Not having a pooch in this battle of verbiage, I find it all quite amusing, reminds me of the days of old and ventilators !
Gary Buchanan, FOG said:
Not having a pooch in this battle of verbiage, I find it all quite amusing, reminds me of the days of old and ventilators !
Couldn’t have said it better myself…(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)
Well, seeing since I both fly RC planes and I just put a 2.4 stick radio to control my Ruby I think I can chime in. There are many RC radios out there with many switches and sliders along with the two gimbals and while yes, they were designed for aircraft, it’s not hard to adapt them to trains. I’ve had many transmitters over the years 40+ in flying, and I’ve used JR or spectrum exclusively. Today, with the radio market constantly changing, excellent used radios are easily available. I have only worn out one gimbal pot in my life putting hundreds of hours on my radios. I have only one DX-5 as most my radios are 7-9 channels. My JR 9303 2.4 transmitter has three switches, two sliding pots, to go along with the four channels on the gimbals. In the 9303, channels are programmable for mixing, travel distance, travel direction, advanced mixing with switches, dual rates, model memory, etc. fixing the two gimbals to only travel up and down is a piece of cake. One could even mix the right stick (elevator) with the throttle and the program would allow you to mix it so moving it up from center would move the train forward and increasing the stick forward would increase speed. Same for down stick and reverse. The gimbal centering spring gets removed and a friction spring with a center detent gets added. All these features and more are available on the old 9303 and there’s a ton of them out there on RC sites for sale. I’ve purchased many used radios and have never had one issue but I’ve bought mine mainly off of RC plane sites. I’m sure if someone took one of these multichannel radios and sent it to RadioSouth, told them what you wanted, they could do it for you. Vendors like Hobby King sell 9 channel orange receivers for $15-$25 each. They also carry analog switches that plug into the receiver which change the proportional control on-off function. My own SBD-6 dive bomber had gun simulating flashing LEDS and a small machine gun sound system operating off one channel using one of those switches. they cost about $5 from HK.
If someone has no issue with the stick transmitters, I would go with one good 7-12 channel transmitte and not bother with the 4-6 channel units if you’re looking to control a ton of stuff with switches. Also, forgot to say these better radios let you select what switch controls which channel and there’s even a throttle curve which would allow for a much slower initial speed relative to the stick movement then closer to the end of stick travel, the top speed would accelerate faster than the movement. In other words, the proportion of the speed can be changed from the movement of the stick. I think those who are not really educated with multi channel RC radios shouldn’t knock them and instead, learn about them. I think many would be amazed at what system offer. Did I forget to mention some systems have telemetry where we can put temp sensors on our steam boilers, for example or even fuel/water levels withthe right sensors aboard the loco!
My input is; at the end of the day whether it is a stick, a switch, or a knob it is just an input method to tell the electronics what you want them to do.
I can give an analogy using poker/slot machines, in the early days there were handles on the side of machines when they were mechanical that spun the reels.
As time moved on they became electronic but still had handles on the side because that is what the punters were used to, the handle only closed a switch to make the machine do its thing ie spin (or at least the video perception of a spin) today the punter pushes a button to get a spin.
The difference being the input method changed or at least the illusion, the same goes with transmitter/receiver combos regardless of their origin (which is irrelevant by the way its just clever marketing), these things are just dumb devices that respond to an input and they do not care what the input method was, they just take signals in and put signals out to drive servos, ESC’s, sound generating devices (if not combined on the same board with the receiver) and heating elements etc.
Lets face it a throttle command makes a motor spinning a propeller or a driving a gear train move faster or slower and the direction of the motor is dependent on the instruction it receives.
Seriously the number of buttons used is really up to the user; personally I am only interested in FWD REV and speed control but if others want to get their jollies by have bells and whistles all power to them.
Personally I think the size of the transmitter box is just a case of mind over matter for the end user and has no effect on performance whatsoever.
I use the Elcheapo HobbyKing TX/RX combos plus ESC’s and they have suited me fine for over 10 years but horses for courses as they say.
Quite silly methinks, the man just wanted a new replacement for a well used older one.
Nowhere did he ask for opinions or an education … or used ones off Ebay(https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-sealed.gif)
Thanks guys.
