Has anyone tried transponding with the FL12/FR11 decoders?

[David]

Both the FL12 and FL11 are advertised as having transponding, but given that they can't give readback on the programming track (can't draw enough current), I'm worried that this function might not work in real world use. Is there anyone with transponding (RX4) who can confirm or deny that cab cars register on the layout? I don't want to go to a lot of trouble of ensuring the head and tail ends of all trains transpond for a future automated layout and see it go to waste.

[KenS]

No, but I'm very interested in the answer as I'm planning to eventually use transponding and I've had the same concern.

[Martijn Meerts]

There's no need for head and tail ends to transpond to automate a layout actually. The only real benefit of using transponders with an automated layout, is that you can have a check to see if a certain train (certain address that is) is on a certain section of track. Of course, no computer program really supports it yet, other than as a gimmick ;)

[KenS]

The usual reason given for transponding (or similar) is initialization, and that's my concern. With a mix of long and short trains, I'd like to know if I have one long train spanning two blocks, or two short trains next to each other, when I power up the system.

 

If every train has at least one transponding decoder (motor), then in theory you don't need to detect the ends. But it seems to me that this adds a "what's adjacent to this unidentified block" level of correlation, making the software's job harder.

 

You can avoid this with careful parking of trains (never use two adjacent blocks), but that's not likely to be practical in yards and even though it's prototypical elsewhere, it's a limitation likely to be violated in practice.

[Martijn Meerts]

Pretty much all software I've tested/used keeps track of where trains are, and saves state on shut down. Of course, you might get issues if you run trains manually in between computer controlled session, considering the program will then loose track of where the train is.

 

I'm actually not certain if transponding function decoders require a minimum current on the outputs (or on 1 of them at least). I've only tried non-transponding function decoders so far, but I do have 2 ESU Lokpilot FX micro decoders on order, which are function decoders that do Railcom (The Lenz version of transponding.)

 

Another thing is, there are tiny circuits which are basically just transponders, you don't connect anything that draws current to those at all. I'm not sure when I'm getting the Lokpilot FX decoders, but I'll give them a whirl to see if transponding works without hooking up a light bulb. If it works with those, chances are it'll work with the Kato decoders as well.

 

 

On a sidenote, while I do say that transponding isn't needed for automated control, I'm trying to put transponding decoders in all my trains as well, even if it's just being prepared for future possibilities ;) If the Lokpilot FX decoders work well, I might replace my Uhlenbrock decoders as well, not entirely happy with them to be honest.

[David]

With regards to software, I'm a programmer professionally so part of the whole appeal is being able to design the software myself - my "dream" layout is a large setup with multiple overlapping lines/interconnecting lines, so that I can call up any train in staging, assign it a programmed "route" (like Chuo-Sobu express, Sobu commuter, etc) and have it go off all by itself. Following signals, braking to a stop at the right stations, throwing switches and generally interacting correctly with all the other automated and manually controlled trains.

[Martijn Meerts]

With regards to software, I'm a programmer professionally so part of the whole appeal is being able to design the software myself - my "dream" layout is a large setup with multiple overlapping lines/interconnecting lines, so that I can call up any train in staging, assign it a programmed "route" (like Chuo-Sobu express, Sobu commuter, etc) and have it go off all by itself. Following signals, braking to a stop at the right stations, throwing switches and generally interacting correctly with all the other automated and manually controlled trains.

 

Pretty much all programs do what you describe, but many of them are either really expensive or very confusing, or both :) I've been sort of planning on making my own programming as well, although mainly because I want to use one of my Macs to control the layout, and the choice of Mac programs to control a layout is very limited. The few programs that do exist are written in Java or some other weird  cross-platform language, and they just never emulate the OSX interface.