Hornby Select Fault

[poliss]

Yes. I was referring to DC locos with no decoders fitted too. A DCC controller fools a DC loco into thinking it's on DC, but if there's something not right, such as having a capacitor fitted to the power track or the DCC controller isn't working properly, that can cause DC locos to runaway too.

Decoder fitted locos should work perfectly fine with a DC controller. No need to remove them.

[RDS]

@Fishy & @Chrissaf

As I have the Select in use a walkabout for the Elite, I can confirm, as Fishy says, that the only limitation on Loco addresses is when using the Select.  The full range is available when using the Elite.

[Chrissaf]

Seems to be a misunderstanding of my comments all round. Just to reiterate again. I'm NOT saying that using a Select as a Walkabout stops you from using the FULL range of addressing on the Elite, just that when you are in Walkabout mode that you can't access the addresses outside the Select range from the Select knobs and buttons.

.

Thus, if a user wants to use the Select as a Walkabout as a PERMANENT feature that that is when the addressing usability of the Elite is effectively restricted to the usable Select ranges.

[RDS]

... Thus, if a user wants to use the Select as a Walkabout as a PERMANENT feature that that is when the addressing usability of the Elite is effectively restricted to the usable Select ranges.

 

Chris,

Sorry to continue this but I feel we need to sort it out to make it clear for others.

 

 

I am still confused by your latest statement because I DO use the Select as a  PERMANENT feature but it does NOT, affect the addressing capability of my Elite by restricting it to the Select range of addresses.

 

I am unaware of any restrictions that the Select in Walkabout mode puts on any other component.

[Yelrow]

Being one of the others, i also use select as a Walkabout. I  find no restriction, with driving any loco, this way, and my understanding was this is an extended arm of the Elite, in order to drive locos from another part of the layout. The only shortcoming i have, is that if anything causes a short/ fault, you have return to the Elite to clear it. john

[96RAF]

@John

If the Elite is running a loco with a long address or even just one above 59, can you hand that over to the Select or will it fail to recognise it.

 

Reason is few of my locos have short addresses and only one of those is within Select range, so if I got the chance of a Select Walkabout should I bother.

[Chrissaf]

The one time I didn't copy my long reply to the clipboard I get the 'you are not logged in error', not a happy bunny. Let me try to post an abbreviated version of my lost reply again.

.

Let me try again to give a clearer description of what I mean using an example to aid it.

.

Let's say you have four locos. Two addressed as 001 & 002 and two addressed as 100 & 101. Now obviously the Elite can control ALL four locos even when a Select is attached as a Walkabout. The Elite has full functions and features without restrictions.

.

But consider a user who wants to PREDOMINANTLY control his fleet from the Walkabout Select. He can only control half his loco fleet i.e locos 001 & 002 as locos 100 & 101 are outside the Select supported range.

.

All I was trying to get across, was that when a user wants to predominantly use the Walkabout Select to control his WHOLE loco fleet. Then it would be better to adopt a 'Lowest Common Denominator' policy and address the loco fleet from the Select supported range. It was this aspect of Elite / Select interaction, that IMHO is the restriction that affects the Elite when using a Select Walkabout with it. I was not inferring, and it was not my intention if it came over that way, that by connecting the Select as a Walkabout to an Elite that somehow that prevented the Elite from functioning to its full potential in its own right.

.

I believe that this is not contradictory to anything that has been stated in earlier posts. Either yours or mine.

[Yelrow]

AH, well, there you have it, as they used to say on the Navy Lark,, you would need a fearful lot of locos, to go past 59, even 59, in fact.  I dont use long addresses, unlike a former member did, all mine are 2 digits. I can  see no logical reason to use 4 digits.. My Walkabout is great, and i am looking for another, having just acquired another cable. Now have 8 metre cable, and 4 metre cable. People on other forums drone on about other makes of controllers, that you can walk round your layout holding. My Walkabout, is on a wooden plinth,  10 foot away from the Elite, which is 1 foot away from the laptop, and RM. When i want to couple/ uncouple, make up trains, play shunting, i do it all with the Select. When i get the second one , that will be similarly mounted to cover the rh side of layout, some 5 foot away.  There is a guy on this forum, who has either 5 or 6 Walkabouts.  As a  normal controller, i would not consider it, buy as a Walkabout, superb.  RAF, yes, you Should bother, in my view. The only, i repeat, only draw back, is a short circuit, necessitating return to the Mother Ship. john

[Yelrow]

I stopped rather than be timed out. How many guys on here have more than 59, DCC locos. john

[Chrissaf]

I only have 7 locos, but for reasons I won't bore anybdy with I number them 101 to 107, so straight away that would invalidate using a Select Walkabout.

[Yelrow]

Chriss, thats your deliberate pre conceived choice. You, not hornby, have made sure  that the select cannot work on your layout, as a Walkabout.  Thats fine, but had you decided you would like to use one, you could/ would  have done as i have, and used lower numbers.   The only point i am trying to make, is that for 90 out of 100 users, it would work a treat, the only exceptions, being those who had more than 59 locos, or who for personal reasons, deliberately pick numbers, not usable.  I would hate any new poster to be put off the Walkabout concept, by thinking, it was in any way inadequate, due to not accepting numbers over 59, as to me, thats a red herring. When you think you can pick these up for about £30, its a solution, worth thinking about. john

[poliss]

Here's a logical reason for using four digit numbers. Instead of your Flying Scotsman being addressed as 03, you addess it as 4472, the cabside number.

The Walkabout isn't really intended for Cab Control, but you can use it that way if you wish. It's more so you, your kids, or your mate can control extra locos.

