Loco Detection: What Is It and How Does It Work?

[PJ_model_trains]

Maybe when Adam has sorted out the forum troubles he will be able to get back onto this and consolidate all the LD stuff into a more cohesive topic.

Given how far back the original request goes it may be too far down in the weeds for him to pick up now and so need a direct request to his email by PJ. 

If only Hornby would put out a flyer advertising what the system will do in more detail. Surely that couldn't harm any patent associated 'secrets'. Why not just market it 'Pat-Pending'.

 

Hi RAF

 

I don't want a direct email to fishy or from him. You cannot have a simple discussion about the basics of adding a sensor without him shoving his oar in one way or another to kill the conversation.  It is sad.

 

I would have thought forum user participation, sharing views would have been better that one person rules.

 

May be it is me, I am so close to saying stick the lot, get a fix for my signals and forget the rest. But part of me says, hang on there are some good guys on here. The next few days will answer what I decide to do.

[Yelrow]

PJ, now now, take an angry pill, thats what i do. Far too many good guys on here, to take offence, or even a wall.. After all is said and done, as my friend WTD, would have said, its only toy trains. Chill, regards. john PS, did you  order the tts class 37, in the end. Playing with the notch up and downs, is enough to give you blood pressure, but what a great loco.

[PJ_model_trains]

PJ, now now, take an angry pill, thats what i do. Far too many good guys on here, to take offence, or even a wall.. After all is said and done, as my friend WTD, would have said, its only toy trains. Chill, regards. john PS, did you  order the tts class 37, in the end. Playing with the notch up and downs, is enough to give you blood pressure, but what a great loco.

 

You are a good man John, I know there are many more on here, that is one reason I do like this forum. I also know some members keep their mouth shut, so to speak, go for the quiet life, avoid certain people. I am not like that. 

 

You are doing well with your... 'offence, or even a wall'  and changing the subject, well done, but the picture is still the same colour!

Nice try with the TTS Class 37  ;o)  No I didn't buy it, I have two class 37's one with Loksound and I didn't like the Class 37 banana, to bright, I would have to weather it (a lot).

Be careful though John, I don't want you having blood pressure with your notching. You could always take one of your angry pills though  ;o)

I do hope it is getting warmer over there, lighter nights, flowers in the garden, fishing getting hungry, our side of the world is on the best side of the seasons.  ;o)

[RB51]

I would like Hornby to spell out, what is envisaged, and planned for this product. How do they see it working. Masses of thoughts have been offered, but we could comment objectively, if we knew better, what proposals are. john

 

John, as at least an interim answer to your question, go back and look at my long post on page 32 of LD Availability - let's start a sweep.  What I say there is based on a whole range of information that we already have on LD, plus a little logical deduction.  I would not consider it to be speculation, although you will see that I have postulated two different methods of determining loco speed and direction as they pass over sensors.  If you look further, no one has suggested that I am wrong, nor do they propose any alternatives or other capabilities.

 

 I also take the subsequent silence on the part of Hornby and HRMS, even Adam's failure to move the content from where it is to here as asked, to be an admission of sorts that what I have said is right.  The problem they have at the moment is that they cannot be seen to publish anything about the patent application they have made or it will invalidate the patent.  You cannot patent anything already in the public domain.  We cannot expect them to say any more until the patent has been granted and they are ready to release the system.

Far be it from me to criticise one of the Fourm's elder statemen - but Fishy is being quite silly here with his statements about "no-one offering alternative ideas" and Admin "not removing erroneous content". For the first part I would hazard a guess that most folk on here are in the same boat as me. That is to say I do not have a clue about how these things work or even might work and I am very prepared to read what those more learned than I have to say as I would not have, I am sure, any viable ideas. It is however a subject I am very interested in.

 

For the non-removal of incorrect statements that is just ridiculous. If all the main contributors put on here everything they thought this system might or might not do - or even what they want it to do - and none if it was removed that would not mean that all the ideas would come to fruition would it? You can't, I'm sorry to say Fishy, claim that you are right just because no-one siad you are wrong, or even implied it. Now, for all those who have spotted them, may I offer my apologies for any spelling, grammar or syntactical errors. I really must find my glasses. R-

[PJ_model_trains]

PJ, interesting topic and certainly one going to the heart of your layout.  if I were picky, I would say it doesn't go to what LD is or how it works, rather it is about how to use it, but let's not be picky.  Now my thoughts on your answers.

