Loco Detection (2)

[Graskie]

Things are patently not clear yet.

[walkingthedog]

But for some it's too long to wait for time.

[PJ_model_trains]

Who needs a manual, it is here ;-)

 

I sensor we are getting back to normal. What was normal?

[Fishmanoz]

Normal is as normal does.

 

Or to paraphrase, only you and I are normal in this world, and I have a question mark about you.

[walkingthedog]

I still can't believe that all those pages and pages of text were discussing how to do something with a system when nobody actually knows how it is going to work yet.

[Fishmanoz]

There's not actually all that much there. It starts with me saying, given what we already have in RM, I think it works like this, then adding a little to what I said first. It then diverges into how you can have the LD system not interrupt and cause programs

 

to fail, and that took sometime to get to the bottom of. And a lot of it is people hitting reply to long posts and taking up space by those posts then being duplicated in their replies.

 

And while it is all speculation, it is logical speculation based

 

on what is already in RM. Then, it may all change completely when the real system is released if that changes the command set you can run as part of a sensor setup. We've had fun in the meantime at least, and it's unlikely to stop.

[Gregd99]

Fishmanoz said:

Normal is as normal does.

Or to paraphrase, only you and I are normal in this world, and I have a question mark about you.

Have you misquoted Einstein?

"Only two things are infinite, the universe

and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Love it....

[Fishmanoz]

What I want to see change is the ability to run if/then/else commands in programs, not just in a sensor setup. That would improve the program feature just pointed out in a point setup on the other thread.

[Fishmanoz]

Gregd99 said:

Have you misquoted Einstein?

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Love it....

Definitely not from Einstein, don't remember who right

now, and originally meaning I'm the only sane one in the world, although you might be too but I'm not sure.

[walkingthedog]

I know you're all having fun fishy but I reckon some think that what's on RM is what they're going to get.

[PJ_model_trains]

Hi WTD

 

With that in mind take a look at RAF96 post 10.20 today at this link

 

https://www.hornby.com/forums/hornby-forums/hornby-railmaster/6797/?page=4#post84702

 

Are changes being made to current versions that shouldn't be and is a

 

history of changes etc being recorded as it should? We hope so but

[PJ_model_trains]

As we plan to set our systems up to match the rail networks, the rail networks continue to change. Technology!

 

For those who didn't see it, but would like to, go to BBC iPlayer and search railways. Look for Bang goes the Theory series 8: Trains

 

and download and watch it.

 

As we set our layouts for fixed block loco detection , moving block detection is being installed. Some will know this, some may not. That is the reason for adding this post.

 

The program also discusses latest techniques

 

for checking the railways including the fastest rail system checker in the country plus many other topics.

[Graskie]

I managed to see most of it, PJ. Quite enthralling. It's getting more and more like running model railways in some respects.

[PJ_model_trains]

Graskie said:

I managed to see most of it, PJ. Quite enthralling. It's getting more and more like running model railways in some respects.

I had heard about it but it was nice to see it on tv and how it works.

To me,

that is loco detection, seeing where each loco is on screen. I think what we are getting is an introduction to loco detection. Putting moving blocks to one side it is to advanced for us yet. But, I can see, in time, Loco Detection Pro allowing us to watch

the locos move in the blocks, as picked up by the sensors and shown on screen.

We live in hope, we all need it, we cannot live without it.

[PJ_model_trains]

Graskie said:

I managed to see most of it, PJ. Quite enthralling. It's getting more and more like running model railways in some respects.

That track detection system train was some machine and some system.

[Graskie]

Just think how many linesmen it has or will put out of a job, though. I well remember them walking the line with their sledgehammer, tapping rails and joints as they went. Also the wheel-tappers, of course.

[Fishmanoz]

Now this time I may be talking through my hat but ....... I don't believe that loco detection will know anything about where your locos are on your layout. Let me explain.

 

All that loco detection will know is when a loco is detected, what its speed

 

is and whether it is going forward or reverse at the time. Full stop.

 

It will know which detector by number has made the detection, but it won't know where the detector is, so it won't know where the train is. By that I mean I'm not expecting that

 

RM will take your schematic and turn it into the spatial arrangement of tracks, points etc, with the detectors positioned on it that would be needed to plot train movements. It doesn't do it now, and I'm not expecting that it will with LD. It will continue

 

to only take account of defined items in your schematic, like points, signals and detectors, but not the spatial relationship between them or that they are joined up by specific track patterns.

 

But you say isn't it essential for RM with LD to work

 

that this is known? Absolutely it is but you have to take account of one additional element in the system that does know all of the spatial relationships. That element is you.

 

So I'm not expecting that LD is going to operate like a fully automated

 

12" to the foot system. Far from it.

[MetmanUK]

Hi Fishy,

I started reading your last post and immediately thought 'Yes, I agree completely'. Then my brain started to tick over and my thoughts changed a bit as follows.