John; I appreciate your chiming in, but I think it’s best at this point to just ignore the noise and concentrate on the music (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-foot-in-mouth.gif)
Ted; Thanks for sharing your experience. I don’t disagree that a more channels/functions would be easier in some cases. However in my case the combination of boards I use only utilize 5 channels from the RX. My sound board and lights are driven by the controller board as it converts the RX output positions to simple switch contacts. If I was going to start over and design a system from the ground up using components, then a radio with lots of switches would be ideal. And you have reminded my why I went this route in the beginning: I also run live steam (although only one loco) and wanted a system that could be shared with the sparkies.
Some reading this may not know that for live steam, a system based on servos is required. It doesn’t need to be sticks as Pete and Tony have shown, but stick radios are not uncommon in the live steam world.
Additionally - I never said I needed or wanted only a stick radio. What I did say was that I do not want to change to a new control system at this point. Replacing my dying stick radio with another is the simple solution with only binding required to get the new radio up and running. Something like the system of Tony’s shown above might be workable, but there would be a learning / programming curve and I am on a schedule! The solution Pete offered at the very top of this thread is my chosen path for now. Once that is up and running I will dissect my existing DX5e and see if I can manage to use it to build something with a speed knob (easy) and buttons/swithces for all the other functions. That last part is proving to be a challenge on paper using only switches and resistors. I might need to resort to a logic circuit.
stick radios are not uncommon in the live steam world.
And that’s because we had to buy a ‘kit’ with servos and a compatible receiver. Nowadays, the DSM2 standard lets me mix and match TX and RX - I have some RX that came from China for $6. RCS’s knob TX is perfect for my live steamers and takes up a lot less room on the shelf.
Hey guys,
Just some input from one of the 1/8th riding scale train people…my new and almost running Super Huskie, is controlled by a FlySky 2.4 ghz car/airplane throttle. It drives a 50A motor controller board in the engine. The throttle is about $40 on Amazon, the controller is $115 and available from a robotics supply house. The motor is a 500watt, 3/4 hp 24v motor. This locomotive weighs 200 pounds. I know this doesn’t help in your “little scales”, but it does show you have to think “outside the box” once in a while :).
My post wasn’t strictly meant to answer the OPs question. It was to reply to a lot of the other posts that were of opinion or mis-information rather than fact and to provide truthful information about stick radio transmitters. My intention was to inform both those unaware and the OP that multi channel radios offer a lot more of what some were claiming they did. I also mentioned places to purchase theses radios affordably already nipping off the future posts about how much they cost new. I always thought forums and posts were to teach and inform people looking for information and occasionally for some laughs. I guess I was wrong, at least here where some don’t want to learn anything evidently, simply get a simple answer to a single question, and if they get more than that, complain about it. They just prefer someone do their research for them and give them the answer. (This is not meant to the OP of this thread). I believe, for now on, I’ll just keep my knowledge to myself rather than get berated for trying to inform people of information and options they might not know exist.
on another note: Jon, completely understand. My suggestion for a multi channel radio was an idea where you could disregard the rudder and aileron channels where the gimbals could be fixed to prevent left and right movement. In essence this would make a 5 channel out of a seven channel transmitter. You’d then have a bunch of switches rather than proportional pots.
It’s true, many times a question/opinion is asked, but the OP does not like the answers.
Tony’s controller reflects the growing trend for more buttons/switches needed in the remote control, and using sticks and trim tabs seems the wrong way to go about it.
My comment was that with the increasing use of DCC-based sound cards, and more commandable sounds, more “buttons” will be needed, and using sticks and trim tabs does not seem to be the best solution.
A remote with more options for on/off buttons, as opposed to analog channels seems to be in order.
But of course everything went wild and I got accused of trying to convince people to use DCC and I don’t know what I am talking about.
Greg
and I don’t know what I am talking about.
Clearly, as you asked Jon how he got 4 sounds out of one channel (2a-2d.) I’m quite curious too! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)
Pete, if you are serious, I think you need to read MY posts again, only the posts with my name on them are from me.
go back and read where I asked what you just said… it did not happen, I never asked what you said in your post. Why in the heck are you saying this?
All I said to repeat again, is that with all the sound functions desired, it makes more sense to me to have actual buttons than translate joysticks, and as the sound market continues to be dominated by DCC based sound cards, you will need a lot more buttons.