 

REPLY - If I were picky you say... I know the title of the thread fishy, I also know what I was putting for discussion was more how we would use LD. It didn't see this as warranting a new thread! I also thought it was worth discussing as a group, as there were several view points for positioning sensors, and quite a few people wanting to learn more. What I was proposing was a forum discussion not what fishy says

 

Where do you put ID tags?  As these will be finite in size, and maybe larger rather than smaller if they detect speed, you may have little flexibility where they go.  For steam locos, the only flat place will be somewhere between the driving wheels, so towards the centre.  Similarly for non-steam, it will be between the bogies not on them, so again towards the centre.

 

REPLY - Again, I thought it better to share views as a forum, I have already said in the past we will be restricted where we can put tags, but with new interest in LD I hoped for user participation, not fishy rules!

 

I also believe you are overthinking it worrying too much about actual driver position in the loco.  I understand why you are doing it but there may be too much variability to actually have your system take it into consideration.  You can try to account for it by exactly how far before your signals you put your sensors - see next.

 

REPLY Over thinking, not so fishy! I was using an example

1 - where should sensors go, by a signal,

2 - what about stopping distance.

3 - if a sensor is next to a signal, where it should go, a train could over shoot the signal.

Again, without saying it, hoping for members to comment and create a discussion, based on the options, advantages and disadvantages of each. The consideration for position of driver, was not over thinking as you put it, but to consider which end of a loco the driver is and where the loco may stop.

 

If you want a loco to change a signal as it passes, you will have little choice but to have a detector at the signal or immediately before it (see above), certainly not at some distance before it.  Then I would consider the speed factor by not looking at that signal in isolation but take account of the signal before it and it's collocated sensor.  If it is other than green, use it to start to slow the loco to shunt.  If you get an emergency situation not known when the loco passes the previous signal, you will have no choice but to wear the stopping distance.  You will need to account for this in signal, not sensor, placement.  Should your signal be on its own and not part of a signalling system, then you may need a sensor some distance before it as well to slow the loco on approach if needed.

 

REPLY - Is not, immediately before a signal same as some distance before it? Some distance is a general term, unspecified distance, left for the user to determine! I have to wonder who is actually over thinking.

 

Now we are getting to the usual Fishy... I have said before we will no doubt control speed at a previous signal, this could be, a block protecting signal, or even another in between the two. I have said this before and you have shot it down!!!

 

Incredible, you now say...  ' then you may need a sensor some distance before it as well to slow the loco'  I have said this before and you have gone against it.  You blow with the wind fishy!

 

I can think of numerous situation where you have given advise and changed the way you think later.  To the new member you come over knowledgeable, but a tree can always be judged by its fruit over time.  You said to me once, I needed the wire clips on points, recently you have said I don't need them. You referred me to Brain Lambert site regarding having a DCC Bus stating then, a DCC Bus was necessary. Good advice if I may say so. But when two or three have run their layouts with just one power source you change your view that a DCC Bus is probably not necessary. Going against specialist advice. You would make a good politician fishy, you are out spoken, think you are always right, have to have the last word and go with the flow based on your view.

 

My replies to your message have been added to the main message above.

 

Fishy, (in reflection that seems a good name).

 

Don't reply I am not interested.  If there was not a problem with signalling waiting to be fixed by HRMS, I would leave the forum and say forget Loco Detection.  But there is a problem with signals and I am interested in LD, so I will withdraw in to the back ground, wait to hear from HRMS, add comments to the forum relating to these items and leave you to your forum.  You are not a front line person fishy, you let members discuss various angles then come in at the end to comment on them, sum up what has been said and trying look good.  

 

Quoting your words...

no one has suggested that I am wrong, nor do they propose any alternatives or other capabilities.

I also take the subsequent silence on the part of Hornby and HRMS, even Adam's failure to move the content from where it is to here as asked, to be an admission of sorts that what I have said is right.

Who do you think you are. Your abruptness will re pay you in time. Hopefully before it costs to many members.

[PJ_model_trains]

I would like Hornby to spell out, what is envisaged, and planned for this product. How do they see it working. Masses of thoughts have been offered, but we could comment objectively, if we knew better, what proposals are. john

 

John, as at least an interim answer to your question, go back and look at my long post on page 32 of LD Availability - let's start a sweep.  What I say there is based on a whole range of information that we already have on LD, plus a little logical deduction.  I would not consider it to be speculation, although you will see that I have postulated two different methods of determining loco speed and direction as they pass over sensors.  If you look further, no one has suggested that I am wrong, nor do they propose any alternatives or other capabilities.

 

 I also take the subsequent silence on the part of Hornby and HRMS, even Adam's failure to move the content from where it is to here as asked, to be an admission of sorts that what I have said is right.  The problem they have at the moment is that they cannot be seen to publish anything about the patent application they have made or it will invalidate the patent.  You cannot patent anything already in the public domain.  We cannot expect them to say any more until the patent has been granted and they are ready to release the system.

