Setting up in R/C. What's needed?

CoggesRailway said:
Tony Walsham said:
If you use the elevator channel for setting the direction and use the throttle stick purely for speed, the stick travel is double from off to full speed, which means you will have much finer speed control.
Plus, with the RCS system you can have even finer start and stop speed control with the infinitely variable momentum/inertia setting. This is set by the operator at will during operation.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. What i am getting at is that you use something like your kit that is designed for railways as opposed to standard car/aircraft stuff. I have bought second hand such equipped locos and they are a bit hopeless.
Click to expand...
IIRC Ian, your 2.4GHz transmitters are already set up as Tony suggests. The problem appears to either be lack of sensitivity in the Tx circuitry or an issue with the receivers. Whichever, the car/plane controllers are simply too bulky/heavy for me. Tony's original RCS controllers were about the size of a cigarette packet and worked very well, but they don't seem to be available any more.

Mike (Beavercreek) makes a good point about the Aristo revolution controller, but it's a big lump of first cost compared to the other systems quoted on here.
 
The problem with the old RCS small hand pieces was that they were run over by technology. 27 MHz had RFI issues compounded by in line motor "noise" which made getting good range problematic. As soon as the 2.4 Ghz REVOLUTION became available I could see the writing on the wall and stopped making them.
Whilst I agree the 2.4 GHz stick radios are still bulky they are actually nowhere near as heavy as the older types of radios. The TX antennas are now only a few inches long. No more poking eyes out.
They are considerably less expensive than earlier multi channel systems and have extremely good range without requiring any motor "noise" suppression at all.
There is nothing quite like having Digital Proportional (DP) control of speed so a lot of thought was given to the way my current system works.
I am also picking up business from Live steamers who by a huge margin use DP radios for R/C control. They usually already have radios so find going battery R/C for standby diesels a low cost way of getting trains running quickly for casual visitors.
My goal is to eventually produce a small hand held DP transmitter that has all the features of stick radios but in a much smaller one hand control package.
 
I use Del Tapparo's system, which uses the aircraft/car/truck etc controller. When Ian showed me his Cliff Barker system I was very impressed. Especially by the hand held transmitter. It's smaller than a pack of cigarettes. The control of the loco was very smooth and responsive. However, I don't know the particulars of his system, which I am sure are up to par with the others.
I may have already mentioned that I prefer a trailing car for all of the electronics. To me, it frees up the system to run with any loco.
Once you feel comfortable with your first conversion, you will convert more of yor railway over to battery power. I was dead set against it until my first conversion. Too many reasons why to list here.
 
Madman said:
I use Del Tapparo's system, which uses the aircraft/car/truck etc controller. When Ian showed me his Cliff Barker system I was very impressed. Especially by the hand held transmitter. It's smaller than a pack of cigarettes. The control of the loco was very smooth and responsive. However, I don't know the particulars of his system, which I am sure are up to par with the others.
I may have already mentioned that I prefer a trailing car for all of the electronics. To me, it frees up the system to run with any loco.
Once you feel comfortable with your first conversion, you will convert more of yor railway over to battery power. I was dead set against it until my first conversion. Too many reasons why to list here.
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts Dan. I already have two battery / RC carrying wagons which will power much of the WGLR's fleet and have just ordered another two receivers off Cliff Barker which will be fitted in the remaining two locos. Best of both worlds. :thumbup::thumbup:
 
Wobbleboxer said:
beavercreek said:
At the risk of seeming to sound like an Ad for the product.
The Aristo system works on 2.4Ghz and the handset is smaller than a Massoth navigator. The chips are a little bigger than a massoth XLS but about twice the thickness. Batteries of course are the same.
Click to expand...

I'm using an Aristo TE now for my track power. Don't they do an onboard receiver? Would that be an easier (and cheaper) way to start? And why didn't I think of that before?

Thanks for all the other info everyone, very interesting stuff.
Click to expand...

Ah yes you could definitely do that Colin!
I was looking from the aspect that the RC system was going to be set up from scratch.
The TE has good control but the onboard type of receivers do have to have very careful placing of the long aerial lead. The receiver range can be short, it depends on the topography and interference characteristics of other things in the vicinity (more so that the TE with track based receiver).

