LCC - Layout Command Control

[mmyers]

Try the "Open LCB" Yahoo group. lots of messages about LCC on that group.

[peteski]

While goign through messages of a lively discussion on various standards on the Zimo Yahoo group, I ran into this comment posted by Didrik A. Voss, MMR, Manager, S&C Dept., NMRA.  You might find it interesting.

Now on to the DCC command bus. I believe a CAN bus is the best approach to controlling devices on the layout. Bridges have been designed and built that convert the packet format on a CAN bus into the packet format of LocoNet and other command buses. The bridges can also translate current bus command packets into CAN packets to operate devices (turnouts, signals, etc.) on the layout. NMRA has a development team that is working on this bus. We are calling it LCC (Layout Command Control). It is not intended to replace current proprietary command buses but rather to tie different command buses together into one system. One great thing about a CAN bus is it designed to guarantee the message gets through. Conflicts are managed at the CAN level. A master CAN chip is constantly checking Nodes to ensure messages are getting through. If not, the operator (Layout Owner) is notified. If am sure many of you already know the capabilities of a CAN bus so I will not go on.

[GaryHinshaw]

Thanks for the input peteski (I moved this over from the RRCirKits thread).   BTW, I just realized that CAN bus has not been defined anywhere in this discussion.  Here it is, for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN_bus.  It seems like a perfectly sensible starting point for the kind of applications we have.

[peteski]

Thanks Gary!  I meant to post it here - I don't know how I ended up posting it in the other thread.

[John]

I wonder sometime if we aren't making model railroading too complicated ..

[peteski]

I wonder sometime if we aren't making model railroading too complicated ..

You must be getting old! 
But I agree, we are sacrificing simplicity to add features and functionality.    But the question is "at which point it becomes too much".  Even basic DCC to just control trains on the track can sometimes behave in very strange ways causing all sorts of frustration.   Decoders not working as expected  or having "their brains blown" by some voltage spike on the layout, etc.  running trains under DC control was way much simpler. If you want to get the most of your model trains, you need to become a computer geek.

But the whole world is taking the more complex route.  Cars are now basically computers on wheels (with often complicated and non-intuitive controls), telephone has been replaced by a very complex and powerful computing device which actually doesn't work very well as an audio-communication device.  Even new appliances (washers, dryers, refrigerators, etc.) are also computers under their covers with all sorts of bells and whistles.

This also creates problems for do-it-yourselfers and independent repairman.  Repairing cars and appliances is no longer a simple task of replacing some mechanical or basic electrical component.  Now there are diagnostics to run and hidden service modes.  One fo these days we might wake up and return to simplicity. 

[GaryHinshaw]

I wonder sometime if we aren't making model railroading too complicated ..

Interesting question John.  Of course it depends entirely on what you want to get out of a layout.  In my case I am trying to make the layout fun to operate and easy to use.  DCC turnout control enables my desire to have completely digital control panels that are intuitive and operator friendly, while block detection and signalling make the operations more prototypical.  With sufficient up front research and good planning, the actual implementation of these features is really no more complicated than track planning, carpentry, track wiring, and of course scenery, structures, and trains.  Happily, I really enjoy every aspect of this great enterprise we call model railroading.   Cue the music!

[John]

My layout is pretty complicated as well .. JMRI and CATS for automation, a bunch of DS64s, SE8Cs, BDL168s, RRcircuits stuff .. etc ..  but then I grew up with electronics and such .. and do computers for a living . but I can see how daunting it could be for the guy who just wants to watch trains go around in circles when confronted with the myriad of choices

[GaryHinshaw]

Daunting yes, but entirely unnecessary for a simple layout like that.  There is no escaping the fact that a large, operating layout (like yours or mine) is a complicated beast!   That's a big part of the fun for me. 

[John]

..  but then I grew up with electronics and such .. and do computers for a living .

Of course, I also just spent $100 at Litchfield to replace blown up decoders for my Atlas C40-8Ws

[GaryHinshaw]

I thought you had sworn off Atlas locos.   

[John]

I thought you had sworn off Atlas locos.   

I did .. but I still have several that need to be DCC enabled .. I don't want to leave them on the shelf ..