Greg
if you are serious,
Greg, my apologies. I forgot that dry english humor is always misunderstood. No, I wasn’t serious, and yes, I’d also like to know how Jon did it. But you did say:
Tell me what I do not understand… show me the picture of the horn, bell, and headlight buttons
Ted Brito said:
on another note: Jon, completely understand. My suggestion for a multi channel radio was an idea where you could disregard the rudder and aileron channels where the gimbals could be fixed to prevent left and right movement. In essence this would make a 5 channel out of a seven channel transmitter. You’d then have a bunch of switches rather than proportional pots.
Now; that is very helpful. I didn’t get the part about ignoring the stick. I will have to do some research on programmable capabilities for the switches to see if they could deliver the servo position my controller is expecting for each function.
Pete Thornton said:
I’d also like to know how Jon did it.
I did nothing. Del Taparo designed his earlier Railboss Plus Enhanced and later the Railboss Plus systems to utilize the Aileron stick as sound triggers. Full left is Bell; half left is a user defined trigger function, center is off, Full right is Crossing Whistle half right is also a user defined trigger function. Headlights are always on on the end of the engine selected for travel. Dell at one time also sold a Trigger Board that uses the Rudder stick for two triggers with center being off and full left or right to close the trigger.
All I do is connect my sound system, lights and motors and power sourceo Del’s board.
Del Taparo designed his earlier Railboss Plus Enhanced and later the Railboss Plus systems to utilize the Aileron stick as sound triggers. Full left is Bell; half left is a user defined trigger function, center is off, Full right is Crossing Whistle half right is also a user defined trigger function.
Aha. I do know how that works, as I had extensive conversations with Tony over pulse-widths for servos when we were talking about % servo throws on his TX-3. Thanks Jon.
Hello Pete.
I abandoned the idea of “over pulsing” the TX control channels to increase servo throw. It caused too many problems in other areas.
My new Rx107 Rx (Rx102-1 replacement) is imminent. Setting servo reverse and end point adjustment is much simplified and available for 7 channels if needed.
Other niceties are included too.
There is an 8th channel output which will be used for an external repeater LED so the operator can see what is happening when setting parameters.
So, I took Pete up on his generous offer and he shipped me his used DX5e which, in my head, would be a quick fix to my problem. What I failed to realize until I started playing with the replacement was that all my locomotives would need to be bound to the new transmitter. Silly me, I didn’t follow the advice Tony Walsham had given years ago: Extend the Rx Bind pins to an accessible point or push button. If I had, changing radios would have been fast and simple. But since I did not, every R/C loco would need to be disassembled to reach the bind pins on the Rx. Not wanting to go through that, I put the project aside waiting for a better idea.
Today, the better idea arrived. The problem with mine was the right stick was sending intermittent false signals causing all kinds of havoc and unwanted sounds. I decided to look inside to see if I could swap an entire gimbal/potentiometer assembly from Pete’s radio to mine as I suspected the pots were dirty or shorting. When I got Pete’s radio open, I realized that the fastest course was to use all of the face plate controls and switches from Pete’s, along with the transmitter board and back panel from my original. This turned out to be a great idea and the swap took just around an hour plus another hour playing trains to be sure the problem was gone (https://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-smile.gif)
The surgery was quite straight forward: Remove 6 screws to separate the case halves. Remove 5 screws holding the main PC board to the front case. Remove 5 plugs connecting the front case to the main board. Uncscrew the Trainer toggle from the back case. Repeat to disassemble both radios. Put the faulty front case, and the new back case with transmitter board aside. Re-assemble the parts to make one good radio and test.
This is what the innards look like. This is the front panel of Pete’s Tx, with the main board unscrewed…
Pete’s Tx with the main board removed. I will be using all of the except the sticky Channel 5 switch…
Pete’s front panel with my main board attached…
My main board was modified to replace the weak slide switch used for power with a quality toggle switch mounted in one of the extra holes in the back case. The new switch is at upper left in the above photo. The last step was to button it up and test. Running two locos for over an hour I had no false signals or problems at all. Prior to the fix it was nearly impossible to use my Tx because the false signals were nearly constant.
This alone will go a long way to get me back into running outside.
So basically this means John Wayne caught the last train out. Spock and Kirk have had enough but no one’s left to beam them up ?
Yes.