Desirable features for future Railmaster Software updates

[St1ngr4y]

It has taken a turn down the scenic route, but I honestly think that Hartlepool United have more chance of winning the Champions League than we have of ever seeing any of our Desirable Features actually being incorporated into the product.

Perhaps if we started a new thread where people could list faults which they have reported (and the dates), and which are still outstanding, then maybe someone in Hornby or HRMS will notice this and prompt a bit of reaction.

Ray

[96RAF]

Good idea Ray. We could have it as a sticky along with the league table for introduction of the LDS.

[Fishmanoz]

Someone, don’t remember who, has previously done summaries of the desirable features listed in this thread and whether they have been fixed or not.  Hasn’t happened for a while though.

[96RAF]

Where a user has two controllers configured i.e A for loco control and B for points on a separate bus - would it be possible to have RM program the points decoders directly using controller B PROG output rather than have to rewire an acc decoder onto controller A for the task.

Rob

[96RAF]

I am still getting responses to fault reports submitted in the past couple of weeks so the light is still on at HRMS.

Rob

[Somerset Modeller]

Hopefully Railmaster is being overhauled and redesigned with lots of new features. I almost moved away from railmaster when using it with eLink because every time you had a short circuit you had to reset. Using it with Elite it works so much better and never have to reset after a short circuIt. 

As computer IT technician Railmaster is stuck in the windows 2000 era and not been redesigned to work like modern apps.

the biggest problem is the lack of communication from Hornby, what are there plans for Railmaster, even if they said the plan to redesign it by 2020 most of us would be happy to wait to get a new updated product. 

[dynax]

i would like to see a release that works on Linux,

[RDS]

... don’t remember who, has previously done summaries ...

 

That was me

[Chrissaf]

@somerset Modeller.

I almost moved away from railmaster when using it with eLink because every time you had a short circuit you had to reset.

.

That is a well documented known issue, and easily fixed with an amendment to the railmaster.ini file. See linked post below:

.

https://www.hornby.com/uk-en/forum/delayed-notification-of-short-circuit/?p=1/

.

Note that the post above ONLY applies to users of eLink and has NO affect on users of the RailMaster / Elite combination.

[Somerset Modeller]

Missing the point a little with that comment, the reason i made the comment was to point out its the little bugs and issues that are putting people off from going down the railmaster route for controlling their trains. 

If Hornby would to fix the bugs and make it a really good product it would sell alot better.

Would you buy a car with lots of faults or one that is is fault free?

[RDS]

@somerset Modeller

This thread is for making detailed suggestions on future new RailMaster enhancements

[Somerset Modeller]

True

But it needs to work correctly before adding new features. 

I was just responding to above comment about Hornby maybe discontinueing railmaster, if they would to discontinue the product then this thread is pointless.

A poor product wont sell, a good product will and it will be developed with new features.

[Chrissaf]

@somerset Modeller.

.

You too are missing the point with your comment. The 'short circuit' detection on the eLink does not require the eLink to be re-booted (reset as you put it). What you observed is not a 'bug' it is just a case of not having the correct configuration implemented. You could have fixed the issue with your eLink WITHOUT going to the expense of buying an Elite to replace it.

.

You wrote in your earlier post:

.

when using it with eLink because every time you had a short circuit you had to reset. Using it with Elite it works so much better and never have to reset after a short circuIt.

.

• With the Elite, you have to press the 'escape' button after a short circuit. This is still technically a RESET.
• With the eLink, you press the on screen version of the Elite 'escape' button (see image below). This is also a RESET function, that functions the same as the physical 'escape' button on the Elite .
• What you DON'T have to do with either the eLink OR the Elite is re-boot either RM or the controller to recover from a 'short circuit'.
• However, as I pointed out in my reply, the on-screen 'escape' (RESET) button for the eLink does not appear unless you have the correct configuration in the 'railmaster.ini' file. That was the purpose of my clickable link, to take you to the 'How To' page to get the on screen reset button (shown below in blue circle) to show.

.

/media/tinymce_upload/59b06869e285f6e6474fac6ce3b71ec8.png

.

PS - Many of the things that you consider as RailMaster bugs are totally fixable if the product is configured correctly by the user. However I do agree, that a high level of configuration tinkering to get a robustly working product should not be needed.

[Chrissaf]

Increase Function support in RailMaster to include F26 to F28. There are three blank function labels already in RM on the large throttle after F25, so I would think that adding these last three missing functions would not be an insurmountable task.

[96RAF]

I would like to be able to clone a locomotive in the setup listings, then give each a new ID. At present I can only change the ID of an existing loco but not duplicate that loco’s features.

 

I have several ‘locos’ which have the full set of 29 functions but there is no equivalent prelisted R-number or standard function set anywhere near my requirements that I can use to avoid having to type in my bespoke list over and over for each unit.

 

This failing probably applies to anyone who runs a fleet of same sort locos not supported by the database.

 

Could this please be added to the future features wish list.

Thanks Rob

[Ashbourne Junction]

I really like Railmaster. I’d just love the graphical interface to look more modern and sleek and less clunky and child like. The colour palettes are so dated. It is however very very good software and i enjoy it greatly. Time for a visual update i think. 

[PJ_model_trains]

@HRMS

 

I totally agree Ashbourne, it has been raised many times in the past but sadly it appears to have been left probably as those working on the software were working on more complex items at the time..

 

The loco boxes are far to big and take uo to much screen

The loco boxes could have smaller icons in them but could also have the ability to shrink them when not in use showing thr Loco name, and expand them ( to a smaller version than those now) when in use. This would allow more locos to be visible.

