere with the trucks swinging freely and, in some cases depending on wire length, arrangement, rigidity, etc., could even lead to derailments.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[bbussey]

In all the ESU sound decoders I have worked with, F8 controls the prime mover startup and shutdown when sitting still, and mutes prime mower sound when moving.

Headlight is F0, but it is also directional (behavior standard on pretty much all DCC decoders).  To make the headlights independent some  reprogramming and function remapping would have to be done (which as others mentioned is best done with LokProgrammer or with Decoder Pro.

But there is no need to actually own LokProgrammer hardware to figure out what CVs to modify to get the desired functionality.  Just install the LokProgrammer software on your Windows PC, download and open the sound project used for this loco, make the changes needed, then open the Tools menu, and select Show Changed CVs. That will show the list of all CVs (in the proper order) to be manually modified on standard programming track of any DCC system.

Yes, F0. I mis-typed.

[bigdawgks]

The redesigned frame of the new GPs is no longer able to act as a conductor for track power, so it makes sense why they have routed it from the trucks through wires. Honestly though this redesign makes assembly of the frame so much easier, so I understand completely why it's been done. I don't think there's any concern about durability of the wires. Unless you are constantly removing the trucks it should be fine. In regular use there's no more motion in the wires/joints than on those running between steam engines and their tenders, and as those only ever risk breaking during handling of the loco.

In a point against contact strip truck pickup, I've had a few older locos where such designs just didn't perform reliably. It has gotten to the point where I had to solder wires between the truck and contact strips (and boy what a nightmare that was to disassemble/reassemble). It's very easy for the contact strips to bend or even slip out of contact with the truck. You can argue it wasn't broke but it certainly wasn't perfect and hardwired pickup should in theory solve the reliability problems.

[randgust]

I'll always prefer the strips, because when they are done properly, they have at least some minimal springing force to equalize the trucks to keep them in full contact with the rails.  Wires can't do that.   That springing is one of the secrets, and when I've had people 'mess with' the Kato chassis to wire around them or jam them, bad things happen.    Track is more uneven than you think on cross-level and particularly on spirals going into superelevation.   It's a matter of electrical contact at the rail itself.   That's the difference between the original Kato designs of the GP38 and the F-units, they relied on truck frame to a pickup plate, and that worked, as long as the track was perfectly flat.   Twist it slightly, and one side looses contact.   Pickup wipers beat that.   I have one spiral going into a 15" superelevated curve that my original-run Kato F's would falter on, and they weighed a ton.   Nothing with pickup wipers hesitates.   We'll see how this does.

But after tearing apart my new Atlas, if anybody has done it right with truck wires, they have.   The trucks have plugs so you can easily pop the plug apart with tweezers and drop the trucks.  Nobody else has done that.   And the solder connection is deep inside the truck, not somewhere where it's going to be subject to flex stress, it's a pretty loose and wide open hole.  And if it does break, well, it's repairable.

I have plenty of reasons to be grumpy about the GP7 because of the relatively light tractive effort and the placement of the circuit board in the high front nose, but the wires on the trucks really aren't a proven reason to me that's a current or future problem.

[peteski]

In a point against contact strip truck pickup, I've had a few older locos where such designs just didn't perform reliably. It has gotten to the point where I had to solder wires between the truck and contact strips (and boy what a nightmare that was to disassemble/reassemble). It's very easy for the contact strips to bend or even slip out of contact with the truck.

If someone had problems with the Kato-style pickup strips then those strops were either not tensioned properly or the contact areas were no clean (or both).  Yes, those contact areas can get contaminated, but don't we all tune-up our models regularly anyway?  Especially older models.  We disassemble, clean, lube and reassemble out models,. So with the contact strips there are few more areas to pay attention to while cleaning.  Soldering a bypass wire is just a hack (in a negative sense of the word) or a kludge.  As far as the nightmare disassembly goes, the pickup strips can be removed after removing the shell and fuel tank (no further disassemble required.  If there is a need to drop the truck then just slightly loosed the screws holding the frame halves, spread them halves slightly ant the trucks just drop out. Easy peasy! As I see it, anybody who has enough dexterity to model in N scale should have no problems with this.

In normal operation problems in my experience (and as we can see others too), that still is quite reliable method of transferring power from trucks to the chassis.  The split frame design is also simple and robust.  But (just like with things like having dozen flavors of Oreos) someone had to "improve" on something that works well already.  There seems to be a lot of "jumping the shark" happening all around us.

