Computer Controlled Layouts

I’ve been looking at the CTI layout control bundle that lets you control your layout from your home computer (www.cti-electronics.com). I was wondering if anyone uses this system (or another one) and has any comments or suggestions on it. (i.e., Does it work well, any performance issues, etc.)

Thanks, Isaac

Wow that looks pretty interesting, especially since I don’t want to go to DCC yet. Any one have experience with this?

I hadn’t heard of this system before. It looks like someone is finally trying to give Bruce Chubb and his CMRI system a run for it’s money.

This looks very interesting and promising for small layouts, though perhaps a little pricey. Though the slightly higer cost may be made up by the ease of use of this system compared to CMRI which can get quite technical.

It will not be a substitute for DCC, but rather a compliment to that train control system. This is more of a layout control system. The fact that this system comes with software is a major departure from CMRI, which is mainly hardware, for which the buyer is responsible for writing his own software.

I just wanted to comment that I am not a fan of computer automation. I feel that anything that removes the human from the control function is a bad thing. Thats why I like DCC. It doesn’t remove the Human from the control equation. It just allows him to control more stuff, more easily.

Actually Grayhound, the computer is not intended to take operation away from humans, though it can handle that issue as well. It should be viewed as a tool, and can be employed to do things like signaling and detection, allowing operators to have an even more realistic experience.

Automation is nice for display running or crew shortages. People better understood the reasons for choosing to use a computer with thier railroad, and I think more would give it a try. This product may bring down some of the barriers from the past.

BTW this message is from Bruce Chubb’s printed material, I’m just the messenger.

Your point is duely noted and understood. However I have a fundamental distrust of computers. All this memory processing power, and logic ability we are giving them these days.Its only a matter of time when an errent drop of moisture shorts the right two things together and our computers become self aware. When that happens we could end up with a Revenge of the machines.

I got the .44 locked and loaded just in case.

James

Unless I’m mistaken, the CTI system is a substitute for a DCC system. This little section below is in the CTI FAQ:

Q. Do I need to make changes to my engines to use CTI ?

A. Definitely not !!! One of the big strengths of our system is that it will work will all off-the-shelf model railroad equipment, without modification. For multiple train operation using non-decoder equipped locomotives, CTI allows the use of conventional block wiring. The PC takes care of tracking each train as it proceeds along the mainline, and automatically routes the throttle assigned to that engine ahead of it, as it proceeds from block to block. The PC can also automatically slow or stop a train based on the presence of traffic in the blocks ahead. The entire operation is automatic, and completely transparent to the user. If you prefer to control your motive power using Digital Command Control, CTI’s software provides full support for the systems from all major manufacturers of PC-controllable DCC equipment. In this case, too, operation can be fully computer-controlled.

This sounds to me like a superior alternative to DCC, as your equipment does not have to be modified.

Isaac

From my experience as a software professional, my thought is: don’t lock yourself into proprietary systemns (Chubb, CTI) when there is an emerging open standard (DCC).

DCC doesn’t have to be expensive. I’d be intereted to see how the cost stacks up against those systems if you look at equivalent functionality. You don’t have to lash out on NCE trhottles, Digitraxx SUperChief controllers and Soundtraxx decoders. Check out the new Lenz decoders for under twenty bucks each and the NCE Switch-It stationary controllers (for switches etc). Combine them with a MRC controller or a Digitraxx Zephyr, and you have a damn cheap system that is open to multiple vendors’ stuff, to future upgrades and to new ideas.

I went to a train club here in cambridge MA the MIT Tech Model Railroad Club and they have a computer controled block system that works wonderfull and this program looks just like that system and it will work fine with DCC so digital will not tell you location of the motive power like a computer controled block system this can run auto trolly service and set train routs this is something I will be picking up as compter control sounds great to me

B -

Isaac, comparing computer control and DCC is like apples and oranges. They are totally different. What makes DCC so nice is, the operator has full control of the engine, just as if he was driving a real train. This makes signaling and detection all the more important. Block control even with the computer doesn’t give you the same freedom and feel as DCC does.

I am building a very large layout and will be using BOTH, and operation should be spectacular. I will be using the computer as a dispatcher. There are a lot of other interesting things that you can do on your railroad by using a computer. You are really only limited by your imagination.

Robengland, the CMRI(Chubb) system is in no way proprietary. The system is really just the hardware needed to convert the computer’s serial port into usable input and output bits. You can use any programming language you want to do the actual control. The system also has accessory hardware available for things like throttles, detection, signaling, and even block control.

This new CTI system will be proprietary, because it comes with software. The advantage of this is that it should be more of a plug and play application than CMRI. This will make it a lot easier for someone without programming experience to access this computer technology.

Budliner has the right idea about computer control.

Please keep in mind I have been doing this stuff for almost 15 years.

BTW James, I think you’ve seen too many movies.[banghead][sigh][(-D][(-D][(-D][swg]

Hi
After the hassle I have just had because my mouse died on a computor that is only 2YO and bought a new mouse to find the USB card I need is no longer made the ps2 card that could be used is not made memory sticks are not made any more.
In other words just because the mouse died a lot of agrivation just to get the new one to work which means two trips to the Tech.
I am too polite to say what you can do with computor control for a model railway I will stick with a transformer controler and cab control thank you
That is unless the computor manufacturors stop diliberatly building obselecence into the things I dont have $2000 per year too waste on a new computer and software every year far better spent on trains
regards John

Agreed. The only use the computer will have on my model railroad is printing out switchlists. Which I make on Microsoft works. Those are a little tedious to make by hand, and I dont want to keep crews waiting for me to make their switch list. But if push came to shove, I coujld do without it just fine.