 

Far be it from me to criticise one of the Fourm's elder statemen - but Fishy is being quite silly here with his statements about "no-one offering alternative ideas" and Admin "not removing erroneous content". For the first part I would hazard a guess that most folk on here are in the same boat as me. That is to say I do not have a clue about how these things work or even might work and I am very prepared to read what those more learned than I have to say as I would not have, I am sure, any viable ideas. It is however a subject I am very interested in.

 

For the non-removal of incorrect statements that is just ridiculous. If all the main contributors put on here everything they thought this system might or might not do - or even what they want it to do - and none if it was removed that would not mean that all the ideas would come to fruition would it? You can't, I'm sorry to say Fishy, claim that you are right just because no-one siad you are wrong, or even implied it. Now, for all those who have spotted them, may I offer my apologies for any spelling, grammar or syntactical errors. I really must find my glasses. R-

 

Very well put Roger.

 

Far better than my replies that's for sure. 

 

As a forum we are a community, sharing ideas has to be our goal so that we can learn from each other. Some subjects someone may know more than another person, this would depend on the persons knowledge or how far they have progressed with that topic. It still doesn't mean that person is right, I may have signals, I know what I have learnt but, it doesn't mean what I have done is right. As out hobbies progress and get more technical with so many over lapping situations and different ways of doing things this will increase. That is why sharing is so important. Well I think so!

 

But, those are my thoughts, for what they are worth, but I stick to them.

[Yelrow]

PJ, you did not take enough angry pills, either that, or you did not give them time to work, before your second Broadside.. Good post from ROG, pity nobody knows what  syntactical means. Did he swallow a dictionary. Meanwhile, back at notching up diesels, thats another new word, in train running. Learning all the time. john

[PJ_model_trains]

PJ, you did not take enough angry pills, either that, or you did not give them time to work, before your second Broadside.. Good post from ROG, pity nobody knows what  syntactical means. Did he swallow a dictionary. Meanwhile, back at notching up diesels, thats another new word, in train running. Learning all the time. john

 

Dear John, you are trying.

 

My wife says I am but I am sure she means it a different way!

 

I looked at the bottle it said, Take two tablets, four times a day.  I chose two and swallowed them, but now I wonder, how do I get them back to take them again?

[Yelrow]

Wait for the next annoying post, you will find a way. john

[PJ_model_trains]

Hi 

John, 

I am trying to joke about things but, it is not a joke, it is sad.  I'm done.

[96RAF]

Maybe when Adam has sorted out the forum troubles he will be able to get back onto this and consolidate all the LD stuff into a more cohesive topic.

Given how far back the original request goes it may be too far down in the weeds for him to pick up now and so need a direct request to his email by PJ. 

 

 I don't want a direct email to fishy or from him.

 

No PJ not to Fishy - a direct email to Adam in case he missed the earlier request.

[96RAF]

Syntactical - a nice play on words by Rog I thought. Not a word you will find in the dictionary - but syntax is and tactical is.

[RB51]

It's nice to be appreciated. R-

[MetmanUK]

My thoughts on LD sensor location are as follows.  I have previously said that LD is simply for detecting locks.  Certain data will be provided or may be calculated at or around the time an LD event occurs.

 

LD is merely a technology for triggering an event in the operational software/program ie RM.  It is not something that mirrors the real world of operating a railway, rather a means of adding value to the info that RM and its operator (you or me!) have to enable us to control trains, signals etc.  Potentially this may enable us to mirror the real world if we so wish.

 

Due to space limitations and probably cost we will be limited to how many sensors we have and where we locate them.  I would therefore suggest that, for most average sized layouts, sensors will be some distance before signals.  This is because there is likely to be a 'reaction' time between detection and initiation of the resultant instruction.  I plan to split my layout into train-sized chunks/blocks, each 'controlled' by a signal.  I will then put a sensor within the block, probably nearer the start then the end.  This will enable me to adjust the loco speed to pass (or not) the next signal as required.

 

However, like everyone else, I'm only guessing!

 

One last point.  Although in the real world LD controls signals by one means or another, it is the loco driver that determines speed.

[RDS]

... However, please let me assure all of you that when I can move these posts I will be sure to do so ...

Thanks Adam.  

I thought that there would be a genuine reason for the hold up and I certainly didn't read anything into it!