The Revolution gives a 'DCC-like' operation with full control of loco movement parameter, lights, smoke etc. Ordinary TE, while very good at control of motor (I still use it) and associated voltage to run lights, smoke and sound, does not really have direct control over these functions (unless you also put accessory units inside the loco or trailing car!)
 
beavercreek said:
...I was looking from the aspect that the RC system was going to be set up from scratch....
Click to expand...

So was I initially until someone mentioned the TE Revolution.

Oh no, more surfing required :rolf:
 
Wobbleboxer said:
beavercreek said:
...I was looking from the aspect that the RC system was going to be set up from scratch....
Click to expand...

So was I initially until someone mentioned the TE Revolution.
Click to expand...

Sorry Colin, that might have been me. :o:

As you have TE already, I would try the on board receiver first as it may be just the ticket and work really well for you. I did think about that solution for my own needs and was going to get a couple of on board TE RX chips. It was only because I had thought about the REVO kit and saw Tony's locos with the stuff in action, and had a chance to snap up a handset and three chips for almost a song, that I will be going down the REVO route for the battery locos.
If you do stick with TE ordinaire then your battery locos will be able to be controlled along side your track jobbies with no probs of different controllers etc.
 
Blimey - have we actually managed to both answer Wobbleboxer's question and save him money rather than get him to buy a shed load of more G scale? That's got to be a first on GSC! :bigsmile:
 
yb281 said:
Madman said:
I use Del Tapparo's system, which uses the aircraft/car/truck etc controller. When Ian showed me his Cliff Barker system I was very impressed. Especially by the hand held transmitter. It's smaller than a pack of cigarettes. The control of the loco was very smooth and responsive. However, I don't know the particulars of his system, which I am sure are up to par with the others.
I may have already mentioned that I prefer a trailing car for all of the electronics. To me, it frees up the system to run with any loco.
Once you feel comfortable with your first conversion, you will convert more of yor railway over to battery power. I was dead set against it until my first conversion. Too many reasons why to list here.
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts Dan. I already have two battery / RC carrying wagons which will power much of the WGLR's fleet and have just ordered another two receivers off Cliff Barker which will be fitted in the remaining two locos. Best of both worlds. :thumbup::thumbup:
Click to expand...

Mel..... serious Question and not to be interprited as a snipe in any way but what is it about the cliff Barker system that is so appealing.... ive been looking at his site and i dont see what all the fuss is about it seems the same price as the revo but with a lot less functions and from looking at the controler how do you control more than one loco at a time.....i dont want this to turn into a LGB / Niquadria? type battle... its not ment that way

Tony
 
Tony said:
yb281 said:
Madman said:
I use Del Tapparo's system, which uses the aircraft/car/truck etc controller. When Ian showed me his Cliff Barker system I was very impressed. Especially by the hand held transmitter. It's smaller than a pack of cigarettes. The control of the loco was very smooth and responsive. However, I don't know the particulars of his system, which I am sure are up to par with the others.
I may have already mentioned that I prefer a trailing car for all of the electronics. To me, it frees up the system to run with any loco.
Once you feel comfortable with your first conversion, you will convert more of yor railway over to battery power. I was dead set against it until my first conversion. Too many reasons why to list here.
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts Dan. I already have two battery / RC carrying wagons which will power much of the WGLR's fleet and have just ordered another two receivers off Cliff Barker which will be fitted in the remaining two locos. Best of both worlds. :thumbup::thumbup:
Click to expand...

Mel..... serious Question and not to be interprited as a snipe in any way but what is it about the cliff Barker system that is so appealing.... ive been looking at his site and i dont see what all the fuss is about it seems the same price as the revo but with a lot less functions and from looking at the controler how do you control more than one loco at a time.....i dont want this to turn into a LGB / Niquadria? type battle... its not ment that way

Tony
Click to expand...
No probs at all mate. It's easy to install, even for a numpty like me, 100% reliable up to now for me (just over 12 months constant use, but Bram has been using it for longer), the controls are very simple and intuitive (my 4 year old nephew can use it when he visits, Netty's two lads were using it within 5 minutes of arriving), and most of all, it suits me, my small locos and my railway.

Now the last one is probably the 64,000 dollar point. If you want to run a lot of trains simultaneously, all with smoke, lights, sound etc., then the Revolution will probably be more suitable than the Cliff Barker stuff. But my railway is tiny and the stock tends to match. I can run more than one train at a time, but only really in trainset mode, it's not something I do very often.

