Yelrow Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Okay guys, it had to happen. The new buz, is LCC. , following split second delay probs with loco commands, and subsequent crashes, apparently, there is a need for LCC. , Non loco command, through 2 different wies, bi directional, covering, points, signals, lighting etc, leaving locos free to take command from BUS. What a mouthful, but apparently, the new in thing on everyones xmas list. I await response with interest. john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Morning John - the only LCC within my knowledge was the one referenced on the front cover of my exercise books when I was at primary school. May I ask where you are reading about this one? R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 it is basically a new set of standards to work with DCC but for the other parts of a layout signals etc, http://www.nmra.org/news/proposed-standard-layout-command-control-lcc-published-comments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Thanks Mike. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelrow Posted November 2, 2015 Author Share Posted November 2, 2015 rog ,http://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/lcc_faq_handout.pdf , morning. I think this is the one to read, as all is explained in language that i understand. see what you think. john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Sounds like a good idea. More kit to buy (sigh) and retrofitting might be a problem, especially for those of us with less agile knee joints. It will be interesting to see if this idea gets - or has been - picked up by Hornby. Looks as though it all got approved and launched by NMRA in June this year so presumably all manufacturers are working on something. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelrow Posted November 2, 2015 Author Share Posted November 2, 2015 Its all been kept very quiet. As you say Rog, ideal, for the dodgy knee brigade, like me. What i found interesting was that so many problems had occured, with locos being slow to respond. Had not personally noticed that, but for those like RDS/ PJ, with loads of points and signals, not forgetting Ray, they may have noticed a delay. john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 So having fully read the FAQ blurb and lightly read the full spec linked to above, can anyone tell me what is the difference between this new LCC idea and running your layout (via RM or manually) on two separate (track and accessory) bus. e.g. Elite controlling locos on track and eLink controlling points, signals, lighting, etc off track, apart from it seems LCC uses large bore wiring, whatever that is. It seems to be re-inventing what is already there, for the benefit of people whose layout has everything controlled by DCC connected to the track bus. Even with LCC, sound loco commands will be via DCC. Their example of controlling a 'bell' must be for an off track bell such as at an American Railroad Crossing, not a loco bell. Also they talk to some cabs (throttles) having facility to control accessory functions - is that not exactly what the Elite ACC button does. Finally they say all manufacturers have been contacted about the new spec and NMRA recommend people badger the manufacturers to see what they are up to developing future LCC products. I wonder how many manufacturers will be very surprised if people do that. Is this just a specified version of the well established MERG CAN Bus. Over to you more knowledgeable people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 From what I can see the MERG BUS system is a "complete" system with hardware and software whereas what is being described here is an NMRA standard for the use of such s system. I can't see if the MERG system is compliant but I would think so. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Maybe then Rog this LCC is a spec for an accessory bus*, which (subject to my future understanding of the full spec) may/may not be the same as a normal DCC bus* spec.Bus* being my generic term for the application of the NMRA standard rather than a couple of bits of electric string on a layout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissaf Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I wonder if the delay in Loco Detection is because Hornby have gone back to the drawing board and are making it one of these LCC compliant thingies..i.e. an LCC controller connects into RM via a second USB port. RM then acts as the interface to use LCC detected conditions to trigger DCC events. Not too dissimilar to what has been announced about LD to date, just that the LD controller now becomes LCC compliant and able to interface to far more devices than just loco detectors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 That's the way I read it, you have a seperate dcc accessory bus to be able to change the accessories without taking away any of the dcc data from the loco's, i can understand that it may happen on very large layouts with multiple operators, but for a home layout or even a large club layout is it going to make any difference, to the general operation of locos and accessories, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @dynax/ChrisAre you suggesting LCC is a type of electronic filter that can milk acccessory commands from an extant DCC bus and hive them off to an LCC bus or is it just a normal separate accessory bus and the track (loco) bus is left to get on with loco specific stuff. The former would require either 2 controllers or a new type of LCC splitter device to send loco command here and accessory commands there. The latter we already got by way of 2 controllers in RM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2e0dtoeric Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 it seems LCC uses large bore wiring, - - probably means thick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissaf Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Rob,I agree to a certain extent that having two DCC controllers A & B one for locos and one for accessories is doable today. Looking at the links provided in previous posts, the difference and probable advantage that having a dedicated second LCC controller instead of a second DCC one for accessories is:.LCC is a Bi-directional protocol.LCC is much faster..Just to be clear, what I was suggesting was that RM communicates with Controller A as a DCC controller and also communicates to a new LCC Controller B via a second USB port. RM then acts as 'piggy in the middle'. Granted, probably more suited to very large layouts particularly exhibition ones with multiple CABs being used. I just offered the suggestion as a possible reason for LD being delayed for so long. Pure conjecture..In all reality and at the end of the day, we probably won't see any LCC compliant devices with Hornby logo on it for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 ...I just offered the suggestion as a possible reason for LD being delayed for so long. Pure conjecture... I wonder if HornbyCC/HRMS would like to confirm that... :-). DCC is bi-directional with RailCom to an extent but obviously with LCC that is a mandatory and extremely useful facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howbi Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I'm inclined to think that LCC is primarily aimed at the USA market where many layouts are enormous by our typical bedroom/garage setups. There are many, many more '0' gauge & above layouts where dozens of accessories and large locos need a substantial power base and have probably reached DCC's max capability for clean, reliable data transmission. HB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Are you suggesting LCC is a type of electronic filter that can milk acccessory commands from an extant DCC bus I don't think so RAF - I see it the same as Chris/Dynax - two separate systems, but they would need some way to communicate with each other I'd have thought? Apart from the effect of making all such systems compliant with the standard I am not sure of any significant end user (home layout) benefit. I'm probably missing something huge though! R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @Rog...but they would need some way to communicate with each other...For what purpose if they were separate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 The example given is to reduce current draw on your loco control bus, although no-one has yet said they have noticed any significant delay in commands getting to the loco. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissaf Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I think HB has more than likely 'hit the nail on the head' with his comment, also in agreement with Roger's too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @Rog...although no-one has yet said they have noticed any significant delay in commands getting to the loco...I suppose one could do the math based on the NMRA spec and tell of an active loco/acc state at which delays would expect to become significant. Maybe if that big model railway/etc place in Germany was DCC they could add some data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissaf Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @Rog...but they would need some way to communicate with each other...For what purpose if they were separate....Since LCC is Bi-directional, you could be able to detect LCC events and use them via RM to initiate some other DCC event(s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 All good stuff - keep it coming... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I wonder if the delay in Loco Detection is because Hornby have gone back to the drawing board and are making it one of these LCC compliant thingies.I would see it less of a "Eureka" moment and more of an "Oh Gawd" one, if that is the case. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.