[Fishmanoz]

All, particularly PJ, my apologies for any offence caused by my last post.  Let me assure you none was intended.  Just a couple of specifics:

 

-  Having the last word.  This is not my intention.  I do sometimes, when I have something to add to a thread, summarise the advice so far, including adding my part, but only to give the OP a consolidated solution.  On LD, back on Let's Start a Sweep, I certainly called for other's view and a lively discussion resulted.  Having just re-read it, I believe my view of LD operation was supported with some additional detail added and unknown areas to date noted.

 

-  On my reply to PJ on tag and sensor placement.  Let me say for a start, I consider PJ to be the ultimate forum signaller, with Ray not far behind.  His work with HRMS on getting the most complex signals to work will benefit everyone, as will his ideas on prototypical signalling systems for layouts.  As a result, he can foresee some demanding needs for tag and sensor placements.  My reply was only attempting to be more pragmatic on this.  My language left a lot to be desired, including the picky remark.

 

-  On Hornby views - sorry Adam, I shouldn't have drawn that conclusion, unwarranted.  However, I'm sure we would all like to know what Hornby think about the LD system without prejudicing any pending patents.

 

- On DCC buses - I believe buses are best practice but not the only practice.  Consequently, I have given opinion and advice on buses, more recently on terminators and electrofrog points with frog switching.  Then I have also given single point connection advice to those not using buses, like john on his possible use of Elite and eLink together on RM.  This doesn't mean I have changed my views from one camp to the other, or given contradictory advice.

 

That's more then enough from me for now and again, no offence intended.

[choralc]

Loco Detection and RailMaster is something I'm looking forward to. When it comes all will be revealed.

[RB51]

Thank you FIshy for your apology - but I for one was not offended, although I think others might have been. For my part all I was trying to do was point out that you had drawn inappropriate conclusions from the absence of comment. R-

[PJ_model_trains]

Dear Fishmanoz

 

Nice to hear from you, we are all valued members, this is a good forum, some very good guys and some knowledgeable guys, I have said it many times before. We all have a contribution to make but not one member knows everything or can see things from every angle. Together we can make a massive difference and help so many existing and new members to the forum and the hobby as a whole.

 

I am going to make this brief for many reasons, we are all different and must respect each others views, but we must also be diplomatic in our approach. I personally respect you for your knowledge, but it is the way you put thinks over at times. You can be quite abrupt, sometimes not seeing the other persons views, so appearing to push your point over, This, and That, and The other... not happy with this you follow with 'Let me summarise'. There are times when we can summarise as comments could be a little bitty, that's fine but not when it is as if shoved down our throats.  I am only saying these thing, knowing I am not the only person to feel this way, so that we can move forward and help one another.

 

I know some times it is hard to get a point over, maybe not worded as it should or it is hard to explain for anothesr to visualise the issue/topic. I had an issue with signals, HRMS were convinced I had set things up incorrectly. Those situations can be hard to discuss as you feel the other person may not listening or only seeing their side, especially when time runs on. In the end HRMS emailed me and was given access into my computer to check my setup. At first I felt pressured as the guy was asking me even the most basic things. Easy to say at that time I am not an idiot but, it would get us no where. Part way through I said to the very kind gentleman, I will listen and do anything you ask but, please listen to my side when you have completed the things you want to go through. He agreed and I could see although many items he asked were very basic, he was just checking 'everything' to see if something was set incorrectly. As it happened I was able to show him the fault I was experiencing at that time and HRMS were able to replicate it. I mention this, as an example only, to discuss a situation with another, rather than anything we have discussed to date.

 

Someone once said knowledge is dangerous, may be in the wrong hands it could be but, more often than not I think it is how we deal with the knowledge when discussing with others, our mnds can get set as we see things from our view point. I think LD has tested us on this issue, as well as frustrated us all, we are discussing items we cannot see but, having been given a few items to play with. We have part of the jigsaw but don't have them all and don't have the full picture. Lets hope the wait is not to long now.

 

The only comment I have regarding your statements, other than what has been stated is, Ray is the number one man for signals with an extensive knowledge and experience of computer programming. I only know what I know through reading real life signalling, talking on other forums and here, trying and putting in to practice what I have read and learned, plus hour upon hour of testing. This included creating blocks by the position of signals, (let that not be a stumbling block), adding sensors to my layout, running programs simulating what will happen in LD so as to visualise from the 'view of the engine driver'. But I too am learning and constantly looking for another persons view so that I can reconsider my thoughts to see things from a different angle. 

 

I said I would make this brief! My apologies if not so. May I conclude by saying... it takes a man to apologise Fishy, and not just the one apology. 