John, check for your parts on eBay. Retailers like CompUSA don’t like to bother with technology more than a couple years old, and this stuff just keeps changing. I went looking for memory of an old style, and picked it up cheap on eBay.

View that experience as an opportunity to learn something new, and not so much as a frustration. Computer control isn’t for everyone, but most people seem to dismiss it before truly investigating it. It can be very cool!!!

James,
If you have a fundamental distrust of computers, you should stop using DCC which is a computer; but I understand what you mean. There are some good reasons to have computer running of trains, particularly in and out of staging. I’ll give you two examples:

  1. My own layout is in a room that is 13 by 7, widening half way down to 9 1/2 by 13. I am running N scale and the layout is double decked with an eventual third deck for staging added much latter. Since the room is small, but for N scale the layout is large. The room with the benchwork in can only handle 3 operators maximum. If I can have a computer bring trains in and out of staging, that saves me the loss of one human operator and have more fun running the trains rather than wasting time with dealing with staging. The computer would bring the train out to an arrival and departure staging track; the operator would pick it up from there. When the operator returned a train on the arrival track, the computer would store the train.

  2. I have a friend who has one of the larger basement layouts. To really operate it well at present, he needs to have about 5 operators running it. On his layout he has two “flat” stub ended staging areas and one helix double track dedicated to staging only (not used in operations). He is just finishing the helical staging now. My conversation with John (the owner) went something like this - “John, how are you going to take those trains in and out of staging in the helix and move all the trains down one train Length?” “Well Rick,” he replied, " there will be some one sitting in the helix doing just that task." My response - “John, no one will want to do that job, do you know how hot and sweaty helix’s can be (all enclosed) and how boring the job will be?” His reply isn’t important. What is important is that this is another location that is excellent for computer running of trains. The computer would take a train out of the Helical staging, move all the trains down one train len

I have a fundamental distrust of computers, true. DCC is a computer, True. But DCC isn’t given the ability to perform certain actions without the Human initiating it. The distrust in computers I have is that we keep giving machines like the one I am typing this message on more and more RAM, Memory, and general free thinking ability. This is what I distrust about computers. Its only a matter of time before the errent drop of moisture shorts the right two circuts together and we get a machine that becomes self aware. I view that as dangerous. Right up there with people that want to pursue full scale Human Cloning. All DCC is is a glorified Dynatac computer in control of several more less powerful Dynatac computers and every control function is routed through the human. Nothing happens with out the human being in total control at all times.

The computer I am writing that message on I am not so sure about as there are several things it just does wheather I want them to or not. Just in case it ever decides to do the “I think therefore I am” routine. I have the .44 calibre slug waiting with its name on it.

You guys may think that this is a drastic over-reaction to something. And that I have watched way to much TV and Read to Much Sience Fiction, but the simple fact of the matter is, Some one in my family long ago made a deal with the Devil, and his long time accomplice Mr. Murphey, and now they are coming to me to collect, with interest. So I am sorry if I am trying to limit my liabilities in the high stakes winner takes all struggle I am involved in.

In the Universe only three things are constant.
Politicians will lie, <

I think it is a long leap from automated staging to sinister self-awareness [:D]
(Just FYI, The brain has 100 billion neurons and 100 trillion connectors. Neurons interact in dozens of different ways chemical and electrical. There aren’t enough silicon atoms on Earth to match that complexity using simple plodding old binary switches with a half-dozen interconnections each. The idea of the computer brain is a crock of ****).

My concern about computers-in-model-railroading will be around reliability: not hardware but software. The last thing I want to see in the middle of an intensive operating session is the old Blue Screen of Death. I’m experiemnting with JMRI right now. If we can get everything working on Linux and gte Bill Gates out of the loop, I may just risk basing all my fun on it.

I too will be automating staging. Initially it will be just aligning turnouts, then later train pickup and delivery as well, as Rick describes. It will all be DCC controlled. Where DCC seems weak right now is transponding and train detection: Digitraxx etc have proprietary solutions but we need the DCC standard to be extended to make transponding an open interface. I assume nothing will happen in this space until those nice people in Mike’s Train House get seen off by someone’s lawyers…

Thanks for jumping in here Rick.

James I understand your feelings toward computers. One of my favorite short stories of all time is “The Murderer” by Ray Bradbury. It is about a guy who is so bothered by all of the high tech gizmos in his life he cracks, an starts busting things up.

I’m not trying to argue to convince you to change your mind, it benefits me none. If you enjoy operating your trains in a traditional manner, or only like DCC that’s fine. I have done both, and have also used a computer, just never all at the same time.

The key to not fearing or hating anything is understanding. In this case the technology can seem very daunting and mysterious, but if you are interested I can explain it in very non technical terms. Actually, I have a very good understanding of the concepts, but very little actual experience when it comes to setting things up. In the past I have always had help, this time I am on my own. Now I have some learning to do.

You might ask “Why bother?” A few reasons. First, I already own most of the materials to do this project. They are leftover from a public display / business that I owned 11 years ago. Second, I think this will be exciting and challenging to take this hobby right to the limits of technology. And finally, operating this layout when finished will be a blast, not just for me, but for anyone who visits or comes over to help operate it.

If you take away nothing else from this conversation, I hope you will read the story I mentioned above. You can find it in a collection of short stories entitled Golden Apples Of The Sun. By the way the story was written in 1953, but the similarities to modern reality are almost frightening.

check this out

A computer controlled model train set

http://keller-tuberg.homeip.net/~stefan/train/

I’m the Superintendant of my railroad, and I’ll run it myself, thank you. [8D]

“Can’t run trains tonight. The computers down”.