[David]

Hi all, newbie here, so if I'm well out of order just say . ..

Think the issues here are interesting.

Conventional slot depends on varying power through the rails.

Any kind of Digital varies speed by signalling to processing in the car, and constant power.

Lane changing involves powering crossovers and separately controlling two or more cars on one slot. This implies constant power with cars selecting how much they draw.

Although an IR, low power radio such as PMR, some kind of induction loop, or any other signalling could easily sit above the layout on a light fitting, and reach "line of sight" all the cars, it would have to reliably reach all cars, have enough channels, and be safe in the children-at-home environment.

Once this is decided, making the track section respond to a cars intention to change lane, avoiding collisions, and setting out track sections to approximate the "best line" ideas for realism should be easier.

In all I think IR is worth a bit of a look.

 

[David]

Sorry guys, bit "blonde" today !

All HAS to be simple for me, incapable of anything clever .. ..

So, to avoid complexity / expense / incompatibility in the car, we have "rail-powered" active change sections ?

Now we need to talk to the car :
IR still looks viable. Number of posters have vouched for non-line-of-sight performance, speed, and signalling capacity. If not, there's now Bluetooth, wiFi, PMR radio etc. Constraints being cost, component availability (hence curiosity for codes on Carrera car chips) and speed of signal interpretation.

Then the car needs to talk to the change section :
What needs to be said ? Change or not ? Left or Right ? Not complex surely. Seems real need is for simple /cheap / very robust ? Ideal for IR ?

And what about collision avoidance ? Or do we like bouncing off each other ?

Just trying to gather the better thinking of others and complete the solution.
David

 

[David]

Gosh the old "grey matter" is going slow today !

Just reading the DCC thread. Optical, of course !

If Lane change is so simple, and Scaley approach is optical, why not utilise Scaley track, Scaley changers with their inherent optical mechanism, power track firmly but without digital complication / expense ?

( For the routed boys, this could all be replicated fairly cheaply, keeping cars the same )

This available, cheapish solution, only then leaves the problem of signalling from controller to car for speed and lane change. Costs of digital track senders, controllers etc. avoided.

Now could optical be used for collision avoidance ?

David