Chrissaf Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Since I have no interest in deploying LD when it does arrive. It doesn't particularly matter to me if it is an "Oh Gawd" moment :-).On a more serious note though. According to the previous posts LCC standards have been in development for some time, allegedly with the knowledge of manufactures. Who is to say that Hornby have not been incorporating LCC specifications into LD for some time..In the main, DCC pushes out commands from the controller to a device. LD is about communication in the other direction. That is, from the device to the controller. Why 'reinvent the wheel' and develop a LD communication protocol from scratch, when the standards body have been already developing a Bi-directional protocol in the form of LCC that could be used instead. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 True - and its predecessor for some time before that. It really is just the standard that is fairly new - June this year, I think. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 The old LCB protocol seems to have matured into this LCC thingie, which seems to be CANBus based and that is supported by MERG kit already and adopted by Rocrail under CBUS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I think it may be some kind of interface between the controller and the layout, something on the lines of a booster, but a bit more complex, it will have it's own power supply and data bus for the accessories, the commands are still given by the controller but rather than going through the dcc bus it gets diverted though the lcc bus, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingthedog Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 And they're under starters orders..........and they're off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissaf Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 I'm with you completely WTD. I deeply regret making my original comment now. This is going to be another one of those never ending threads just like the original LD. I for one, shall not be making anymore replies on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
96RAF Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @WTD...and they're off....Chasing rainbows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelrow Posted November 2, 2015 Author Share Posted November 2, 2015 Well, at least i found a new subject to natter on. The main thing that i think you guys have not picked up, and commented on, is the reason for its introduction, which is, if i read it right, to obviate the over running/ crashing problems that are occuring now, because the bus, is all things to all men. By putting locos only on a bus, and everything else on LCC, this is supposed to stop it happening. On e must remember, hornby in the overall size of the DCC market, and it may be that Hornby locos, behave differently to other makes, of which there are many, particularly in USA/ brazil/ germany. I dont remember any forum post about locos over running, but these people must have had problems, to be responding to them, in this fashion. I only have Hornby and Bachmann, dcc locos, none of which over run to a degree, that i have even noticed or thought about, but this is not somebodies whim, its going to be a big thing, which i imagine manufacturers will have to take on board. john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 So basically it is for the rivet counters and the professional railway modeller who take it too seriously instead of enjoying and playing trains, who breakout in cold sweats and hives when they overshoot a platform or signal, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Ah.... that's why I don't have any platforms or signals then. I knew there would be a reason for it if I looked hard enough. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 And they're under starters orders..........and they're off. So what WTD? You talk about what interests you, leave others to talk about what interests them. You don't have to read it. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingthedog Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Don't get me wrong Roger I alway read DCC because I'm really interested, might not use it but like to keep in touch. I was was just having a joke about the way LD went. Now it's LC©. LB Next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Good to hear. I hope that you have'nt inadvertantly closed other contributors down. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingthedog Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Me, I doubt it. Blimey, must be the fog. DC users had a long period of being called old fashioned, dinosaurs etc. Thought it best to learn as much as possible. Even managed to give the occasional DCC advice. Been using it a fair bit at a club and on a friends layout. I cant see DCC users having nothing to talk about. I'll get my coat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yelrow Posted November 2, 2015 Author Share Posted November 2, 2015 DYNAX, hi, no i dont read it like that. I read it, as manufacturers will have to conform, i dont see it as optional, as they have to with DCC. Eg, locos must not crash, due to delay in command reaching them, which means safeguards, which means LCC. I know you can press stop, or the big red button in .the case of Elite, and. Its a bit like Health and Safety gone mad, regulation for regulation sake. , but DCC was operating a long time before some manufacturers came on board, and may be some makes just dont conform. . john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howbi Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @Roger..........I thought banter was an essential requirement to be a member of this Forum!!!! HB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Certainly, and drivel and waffle. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingthedog Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 What's going on here. Real shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RB51 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 How so? Just agreeing with HB. R- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 @ Yelrow, if you read the article that you have linked to you will see that it "was developed by a group of volunteers and railway modellers, and approved by the NMRA", it does not, necessarly follow that the manufacturers have to adopt this system, it only says that if it is used by the manufacturers it has to follow a standard of compliancy like DCC, here is a brief extract copied from the article,What does the NMRA have to do with LCC?Just like the NMRA set the standard for DCC 20 yearsago, we’ve now set the standard for LCC. A group ofindependent volunteers who are both model railroadersand experts in electronics got together and developedconcepts, protocols, interfaces, and documents for LCC.That group calls itself OpenLCB. And we owe all ofthose modelers a huge debt of gratitude for the time andeffort they’ve put into LCC.That group developed the standards, and the NMRAapproved them.The NMRA has no vested interest in any onemanufacturer or product, and we certainly aren’t goingto be making products -- that’s up to manufacturers. Wejust set and approved the standard that manufacturerswill use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingthedog Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Me too Roger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 So in retrospect of this I stand by my earlier post of it being for the professional railway modeller, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slornie Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 So LCC is essentially doubling up on the wires between the controller and the layout via some form of splitter device? One pair taking loco commands to the track and the other pair going to your signals and other accessories? If that's the case then the first paragraph of that FAQ document has me confused. It says: "it’s a system for controlling all the functions on your layout that don’t have to do with how fast the locomotive is moving -- things like signals, or sounds, or passenger car lighting." How can you diverge instructions for sounds and passenger car (carriage?) lighting from locomotive control instructions when your sound decoder and carriage lights are on the track (and therefore on the same bus?) alongside the loco? Or am I missing something? That said, the two-way communication via LCC does sound ideal for Hornby's LD system and could well be part of the oft-commented delay (waiting for the standard to be adopted so they can be 100% sure of compliance). I wonder how that bit about "an LCC accessory can teach another one how to respond to it, and vice versa" will play into things like point and signal interfacing.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkingthedog Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 All I was 'trying' to say is that once something different arrives in the world of DCC it starts an incredibly long set of views and discussions. There's not one other subject on here that can do this. It is incredible that it can generate such an enormous amount of different opinions. Long may it continue like the Epsom Derby.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynax Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 Well that is all from me now on this topic, I can say with confidence that this will not be for me, if i happen to have a collision, it just means extra enjoyment of deploying the emergency services and recovery crews to sort it out, and then wait to be inundated by claims companys for the accident i had just had to claim compensation, oh what joyful fun, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.