As for the wired connections, while it is true that models are not disassembled frequently, the wires are exposed to constant flexing while the model operates on the layout.  It is not very large movement, but it does flex the wires.  They can eventually break.  But some will think this design is an improvement, while others will think it is a step backwards (remember the old N scale models with their rat's nest of easily broken wires inside?). 

[tehachapifan]

...As for the wired connections, while it is true that models are not disassembled frequently, the wires are exposed to constant flexing while the model operates on the layout.  It is not very large movement, but it does flex the wires.  They can eventually break.  But some will think this design is an improvement, while others will think it is a step backwards (remember the old N scale models with their rat's nest of easily broken wires inside?).

I also have a hunch that the issue of wires eventually breaking after normal use will start to really rear its ugly head in a few years. I hope I'm wrong! That said, I seem to have vague recall of a thread a while back where someone had a new loco with truck wires where at least one was already broken either on arrival or only after a short period of use. I know there will always be anomalies, but I fear this new design trend is going to leads to a lot of future headaches, especially for those that aren't skilled in re-soldering these wires.

[thomasjmdavis]

Yes, wires may be broken on delivery.  But...I've had a brand new loco delivered to me with a contact strip missing. Stuff happens.  The question of dependability will be settled after one company that has made units both way can compare warranty and return data from one with the same data for the other.

Yes, those contact areas can get contaminated, but don't we all tune-up our models regularly anyway?  Especially older models.  We disassemble, clean, lube and reassemble out models,.

While I am a fan of the contact strip design, and see it as preferred, I do wonder how many casual modelers regularly tune their models. In fact, many of my models have been purchased second hand. And often at a very good price, because they "don't run properly" at the time of purchase. As a rule, an hour cleaning and tuning, and they run like new.

One of the things I wonder about is whether the contact strip design, where electrical contact is through 2 bits of metal that are touching, but not 'hard wired,' performs well over the long term as the power feed for the miniature sound system that is a sound decoder. I've worked as a 'sound guy' for a several hundred concerts, not in stadiums or Vegas showrooms, but small venues like college and high school auditoriums. My observation is that tiny electrical contact issues result in static, crackle, and occasionally, shorts sufficient to knock out a system.  I wonder if the move to wired and soldered connections is not an effort to get ahead of this sort of problem- something we would not notice in 'silent' operations, but which would be noticed as unwanted noise, dropouts, or restarts on a sound equipped loco.  Certainly, those who do NOT regularly clean and maintain their locos would be at risk of poor sound quality as dirt and gunk builds up over time. Granted, all speculation on my part, but I've replaced enough pots and sliders on sound boards to believe it is a possibility.

After all...product re-design is expensive, and almost always happens for a reason- therefore the manufacturers who are moving (back) to wired trucks are probably doing so because they see it as an improvement, even if I don't. And my first suspicion is that the modelers who don't tear down their locos and clean them (or are afraid to take apart a tiny $300 loco for fear of not getting it back together again- and I do know folks who are like that), would be the first to encounter sound problems related to dirt or corrosion on the contact strips. And that leads to returns and warranty claims, which are very expensive for companies to deal with.

[bigdawgks]

@thomasjmdavis has a point. Manufacturers aren't designing their models only considering the experienced hobby veterans who may be comfortable doing maintenance on their equipment, but are also considering that the majority of users will simply send their models back to them when a problem develops. The new design of the GP reduces the likelihood of bad pickup due to bent or poorly manufactured (or missing, as someone pointed out) contact strips, it simply plugs into the board and there's overall many fewer potential points of failure. If something does break, all the warranty department has to do is unplug the old wire, grab a new truck and plug it in. That's also a far more consistent repair than trying to troubleshoot and fix poor reliability with contact strips and also loose circuit boards (another common point of failure in split frame designs).Overall I 100% get why this is an improvement from their perspective.

[dem34]

I mean. That is the answer if you ask. Atlas started doing it because a good chunk of warranty repairs were just oxidized or dirty wipers from models sitting sideways on shelves, in a box, on a layout for a few months with no run time.

I hate electronics installs, I rarely do decoders. But I am my club's DCC guy because in a room of 20 guys I'm the only one comfortable taking the shells off my locomotives, even though I consider that a basic part of maintenance on stuff I buy from shows.