 

The track layout plan only allows 50%, 75%, 100%, 125% and 150%. as requested before this would be better for the user is we could alter the % to best fit the layout on screen. At present I have 50% showing for my proposed layout, with blank spaces either side, above and below. If I set at 75% I lose 25% of the length and height of the layout. At 50% point buttons and signals are to small, at 75% they are quite large. If we could alter the % ourselves I would be able to set at 60-62% approx, the layout would be easier to see. 

I can supply screen grabs if it helps.

 

Again the isons at the top of the page are far to big, it is like going back to the early days of Microd=sfot and graphics programs, they soon realised the user gets to know the icons quickly, so they made them small, again it would increase the working layout area.

 

These things are much needed, has the software has developed points require extra track between them, double slips taking up around 5 sections for each. 

 

Hopefully HRMS will look at improving these items and bring the software, visual and workable areas, making them more acceptable, more workable and more up to dated. Compared to most improvement requests, these should be relatively easy to do.

[Chrissaf]

I too would prefer a traditional Windows Desktop appearance (Windows 7 that is, not Windows 10) and less toy like. But I think the problem is that HRMS are trying to make the application GUI work for touchscreen and small tablet users too. As they say, you can't please all of the people all of the time........

[PJ_model_trains]

I too would prefer a traditional Windows Desktop appearance (Windows 7 that is, not Windows 10) and less toy like. But I think the problem is that HRMS are trying to make the application GUI work for touchscreen and small tablet users too. As they say, you can't please all of the people all of the time........

 

I understand that Chrissaf, but there must be a way for the software to work on a PC one way and an Android or Apple hand held another way. IFTTT.

 

Take a Laptop or PC as an example, they could have two modes, the one that is now, chunky and bulky, which may be suitable as you say for touch screen also, but also a more Windows like approach also. So the user has the option in setup, beginners or touch screen mode, or advanced and more Windows like. Beginners and Advanced used here just to define chunky or Windows like, it could also be viewed as larger and small work items for those who have eyesight issues. I am looking at the icons in the message of the forum no one says they are to small, they may say not enough emoticons, but people accept the smaller icons, once you have clicked them you know what they are.

 

There is also the percentage screen view, this may work with both PC/laptop and mobiles/tablets, if there is an issue with mobiles/tablets just add it in to the more Windows like choice available only on PC/Laptops.

 

RM is excellent software, but it has so many restrictions that make it frustrating. 

 

There is also the feather indicators on signals issue, we are still waiting for these in RM. They started to add the options then ran into issues. But they finally agreed last year the feathers would work individually to the siganl. Excellent decision, that meant the on off of the feather was no different to a two aspect signal going from red to green and back again, no other difference except the icon in the track plan. But one year down the line nothing has happened, and we have no idea when they will be implemented. That makes it more frustrating. 

 

[PJ_model_trains]

@HRMS

 

Please, please finish the signals, and include the feathers and theatre signals controlled like a two aspect signal with the simple on/off, red/green coding that you know works for the 2 aspect signals.

 

Thank you in advance 

 

It would be great to see unfinished items and issues complete before new items are added, as much as we like new items.  😀

[St1ngr4y]

I wonder what the chances are of another Railmaster update before Christmas   😆

[PJ_model_trains]

I wonder what the chances are of another Railmaster update before Christmas   😆

 

On a positive note Ray there are two chances. 

 

If there is it will no doubt include 'minor fixes'. Not completion of unfinished tasks.

 

You will have more for your trains when you get to Christmas day Ray. 

 

Are you still using 2 signals where you have a signal with feather, one for the signal and a 2 aspect for the feather. Although it works it makes the layout screen very cluttered don't you think.

 

[St1ngr4y]

 

Are you still using 2 signals where you have a signal with feather, one for the signal and a 2 aspect for the feather. Although it works it makes the layout screen very cluttered don't you think.

 

 

Yes I am PJ, although, as you know, I do most of my running using programs, so the look of the layout diagram isn't so important for me. However, didn't HRMS say that they were working on making the feather a seperate, snap-on, configurable icon ? Or was that wishful thinking on my part ?

 

Ray

[PJ_model_trains]

 

Are you still using 2 signals where you have a signal with feather, one for the signal and a 2 aspect for the feather. Although it works it makes the layout screen very cluttered don't you think.

 

 

Yes I am PJ, although, as you know, I do most of my running using programs, so the look of the layout diagram isn't so important for me. However, didn't HRMS say that they were working on making the feather a seperate, snap-on, configurable icon ? Or was that wishful thinking on my part ?

 

Ray

Hi Ray 

 

Yes they did say that, a year ago. They said they had decided to make them separate as there were to many issues having the signal and feather as one element. It would work like a 2 aspect signal, on/off switch, which we know work they confirmed that also.

 

Except for the odd update and making sure people can log in to use RM, little else has happened.

 

Signals are so near being complete, yet seem so far away, almost forgotten about I can't help but think.

 

It would be nicce to get an update on here from HRMS don't you think.

[Pietrarsa]

Hi all

 

I was suggested to post a message here about the discrepancy I've found using a DCC measurement/sniffer car, in commands "Forward/Reverse to [x]" and "Accelerate/Decelerate Forward/Reverse [x] to [y]", between values format (Speed Steps vs Mph vs Kmh) and RM general settings (scale speeds, units).

It would be appreciated a way to use speeds conforming to general settings.

 

Also I've noticed that when using the single loco driver pop-up (with a bigger speed slider) it often goes in conflict with the little speed slider in the general loco column at right. While mouse button is pressed, the speed of the loco reflects slider position, then releasing mouse button stops the big slider in a position (ie. 70% speed) but the little one in the loco column goes to a different step (usually more higher) and the loco obeys tho the latter, causing often a rush of the loco.