Next Model Railroaing Tech Breakthrough...

[eric220]

Batteries in N Scale are another thing that I don't see happening. I have a model helicopter that takes 3.7 V batteries. The smaller ones are 150 mAh. They are 1.7" x .425" x .275", not counting the connector on the end. (That's comparable but slightly longer than a Micro-Tsunami decoder.) That's good for around 5 minutes of flying, and they take 40 minutes to charge. With a nice, long PRR coast-to-coast tender, one could cram a couple in there, but I don't see how they would ever fit in a diesel. On top of that, they're not very heavy (of course, as helicopter batteries, they're designed to be lightweight) so they would greatly reduce the weight versus having more heavy metal in there.

My other thoughts come with my dad's experience with battery driven locomotives. Of course, his are G scale, but it's still concrete experience running trains on batteries. G Scale has room to hide very large battery packs. Some people in his group of friends have mounted batteries permanently in the locomotive boilers, but that means taking them out of service for hours while they charge. And that's after only 15-20 minutes of running. My dad opted for removable battery packs specifically so that he could keep spare packs charged and just swap them out. Either solution doesn't seem very attractive for 2 hour ops sessions, or for a large layout with a helix.

Battery power is not a magic solution that makes model railroading amazingly different or better. It just comes with different challenges. My general philosophy is that I'd rather invest time and effort now for benefit down the road. I'll take the wiring and track cleaning complications so that I can drop a locomotive on my track any time and run it as long as I want.

[eric220]

- Bluetooth technology could replace DCC control.  This would allow easier integration into computer systems without the need for adapters and specialty programs.

 

No. No physical layer to the control system that requires joining, pairing, etc. That is a recipie for frustration and failure. Bluetooth is far worse than WiFi in that respect.

As a correction to my earlier post about NFC, I actually meant RFID. My mistake.

[victor miranda]

the standards for blue-tooth include battery as the power source
so there is a low power RF option.

give the size of batteries and super caps right now
you will be dragging a 'tender' of some sort.

besides you will want a few to run the empire while the rest charge.

and yes super magnets will be used to get more efficiency
(Coreless is the best bet currently)

again.... I am not at all sure the extra costs of BT-DCC and battery-boxcars
are a collective good idea.

over the past two years we have been promised
genuine small super caps with power densities similar to leading
edge batteries.   .... that would mean a keep-alive cap that fits in a medium n-scale steam dome.

R/c locos will be a bigger pain than cleaning track.

build a better track cleaner.

!!!!

there is another technology breakthrough.

a REAL GOOD track cleaner that survives longer than a month....

victor

[eric220]

build a better track cleaner.

!!!!

there is another technology breakthrough.

a REAL GOOD track cleaner that survives longer than a month....

victor

This gets my vote!

[Ken Rice]

Batteries in N Scale are another thing that I don't see happening. I have a model helicopter that takes 3.7 V batteries. The smaller ones are 150 mAh. They are 1.7" x .425" x .275", not counting the connector on the end. (That's comparable but slightly longer than a Micro-Tsunami decoder.) That's good for around 5 minutes of flying, and they take 40 minutes to charge. With a nice, long PRR coast-to-coast tender, one could cram a couple in there, but I don't see how they would ever fit in a diesel. On top of that, they're not very heavy (of course, as helicopter batteries, they're designed to be lightweight) so they would greatly reduce the weight versus having more heavy metal in there.

...

Battery power is not a magic solution that makes model railroading amazingly different or better. It just comes with different challenges. My general philosophy is that I'd rather invest time and effort now for benefit down the road. I'll take the wiring and track cleaning complications so that I can drop a locomotive on my track any time and run it as long as I want.

Bingo!  The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.  Or to put it differently, the system whose problems you are hassled by regularly seems pretty lousy in comparison to a system whose problems you have never experienced 

An important point about those lipos that people are fond of pointing out as a good solution is that in the R/C world at least they have basically no safety features and are prone to some rather exciting failure modes, mostly when provoked but on rarer occasions basically spontaneously (due to a lingering manufacturing defect).  Mostly at storage charge level and below (3.84 volts per cell) they are pretty safe.  But fully charged (4.2 volts per cell) they pack enough energy to rupture and spew flames and toxic smoke if they are punctured, shorted, etc.  You can get some real spectacular failures if you overcharge significantly.  Which some cheapo chargers do - I personally have seen a cheap usb charger for the 1 cell lipos for things like that model helicopter over charge a lipo to the point where it burst into flames, the lipo/charger fell apart and made a serious charred mark on a hardwood floor.
The point is, these are not things you want to charge unattended, or leave sitting around fully charged.  Especially not in small enclosed spaces (locos) with a bunch of flammable stuff around (scenery).

There are all kinds of really cool potential battery technologies that both have higher energy density (more oomph for the size) and are much safer than lipos, but so far none of them has made it out of the laboratory, and there's no sign that trend will change anytime soon.  This thread is a fun and sometimes depressing read: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1188429 ("Some company announces groundbreaking new battery - again.")

[peteski]

This gets my vote!

Add me to that too!

[nkalanaga]

Max:  I've seen some railroads that do "refuel on the fly".  For years Amtrak's Cardinal refueled in Russell, KY, just west of Ashland.  No station stop, they just stopped on the mainline, and a waiting tank truck pumped the tanks full of diesel.  The NP/BN, and probably the BNSF, did much the same at Pasco yard, refueling the switchers from a tank truck, usually during the crew's lunch, at the yard office, but I've seen the truck in the middle of the yard.