If I were to buy a Hornby DCC system, it would be the eLink, (provided it doesn't cost extra to use extra smartphones as controllers). It's cheaper than the Walkabout and doesn't have the Walkabout's limitiations.

[Yelrow]

Polss, hi, i have no problem, with Chriss, or anybody else who wishes to use a 4 figure number. Graskie, always did. But to continue, many first time DCC ers, buy a set according to their means, which includes a select. Once their finances, or knowledge improves, they graduate, many to an Elite, when the Walkabout, comes into its own, rather than become something in a forgotten drawer. Moving on to the Elink, , firstly, it Does cost extra to run from a tablet, and you have to have, or buy a laptop. If the latter, is the case, its not cheaper than a Walkabout cable, bearing in mind, you already have the Select. In my case, which i know , is unusual, I have all three, started with Elink, Replaced that with Elite, when one came up, at a silly price, and added a select, also at a silly price, to save my knees, as upping and downing, hurts.. If the select was not ever intended for cab control, why supply a cable.. Of course it taint perfect, it would be, if it cleared its own shorts. Really, tis horses for courses

[poliss]

As I said, the Walkabout was intended for extra people to control extra trains.

 

With the system I want, you can use ten smartphones/tablets at no extra cost, not to mention the 31 X-Bus controllers. You don't have to activate it over the internet either. It's activated by the serial number on the bottom of the unit.

[Yelrow]

That sounds like a few quid, cost a bit to buy 10 tablets/ smart phones. john

[96RAF]

I'm with polis in using cab side numbers as addresses so long addresses are the norm on my kit.

 

It would help if having set both a long and a short address in a decoder, you could use either without having to chop it back and forth in CV29 (or via Elite Menu system).

 

That would be ideal for me as I would have the long/short ID conversion list pasted on the wall near the Select Walkabout (if and when I get one).

[Yelrow]

RAF, why. I dont know, but lets say Bachmann for 2017, decide on 5 numbers for all cabs. Then what,. Or, just use the first 2 eg 1426, becomes 14. Do all locos have cab numbers, regardless of make. john 

[poliss]

The ten cabs. Your mates can come round with their smartphones, download the FREE app, and operate locos on your layout.

Bachmann don't decice cab numbers. They are the numbers on the side of the real loco. 4472 is the cab number on Flying Scotsman.

[96RAF]

@John

 

Every loco has a number on the side - some are issued (and amended) to a regime (BR, Tops, Big 4, Regional, etc) and some appear to be simply in sequence from their place of work - e.g. industrial locos / NCB / etc..

 

The simplified numbering system using your example 1426 would to me signify a Class 14xxx steam loco and number 26 in build.

 

What you use as a simplified short address depends a great deal upon what classes of loco you have in your fleet

 

Here's a few examples of mine:

4468 Mallard is addressed as 4468, 35012 Merchant Navy is 3512, 37xxx re-liveried Class 37 is 3796, 56013 Class 56 is 5613, 56098 Class 56 is 5698, 90018 Class 90 is 9018, 71000 D of G is 7100, 61243 B1 is 1243, 06008 shunter is 6008, 6241 City of Edinburgh is 6241, No.1 Lion Works is 0001, 2728 Class 2721 is 2728, 395xx Class 395 is 0395

 

So you see I try to find a unique ID for each cab-side number presented to me and long addressing suits this better than my original numbering scheme of 1 to 99. Try to pick an easily remembered short address for that lot.

 

 

 

[Yelrow]

Well, there you have it, mine are 1-22. I have no interest in class, differing between diesel or steam. They are simply numbered in the order in which i bought them. Hence its a doddle. john

[Fishmanoz]

I'd suggest remembering the number on the cab is far easier than remembering the order you bought them in.  In fact, no memory needed for the cab number beyond which of the 5 digits you left out.  Simple for Rob, the middle one.

[Yelrow]

What i meant by number i bought them in was, i just use the next number for the next loco, eg, if i buy another one, it will be 23.. I agree about middle nos, but all would need to be under 59. john

[RDS]

I have been away from the forum for a couple of days, so missed the dialogue on this fascinating topic.

@Chris.  Thanks for clearing that up regarding Select use with Elite and your LCD theory.

 

@John.  I know you have said you are not interested in Classes and to a large extent - neither am I but I do use the Class Number as my DCC address, or the first 2 digits of the cab number, usually when I don't know the Class.  The numbers I use are: 1 for Inter-city 125, 2 for LMS Loco, 5 for Thomas the Tank engine, 8 for Class 8 Shunter, 9 for Bill the Tank engine, 20 for Class 20 Diesel, 25 for LMS Stanier cab number 2546, 37 for Class 37 Diesel, 42 for Class 42 Warship, 46 for Royal Scot cab number 46117, 47 for Class 47 Diesel, 66 for Class 66 Diesel, 70 for Class 70 Diesel and finally 88 for Duck the Tank engine.

In my case, I have 3 Loco's that I cannot control using my Select Walkabout but I regard the other 11 that I can control as a worthwhile reason for using the Select in this mode and I agree with you about not wanting to put people off using Select.

 

@RAF96.  In view of the fact that all but 1 of your Loco's are outside the Select id Range, I am not convinced it would be worthwhile for you.

[Chrissaf]

@Chris.  Thanks for clearing that up regarding Select use with Elite and your LCD theory.

.

Somewhat confused RDS, I don't recall expelling any theory regarding LCDs in this thread. Can you remind me, was it in another? 

[96RAF]

@Chris

Lowest Common Denominator...