 

The past

Sand_____________________________________________________________________Sand

The present

 

We move on... one word or two word replies are all that is needed, if you feel you need to reply at all, do not feel you have to, I have already moved on. I am still here but almost wasn't.    ;o)

 

PJ

[Yelrow]

PJ, hi, I would hate to ever ask you for a long reply, if that was a brief one. This is a brief one. john

[PJ_model_trains]

PJ, hi, I would hate to ever ask you for a long reply, if that was a brief one. This is a brief one. john

 

Hello young John

I am onviously not into briefs..... thank goodness the weather is improving  ;o)

[PJ_model_trains]

PJ, hi, I would hate to ever ask you for a long reply, if that was a brief one. This is a brief one. john

 

Hello young John

I am obviously not into briefs..... thank goodness the weather is improving  ;o)

[PJ_model_trains]

PJ, hi, I would hate to ever ask you for a long reply, if that was a brief one. This is a brief one. john

 

Ermmm

One or two word reply welcome John..... that is brief  ;o)

[hosh]

Question-1 (consider this before reading the items below) - where would you put the sensor in the track, next to the signal, before or after the signal?  The train has to pass over the sensor to receive the command to Stop.

Consider-1 stopping distance for your train

Consider-2 your steam train driver is near the back of the train

Consider-3 now do the same run with your Class 37 diesel loco, driver of train is at the front.

Consider-4  a signal should change when a train passes it!

Question -  where would you put the sensor? Next to the signal, before or after the signal? 

Additional considerations

- where would you put the train tag on the steam train? (we said driver was at the back)

- where would you put the train tag on the Class 37? (we said driver was at the front)

 

Why isn't it as simple as this? -

Sensor A well before signal A. If signal A red then stop, else continue. The speed of the train should be known and thus the signal can be told to go red after x seconds in the event it is green to begin with.

Further up the track there is another sensor/signal B and when this is green then the preceding signal A also goes green and the train moves away. When it is now 2 sensors up the track (i.e. thru the next signal and approaching signal/sensor C) then signal A becomes green again.

Sorry if this is rubbish - I don't have RM and have no idea how it's designed but surely this is possible?

[PJ_model_trains]

 

Why isn't it as simple as this? -

Sensor A well before signal A. If signal A red then stop, else continue. The speed of the train should be known and thus the signal can be told to go red after x seconds in the event it is green to begin with.

Further up the track there is another sensor/signal B and when this is green then the preceding signal A also goes green and the train moves away. When it is now 2 sensors up the track (i.e. thru the next signal and approaching signal/sensor C) then signal A becomes green again.

Sorry if this is rubbish - I don't have RM and have no idea how it's designed but surely this is possible?

 

Hello hosh

.

You don't have RailMaster? It is a good piece of software improving all the time.

.

Regarding signalling there are two initial view points to consider, first is from what the train driver sees, second is how signals work that the driver doesn't see.

.

Regarding your comments on a Red signal, that is straight forward, the sensor a short distance from the signal A tells the train to stop as this signal is Red.

.

But, what about the train on its journey, let's say at this point the train driver sees a 'none red signal' so he can continue his journey, as his train passes that signal A, that signal changes to Red. As his train passes signal B that signal changes Red.

.

But when the tender or back of the loco (if no carriages), or last carriage/wagon or guards van passes that signal, the 'previous signals down the line' (which the train/loco driver cannot see) change according to the type of signals in use.

.

The sequence of signal aspects being 2 aspect Red then green, 3 aspect Red then Yellow then Green, 4 aspect Red then Yellow, then double Yellow then green.

.

What happens behind the train/loco depends very much on whether it is a loco without carriages or a train with carriages and how long it is along with the distance between signals. It may also take in to consideration whether a signal is a station or sidings signal, or whether they are block protection signals..

 .

Looking at your example hosh, train has passed signal A and turned it Red, when passing the next  signal up the line, signal B, that will turn Red. But, neither of these or any other signal down the line can change until the back of the loco or train (including carriages etc as stated above) has passed a signal. And when it/they have passed the said signal, only those back down the line change according to the signal type.

.

I think the use of delay timing may be needed, but also may not. This will probably depend on how far the sensor is from the signal and the stopping distance of some locos (subject to speed at that time) Some trains stop quicker than others so the distance is shorter, it would be good to test our trains before installing sensors to allow what suits our locos. Regarding speed, I think we will be slowing locos down from a previous sensor, subject to the signal aspect in readiness. This is where I think multi aspect signals come in to play. If signal passing is Yellow proceed with extra caution, if it is double yellow proceed with caution, if it is green it is clear to continue, but with a 2 aspect signal it is one or the other, there are no warnings!  Multi aspect signals are used on faster lines, 4 aspect on the fastest lines to give more advanced warning.

.

I hope the above makes sense.