[peteski]

One of the things I wonder about is whether the contact strip design, where electrical contact is through 2 bits of metal that are touching, but not 'hard wired,' performs well over the long term as the power feed for the miniature sound system that is a sound decoder. I've worked as a 'sound guy' for a several hundred concerts, not in stadiums or Vegas showrooms, but small venues like college and high school auditoriums.

After all...product re-design is expensive, and almost always happens for a reason- therefore the manufacturers who are moving (back) to wired trucks are probably doing so because they see it as an improvement, even if I don't. And my first suspicion is that the modelers who don't tear down their locos and clean them (or are afraid to take apart a tiny $300 loco for fear of not getting it back together again- and I do know folks who are like that), would be the first to encounter sound problems related to dirt or corrosion on the contact strips. And that leads to returns and warranty claims, which are very expensive for companies to deal with.

Sure, audio equipment is quite sensitive to any contact problems (especially in the low level microphone circuits), but here we are discussing the power feed to the decoder.  Sort of equivalent to the 120V AC power feed for those concert audio amps.

Using wires at the truck to chassis connection eliminates one point of metal-to-metal contacts, but then there is the axle point to bearing cup connection, the PC board to motor connection, the PC board to speaker connection, and even the track to wheel tread connection. None of those connections are soldered - just metal touching metal. By what you mentioned, those all would be causing problems.

Over the years (since Kato came out with their U30C loco using this type of design)  I have not experienced excessive number of problems with the pickup strips contact.    Just wiring the truck to the chassis (or directly to the PC board) seems unnecessary, but I have no real say in that.  It is what it is - IMO, not an optimal design.

Unfortunately, many product "improvements" don't actually improve anything, and sometimes are even steps backwards.  Some of this could be due to the Dunning Kruger effect 

[thomasjmdavis]

Sure, audio equipment is quite sensitive to any contact problems (especially in the low level microphone circuits), but here we are discussing the power feed to the decoder.  Sort of equivalent to the 120V AC power feed for those concert audio amps.

Yes, and as you are no doubt aware, (concert level) audio equipment uses 120V AC power feeds that, whenever possible, are completely isolated from the other power feeds in the auditorium, and have separate grounds, in an effort to avoid any electrical interference from lighting, HVAC and other equipment in use in the facility.  And one of the very first things you check if you encounter pops, static or "fuzzy" audio is the 120V plug to be sure that the connection into the outlet is tight, and that  there is no kink or damage to the cord that might have damaged the stranded wire inside.

That said, as I said in my opening sentence earlier, I agree that contact strips are, overall, a better design. But my gut tells me (that is, IMHO) that the 'step backwards' to wires is driven by sound decoders, and the warranty issues with 'bad sound' driven by dirty or corroded or loose or bent or improperly re-installed contact strips.

[peteski]

Yes, and as you are no doubt aware, (concert level) audio equipment uses 120V AC power feeds that, whenever possible, are completely isolated from the other power feeds in the auditorium, and have separate grounds, in an effort to avoid any electrical interference from lighting, HVAC and other equipment in use in the facility.  And one of the very first things you check if you encounter pops, static or "fuzzy" audio is the 120V plug to be sure that the connection into the outlet is tight, and that  there is no kink or damage to the cord that might have damaged the stranded wire inside.

That said, as I said in my opening sentence earlier, I agree that contact strips are, overall, a better design. But my gut tells me (that is, IMHO) that the 'step backwards' to wires is driven by sound decoders, and the warranty issues with 'bad sound' driven by dirty or corroded or loose or bent or improperly re-installed contact strips.

Yes, the audio amps, mixers, etc. used for concerts are quite sensitive to static due to poor connections and 60Hz hum/buzz from AC power.  Shielding and proper grounding is very important.  But while sound decoders also produce sound, to me it is like comparing apples to oranges.  There is no milli-Volt level microphones used, which are very sensitive to any sorts of interference.

ON a decoder the sound signals are higher level, and routed through traces on the decoder's PC board between the microcontroller, which has an internal Digital/Analog converter (DAC) producing line-level audio and a D-class amplifier which then drives the speaker. The poor contact with the rail (anywhere between the track and the decoder) affects the entire decoder (including its sound generating circuit). If the interruption is long enough for the on-decoder keep-alive caps to discharge, the entire decoder will "reboot", causing an interruption in the model's operation. 

I guess when you look at the big picture, regardless of the mode of failure, the bottom line is that the model misbehaves.  This happens with silent decoders too, but since the sounds decoders also go silent, the problem is more apparent in sound decoders.    I guess we are stuck with the new and improved design.