With my current set up, tethered is fine. There's plenty of running options to keep it interesting but my main focus is scenic detailing. Smaller layouts are easier to super-detail. Think of how many years it took George Sellios to detail his Franklin & South Manchester and he worked on it constantly, and yes, it's gorgeous, but I don't have that kind of time.
The tethered throttles that I listed are at least all throttles that have 'memory' (you can unplug the throttle and the engine will continue at the last set speed). This is at least a good stopgap throttle. You can run and follow your train around the layout without tripping and tying up any other operators or visitors due to the really long cord (depending on the size of the layout) The problem with a wireless throttle (either selling or building) is once it is wireless it has to meet FCC testing. This is usually something that most MFRs are not willing to do (even if you are only offering plans for said throttle). Even with bluetooth or using R/C: if you use a FCC approved bluetooth module (or R/C radio), it STILL has to be tested by the FCC once incorporated into another device. Thank the FCC for protecting us from ourselves.
Last I heard someone is working on "Dead Rail" for N Scale. A dummy engine or older diesel hollowed out would work nicely. The tender for a locomotive would do nicely. Batteries are still an issue but I suspect, it won't be long and we can kiss powered rails good bye. See: RC or Dead Rails
My understanding is if you purchase the module that is already certified, you need no additional certification. My company manufactures wireless devices that need FCC certification. Perhaps JMaurer1 should read: https://apps.fcc.gov/eas/comments/GetPublishedDocument.html?id=50&tn=916170 This is how we do it. Greg
Just to clarify. If you don't modify the R/C transmitter and receiver, you are good to go. So I can put a servo in my layout that has a mechanical linkage to a turnout and the servo is connected to an unmodified approved receiver that talks to my transmitter, there's no need to be retested by the FCC.
The frequencies we use for DCC and RC are already approved by FCC. We use wireless microphones at church and as long as they are within the guidelines established it's not a problem. No testing needed. Now you build something using a new frequency (outside established parameters)...that's a different animal. So go for it.
Ahh Rick, not true... just because a frequency is approved, it has nothing to do with the hardware you are using. There are frequencies where non-licensed hardware can be used, usually you find this in the 900 MHz ISM band. BUT Nothing in the 2.4 GHz band is unlicensed I can tell you that. So you cannot just build or use any hardware in an "approved frequency band"... (and we have not even gotten into modulations allowed and power levels, etc.) Let's not lose sight of the controversy, this is the untrue statement that we are at odds with: "Even with bluetooth or using R/C: if you use a FCC approved bluetooth module (or R/C radio), it STILL has to be tested by the FCC once incorporated into another device." Not true. Besides being in the wireless industry for a number of years, I'm also a ham radio operator, we have to know the laws. (at least some of them ha ha!) https://www.google.com/patents/US6148210 Greg
Gregg, We aren't at odds here. Just getting a little more technical then I had hoped. I got my information from a Ham Operator and he said the same thing you did. Keep us thinking straight and thanks for your comeback. Look out the roof is falling in! Grin!
