One or two DCC programming questions

[keeper]

I have heard of another European DCC manufacturer in Netherlands: Digikeijs

Yes, another one would be Doehler & Haass. DM Toys has quite a seletion.

https://doehler-haass.de

[rodsup9000]

I have heard of another European DCC manufacturer in Netherlands: Digikeijs

Iron Planet Hobbies in Springfield Mo is the US importer of Digikeijs. I've though about getting a DR5000 command station and play around with it. All the CVP stuff (10 tethered, 16 radio throttles, throttle receivers, boosters) I have is supposed to work with it.   

[peteski]

Looking at the clock, are you ever sleeping? 

No!  I'm a Bot, remember?  Not a real human. 

[peteski]

Yes, another one would be Doehler & Haass. DM Toys has quite a seletion.

https://doehler-haass.de

I know they make decoders, but do they make a complete DCC system?

[keeper]

I know they make decoders, but do they make a complete DCC system?

Ah yes, you're right. They have decoders and other modules but also a decoder programmer. It seems they don't have a command station or something like that.

[keeper]

I know they make decoders, but do they make a complete DCC system?

Like C3PO?
 

Only joking.

[peteski]

Like C3PO?
 

Only joking.

Exactly, but I was programmed to be a little more snarky.    Just never compare me to Alexa! 

[rodsup9000]

I know they make decoders, but do they make a complete DCC system?

 Hey Pete
 The Digikeijs DR 5000 command station is pretty neat and not all that expensive. You need to check it out

[peteski]

Thanks Rod!
I'm not looking for one at this time (no layout, and I already own the dedicated QSI, ZIMO, and ESU programmers, along with my trusty NCE Power Cab).  That's all I need for the DCC installations and experimentation.

I just wanted to mention Digikeijs DCC to Thomas, since he lives in Germany and he mentioned that American DCC systems (well Digitrax) are rather pricey there.  I didn't do any research, but I have heard the name on other forums during discussions about European DCC.

[jdcolombo]

To sort of get back to the main topic:

Maybe we need a consist command wish list.

Here are some things I'd like a Command Station to do re: consists

1.  Know what engines are in a consist and which one is the front engine and which one is the rear engine and the order of the engines in the consist (Front, middle, rear; if more than 3 engines, Front, M1, M2, etc., Rear).  Ditch reliance on CV19 for consists.

2.  By default, automatically address headlight (F0) and Bell/Horn sound commands (F1 and F2) to the front engine only.  Invent some way to tell the decoder of the F engine NOT to turn on the rear light on the F engine if the consist is in reverse (we might need to tell engine and decoder manufacturers to ditch the automatic headlight reversing behavior, which is not prototypical.  Assign the headlight to F0 and the rear light to a different function key - I'll nominate F3.  Then the rear light on the front engine of a consist would not come on automatically when you put the consist in reverse).

3.  If an engine is dropped from a consist, automatically adjust the front and rear units if needed.  For example, in a consist with F, M1, M2, R, if R is dropped from the consist, M2 automatically becomes R.  If the front engine is dropped, M1 automatically becomes F.

4.  Have a "consist reverse" button so that Engines F and R are swapped (for runaround moves).  E.g., you decouple the consist from the train, you can press the "Consist Reverse" button, and now the headlight, bell and horn commands are automatically addressed to what used to be the rear engine, but now is the front engine. 

5.  Be able to specify at the command station level commands that should be sent to all engines in a consist, so you don't have to specifically program CVs 21 and 22 for such behavior (and can have such behavior for function keys beyond F12).

What else??

All this should be doable easily with today's cheap digital memory and processing power.  It's just programming and interface design.

John C.

[peteski]

Those are all good ideas, and as you mentioned, should not be too difficult to implement in any *newly* designed DCC command station.

One more thing I forgot to mention is that in general, European made DCC systems are sort of weak on consisting likely because in Europe trains are pulled by single engines (and they are all have cabs on each end, so no turning them is needed).  Well, that goes for trains in the past. I have not kept up to date on contemporary European railroad operations. So, I believe that European DC manufactuers, since that is their main market, think of consistig as a secondary feature.  Whereas consisting is one  of the vital features for North America (and probably Australia).

[keeper]

Sorry for being away for a long time.
At the end of August some family issues needed quick and time consuming attention which is mostly done now.
In between we couldn't avoid Covid - we visited my mother in hospital and got it there, go figure...
The only nice thing in between was our two weeks holiday in Denmark.

Anyway, time for modeling is increasing 

One more thing I forgot to mention is that in general, European made DCC systems are sort of weak on consisting likely because in Europe trains are pulled by single engines (and they are all have cabs on each end, so no turning them is needed).  Well, that goes for trains in the past. I have not kept up to date on contemporary European railroad operations. So, I believe that European DC manufactuers, since that is their main market, think of consistig as a secondary feature.  Whereas consisting is one  of the vital features for North America (and probably Australia).

This might be plausible. There are not many trains with more than one locomotive. I think that's because the trains in Europe, well at least here in Germany, are quite short compared to those in the US, but also a single electric loco is more powerful than a diesel loco, eg. SD70Ace 4300 hp vs. DB class 152 8700 hp.

John has some good ideas. I'm no programmer but this should not be too difficult for a new system.
Although there are some setting in Lokprogrammer where you can choose what function should be available in consisting or not. Nothing near John's ideas but it is in that direction.

Thomas 

[peteski]

Yes, John's ideas are good, and should be easily implemented with today's computer hardware.  But the manufacturer must be willing to do that.

When using advanced consisting (and only advanced consisting), there are two CVs that control which functions can be accessed via the advanced consist address (instead of the "regular" address).  That feature is inside of the decoder. Lokprogrammer just makes this process easy.

https://www.digitrax.com/tsd/KB923/cv19-cv21-cv22-advanced-consist-addressfunction-co/