Model Railroading > Digitrax wireless system

I understand Digitrax has released their new totally wireless system in Europe and it is expected they will be releasing a U.S. version here soon. Does anyone have any updated info on this? With MRC and NCE hitting the market with theirs recently, I would wonder why Digitrax waited and decided to test it in the European market first? No problem with that, but it was also rumored they might be doing a throttle conversion much as they did from tethered to wireless. Any info would be appreciated.

Jim

They're suppoidlly going to be in the 2.4 M/K hertz spectrum and they are having problems with cordless phones and such. From what I read no one else will be at that freq., thus no problems at a show except from other Digitrax users. Hopefully they'l be here this summer.

The European release is likely due to NCE and MRC radio not being licensed in Europe. Digitrax has the only full featured system there.

tunnelmotor40 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > With MRC and NCE hitting the market with
> theirs recently

NCE has had wireless for years, not just recently. They are on the third generation wireless now, with major enhancements each time.

coaldrag Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They're suppoidlly going to be in the 2.4 M/K
> hertz spectrum and they are having problems with
> cordless phones and such. From what I read no one
> else will be at that freq., thus no problems at a
> show except from other Digitrax users. Hopefully
> they'l be here this summer.

2.4 mhz is crammed with users, all of whose systems are supposed to NOT cause interference, and to ACCEPT interference.

Digitrax has wireless. You can control anything with a decoder wirelessly. But you still have to plug in to acquire and consist things together.

It is two way wireless. So you will not have to plug in to acquire and consist things together.

n6nvr Wrote:
> 2.4 mhz is crammed with users, all of whose
> systems are supposed to NOT cause interference,
> and to ACCEPT interference.

You have to parse this statement very carefully. A transmitter of this type may not cause interference to other services outside its operating band. it must accept interference from any source. Multiple transmitters operating in the same band will cause interference that is legal and is mostly a nuisance since it is very hard to identify interference as the cause of operating failures. These things operate at such low powers that you almost have to throw away the rule book for radio propagation.

When I said wireless, I was referring to the newest system that, as one of you did state, does NOT require plugging in to either access or program a loco. This will require a totally new frequency or mod to the existing one. A new receiver will be attached to a modified UP5 (from photos I've seen) with an upgraded throttle. The U.S. Patent Office has already given the OK to this system.
As for frequency interference, I had this at a train show two years ago. A robotics club was running their stuff with a wireless controler, and our trains were just taking off on their own. A quick search in the DCS100 manual mentioned this issue and further and described how to change the frequency within the Command Station (DCS100/200 or DB150). There are 7 settings, I believe, so I simply dialed up a number, entered it in and no more issues that weekend. Once you are done, it is a good idea to reset it back to 0 or 1, as well as purging the command station and throttles of existing cab numbers.

Jim

tunnelmotor40 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I said wireless, I was referring to the
> newest system that, as one of you did state, does
> NOT require plugging in to either access or
> program a loco. This will require a totally new
> frequency or mod to the existing one. A new
> receiver will be attached to a modified UP5 (from
> photos I've seen) with an upgraded throttle. The
> U.S. Patent Office has already given the OK to
> this system.

The Patent Office does not O.K. systems, it only grants Patents on the merits of non obvious issues that are new ideas. The FCC gives the O.K. to radio systems.

> As for frequency interference, I had this at
> a train show two years ago. A robotics club was
> running their stuff with a wireless controler, and
> our trains were just taking off on their own. A
> quick search in the DCS100 manual mentioned this
> issue and further and described how to change the
> frequency within the Command Station (DCS100/200
> or DB150). There are 7 settings, I believe, so I
> simply dialed up a number, entered it in and no
> more issues that weekend. Once you are done, it
> is a good idea to reset it back to 0 or 1, as well
> as purging the command station and throttles of
> existing cab numbers.
>
> Jim

The robotics club must have programmed their decoders to the same numbers as your decoders as only the same numbers will respond. This problem could have been eliminated if the NMRA and the DCC manufacturers would have done the initial protocol properly when they started DCC.

Not sure what the robotics club had, but from what I was told, it had to do with the frequency of their radios. Nonetheless, the problem was resolved and is addressed in the DCS100/200 manual. Sorry 'bout the mis statment on the US Patent office giving the OK to Digitrax's system. . . just an overview that the system did get FCC approval as well as the patent. There were some photos posted of the new panel on the Digitrax chat site.

Jim

If the NMRA would have done the DCC spec. correctly, there would be no interference. Most cell phones and portable 900 mhz phones work on the same frequency but the data packets have the serial number of the particular communications chip at the beginning and end of the transmission packet. Thus, the packet of data is only "heard" by the receiver chip that has that particular serial number even though there may be other transceivers on the same frequency. We have accomplished up to 200 transceivers "talking" and "listening" to one another in a the ECP (Electronic Control Pneumatic) 1:1 brake system without any interference. This was demonstrated on 900 mhz and 2.4 ghz. If it's good enough to work there, it can work with DCC. As a matter of fact, there really isn't much difference in the way the data is sent in ECP systems as in DCC systems. The data in ECP systems is sent down the wire at a radio frequency in packets or sent through the air as the same. The wired system in ECP is the power line also that runs the length of the train, so the data packets are sent over the power line. Sound familiar? Difference is, the 1:1 systems uses 210 VDC down the train line which must be at a minimum of 10,000 ft. long with good transmission at the end. ECP communications is not really much more in cost than DCC considering the amount of solenoids and transducers the ECP circuitry is watching and acting on.

tunnelmotor40 Wrote:

> Not sure what the robotics club had, but from what
> I was told, it had to do with the frequency of
> their radios. Nonetheless, the problem was
> resolved and is addressed in the DCS100/200
> manual.

Sorry 'bout the mis statment on the US
> Patent office giving the OK to Digitrax's system.
> . . just an overview that the system did get FCC
> approval as well as the patent. There were some
> photos posted of the new panel on the Digitrax
> chat site.
>
> Jim

No problem Jim, just thought I'd correct what is often a misnomer about the Patent Office. I heard that Digitrax is having interference problems here in the States and this has lead to the delay in getting the unit approved. Is this true?

Jim-

Was this on the Digitrax Yahoo!Group that you found photos of the UR92, or somewhere else? I've looked (eagerly) and can't find them on the Yahoo!Group.

-Fritz Milhaupt
DCC Wrangler, Rails on Wheels
http://www.railsonwheels.com

I seem to have this memory problem . . . I searched it too, and now can't recall where it was. It may have been on the JMRI User group. I'll check and get back with you.
Jim

OK, I did my diligent search on the Digitrax Yahoo Group site and it was posted on or about Nov 25, 2007 as message #122177 thru 122184. That's about as far back as I went. I don't recall, nor did I search further back to see when this thread started, but this should give you a starting point. Interestingly, it is doing well in Europe, from what I've heard. If Digitrax is having some 'teething' problems before U.S. release, I'd hope they resolve them soon, as it would be nice to go fully wireless.

Jim