 

You are right in that the track plan is merely a representation of the

 

important parts of the layout and that RM cannot therefore link the real world of what is happening on the track with the schematic drawing.

 

However, suppose the detection decoders when dropped onto the layout plan are linked to a piece of track, in

 

much the same way as the red/green blobs are to points. When you change points the blobs react and the grey lines in the points change. Now, when a detection point sends an event message back to RM I see no (obvious) reason why the linked detection blob couldn't

 

flash or maybe display the loco ID briefly. This would be good programming as it provides positive feedback to the controller that a/the loco has passed a certain point.

 

From this you could go completely overboard and include detectors every 30cm (!)

 

and match this to your track plan so that each track section represents roughly 30cm. Overkill, I know, but its something to think about.

 

I should say that it still wouldn't show which blocks have locos in, only the passage of locos around your layout.

 

Should

 

I go and lie down now ?

[Fishmanoz]

Hi Metman, a lie down might be good. There are 2 issues with what you say. The first is that you will quickly run out of sensors given the number you can put on your layout. So every foot will be impractical.

 

The second is that, even if you have

 

them every foot, the program still doesn't know where those pieces of track are, only that a sensor is there, but just where where is remains a mystery. The track pieces are only there for your convenience, not for any practical use by Rm am in controlling

 

your locos.

 

At least that is what I think. I'm happy to be corrected.

[PJ_model_trains]

Fishmanoz said:

Now this time I may be talking through my hat but ....... I don't believe that loco detection will know anything about where your locos are on your layout. Let me explain.

All that loco detection will know is when

a loco is detected, what its speed is and whether it is going forward or reverse at the time. Full stop.

It will know which detector by number has made the detection, but it won't know where the detector is, so it won't know where the train is. By

that I mean I'm not expecting that RM will take your schematic and turn it into the spatial arrangement of tracks, points etc, with the detectors positioned on it that would be needed to plot train movements. It doesn't do it now, and I'm not expecting that

it will with LD. It will continue to only take account of defined items in your schematic, like points, signals and detectors, but not the spatial relationship between them or that they are joined up by specific track patterns.

But you say isn't it

essential for RM with LD to work that this is known? Absolutely it is but you have to take account of one additional element in the system that does know all of the spatial relationships. That element is you.

So I'm not expecting that LD is going to

operate like a fully automated 12" to the foot system. Far from it.

Just to clarify a point in this can of worms I do not apologise for opening. It is good to bring these things out and discuss them constructively.

I said...

To

me, that is loco detection, seeing where each loco is on screen. I think what we are getting is an introduction to loco detection. Putting moving blocks to one side it is to advanced for us yet. But, I can see, in time, Loco Detection Pro allowing us to

watch the locos move in the blocks, as picked up by the sensors and shown on screen.

I also said...

We live in hope,

PJ

[Fishmanoz]

PJ, you'll need more than hope before RM knows where your pieces of track are in a meaningful topographical fashion, including their interconnections with other pieces of your track and, until then, it can't know where your locos are. All LD will do is

 

report detections at particular detectors. Knowing where they are is a whole nother order of magnitude in complexity.

[PJ_model_trains]

I agree with MetmanUK that it is not impossible but I do feel it could come in the future.

 

My line of thought at this time (right or wrong) is...

 

A sensor is placed on the track

A sensor blue block is placed on our RM layout design at

 

a similar point.

A sensor detects a train (code) as it passes over it and sends a message loco #*** has just gone over it, plus any other information it may send.

 

The sensor is a dumb object somewhere on the track. But RM is a sophisticated piece

 

of software, 'improving all the time'. It is how the information received is programmed between RM and LD and how it used that counts, not forgetting our blue square on the layout represents the position on the track, so any data response it to that blue square

 

where ever we put it.

 

Initial LD will not do this but, I believe it is on the horizon if they choose to program a Pro version to do it. As mentioned by MetmanUk we would add more sensors also up to maximum, more sales for Hornby. There is nothing to

 

say they cannot in the future expand the possibilities, more sales for Hornby.

 

Nothing is impossible at a price, subject to demand.

 

PJ

[St1ngr4y]

Personally, I would rather watch the trains going around the track, rather than shapes moving around on the RM layout diagram. For me, the only use for LD will be to allow my programs to stop trains more precisely than at present.

Ray

[PJ_model_trains]

Hi Ray

 

I would in time like both. Yes I love to watch the trains go round as you do but, having a layout in front of me where I control them from (unless running a program or a recorded run) I see many benefits from knowing where the train is on

 

the screen.

 

PJ

[Fishmanoz]

Pretty fundamental change I think PJ. First thing you are going to have to do is throw away the schematic and put in a real layout, then you'll need an engine to map every last piece of track into the program with its dimensions and where along its length

 

any sensors might be, and whether it joins to more track or points, crossovers or slips.

 

Not saying it can't be done, clearly it can, but it hasn't even started yet as no such capability is on the current program, nor do I think likely in the near

 

future.