For battery powered steam, the ideal design might be to go back to a tender-mounted motor, a shaft-driven loco, and a boiler full of battery.  Put the weight where it's needed, over the drivers, and a big, but lightweight, motor and gearhead in the spacious tender, where the light weight would lessen the drag.  Many large North American locos had stokers, and the driveshaft could be disguised as the stoker tube.

[peteski]

For battery powered steam, the ideal design might be to go back to a tender-mounted motor, a shaft-driven loco, and a boiler full of battery.  Put the weight where it's needed, over the drivers, and a big, but lightweight, motor and gearhead in the spacious tender, where the light weight would lessen the drag.  Many large North American locos had stokers, and the driveshaft could be disguised as the stoker tube.

That I don't understand. Unless you can find a high-capacity lead-acid battery, the boiler will not contribute much to the loco's weight (and pulling ability), after all the boiler is where you can cram the most of your heaviest weight. In N scale steam locos maximizing the weight is extremely important to maximize pulling ability.  Where else can you put, as you said "weight where it's needed".  The only available space for weights is in the boiler (and maybe some space in the frame and cab).

[eric220]

OK, let me see if I can rephrase my stance on batteries: with current technology, yes it can be done. With no sound and a tuned, coreless motor as Max described, you might even get a decent run time. You can forget any prospect of having sound, as the draw from sound decoders would kill the battery in minutes, and there's very little room left for a speaker. (You can also forget any of these other technologies that have been discussed for the same reason.) Also, the locomotive is going to be down between uses for charging for somewhere between 40 minutes and a couple of hours. Batteries don't last forever, so after a couple of years, you're going to have to dig them out and replace them. If you build the batteries as swappable, it means breaking out the 0-5-0 and manhandling the engines at least twice every time you use them. You still need a DCC (or equivalent) decoder with integrated wireless receiver in there too. Not a good prospect for anything that doesn't have a large, roomy tender like a PRR coast-to-coast.

I for one just don't see the advantage in n Scale, and I see plenty of drawback.

[glakedylan]

back some 3 decades while modeling HO scale, I had a 2-8-0 consolidation locomotive from Bachmann that had free wheeling drivers under the boiler with motor and wheel drive inn the tender. it was an interesting set up with 1/2 of the tender trucks able to rotate. it was one of the smoothest and heavy pulling steam locomotives I ever have had. but, then, translating that to N Scale is not readily done. the tender can be even worse in space for the addition of weight than the boiler frame and shell. but, it was an interesting way to produce a good running locomotive. I think, in addition, getting the right action and look on the tender trucks would be a challenge?

interesting thread!

[peteski]

back some 3 decades while modeling HO scale, I had a 2-8-0 consolidation locomotive from Bachmann that had free wheeling drivers under the boiler with motor and wheel drive inn the tender. it was an interesting set up with 1/2 of the tender trucks able to rotate. it was one of the smoothest and heavy pulling steam locomotives I ever have had. but, then, translating that to N Scale is not readily done. the tender can be even worse in space for the addition of weight than the boiler frame and shell. but, it was an interesting way to produce a good running locomotive. I think, in addition, getting the right action and look on the tender trucks would be a challenge?

interesting thread!

Um, a large majority of Minitrix and Fleischmann  N scale setam locos (and they have a relatively huge selection compared to what we have here for U.S. steam) have tender drive like you've described.  The loco is free-rolling and it picks up power. Most of the driven tender wheels have traction tires.  Does it work?  So-so. Is it optimal?  No.  Again, the light-weight of the N scale models (compared to H0) is the pink elephant in the room.  The loco is a bit too light to super-reliably pick up power and the tender is too light to give it enough traction (so there is a need for 4 or 6 traction tires which makes the tender dead as electric pickup).

Remember this post? Tender drive.

[glakedylan]

yes, I agree Peteski
the need for weight for both better electrical pickup and traction/pulling power
and thanks much for noting the thead with the tender drive locomotive
somehow I missed that thread in its original form
I also admit that the tender drive and the Randgust boxcar drive addition
have been played off each other back and forth and in conjunction with each other
for years...I keep searching for what would be the ideal
too many Model Power non-pullers, along with too many others that even
adding a Bachmann tender or kato trucks to the tender just do not do as well as
one would hope...
thanks for the well thought out info...
sincerely--

[victor miranda]

is that the famous Peteski Schnell Zug?

ah the URL says it is...

I like it!

victor

[peteski]

is that the famous Peteski Schnell Zug?

ah the URL says it is...

I like it!

victor

You  made me laugh Victor!  Thanks!

Now if that loco was a PRR loco, that would make your day.  It is a Atlantic!

[nkalanaga]

Peteski:  Since we don't know what the battery would be made of, it may well be as heavy as a lead-acid one.  After all, none of today's batteries hold enough charge to make it worthwhile.  By the time one does become available, it may well be a "supercapacitor", rather than a battery, and the boiler shell could BE the energy storage system, instead of using a plastic casting.  More likely it would go in the tender, and since light weight is a feature of the supercapacitors, the tender would be the perfect place for it.

In any case, it wouldn't help me, because the only steam I need is narrow gauge, and there's little room for batteries, capacitors, radios, or much of anything else in N scale narrow gauge.