I still maintain that a conversion to full battery power using the Revolution would have cost me a lot more than using the Barker system, although I accept that I may have been able to do more with it.
 
Tony said:
Mel..... serious Question and not to be interprited as a snipe in any way but what is it about the cliff Barker system that is so appealing.... ive been looking at his site and i dont see what all the fuss is about it seems the same price as the revo but with a lot less functions and from looking at the controler how do you control more than one loco at a time.....i dont want this to turn into a LGB / Niquadria? type battle... its not ment that way

Tony
Click to expand...

Tony - all fair questions and I hope you'll allow me to comment as well as Mel. You're absolutely right in saying that the Aristo has more functions than Cliff Barker's kit. As ever, the question is whether a particular user needs them or not. Cliff's design point is one controller for one receiver, but you can control two receivers from a single transmitter if both are linked to it. Aristocraft's design point is one controller for umpteen chips (locos or accessories). The real consideration is whether you intend to be primarily a user of multiple battery locos or not.

In both systems you can have a trail car containing the control chip which can be attached to any number of locos via a lead. In both systems you can have gradual acceleration and deceleration. The Barker system features an excellent "cruise control" system of halt/resume previous speed in the same manner as that of a car. Not sure if the Aristo system has that.

The Aristo system's single controller, for me, is both its strength and its weakness. It clearly has many sophisticated features, but only one user can use a single controller at a time. So if you have visitors to your layout they either have to bring their own controllers or they can't play/test. If you have the Barker system, every controller is expected to have a dedicated chip, so multiple controllers for multiple users are in place already.

For me, the Barker system is cheaper in "lumps" of UK cost (£130 for one 2.8 amp system complete except for batteries) and utterly instinctive to use. Some visiting kids understood mine in about 30 seconds flat. The price crossover point between the two systems is just over 3 loco chips. Four chips or more and the Aristo is cheaper overall (so long as you have only one Aristo controller). Three loco chips or less and the Barker system is cheaper. For those of us who are primarily track-powered but want battery power as an occasional option, that makes the Barker system very attractive.
 
Totally spot on Peter
It is the flexibility of the Revo that makes it alluring to me and, provided you have the capacitor boards for using track power operation, the expandibility. But it is a system (much like DCC) that is not necessarily instinctive to use, easy to learn but not instinctive. I like the way it works and it was because of my very cheap chance to purchase the handset and chips that has set me on that path.
The Barker system is spot on for what Mel needs and for the kids to use and the Revo one would offer no advantage except a nice looking handset.
For me the chance to have some tripple headed battery locos (also easily operated separately) operated by the one handset with control over momentum, lights, smoke etc was a big draw and this system fits it. As ever in this delectable hobby one man's meat is another's......tofu. ;) ;)
 
yb281 said:
Tofu :bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh::bleh:
Click to expand...
To-fu, to-me, to-fu, to-me.....chuckle chuckle brothers :rolf::rolf::rolf:
 
ROSS said:
That's why there are so many unnecessary questions on the forum. No one reads the leaflets.:rolleyes:

:rolf::rolf:
Click to expand...
Point of order - no such thing as an unecessary question, just questions. If someone needs to know something, then that's what places like this are for, that way many others can learn at the same time.

Posting on threads that have obviously not been read however - now that's another matter. :bigsmile::bigsmile:
 
The Aristo system's single controller, for me, is both its strength and its weakness. It clearly has many sophisticated features, but only one user can use a single controller at a time. So if you have visitors to your layout they either have to bring their own controllers or they can't play/test. If you have the Barker system, every controller is expected to have a dedicated chip, so multiple controllers for multiple users are in place already.
Yes i can see the slight virtues of your System but for expandability il stick with the Revo as for the one controler issue if someone else brings a Revo loco then persumerbly they will have a controler... as it happens i got 3 with the collection i bought but i know thats being greedy
Im so convinced by it im converting all my locos although some of the smaller ones will rely on a universal control wagon
but thanks to you both for the reply

Tony
 
whatlep said:
Blimey - have we actually managed to both answer Wobbleboxer's question and save him money rather than get him to buy a shed load of more G scale? That's got to be a first on GSC! :bigsmile:
Click to expand...
Hoorah!

Now, back to the thread. Anyone got a 27mhz on-board receiver or a 75mhz with the 27mhz converter? Pretty please?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top