Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Front and rear lights

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Front and rear lights

    I read on the OO thread for this loco that you have achieved the noted 'halo' effect - is this something you hope to emulate in N gauge, or is it not possible due to size constraints?

    Also, in the same manner that you have done on your DMUs, can you have a switch underneath for turning front/rear lights on/off?.... nothing more unrealistic than a loco at the front with red tail lights illuminating the lead coach/wagon. I'd go so far as to say this is one of my biggest annoyances with N gauge locos currently.

    Frankly, I wouldn't be upset if you were able to adopt this for all your locos as standard practice. Since I realise this may be financially implausible for existing locos, I thought that you could at least adopt it for any *new* locos from here on.... starting with the 68....

    THANKS :-)

  • #2
    I do wonder if PCB could accommodate reed switches and let user have a magnetic wand or perhaps a mico push switch acceassble through exhaust port to cut lights. It would remove need to handle stock once railed.
    Robert

    Comment


    • JR_P
      JR_P commented
      Editing a comment
      Hi Robert, nice idea, although the former suggestion is far more elaborate than I had in mind ;-) !.... I guess it would operate in a not too dissimilar manner to Rapido (of Canada) 'easy-peasy' light bar for coaches, except in this case for the front/tail lights....

  • #3
    The Farish 31s (latest tooling) have very small sliding switches on the cicruit board to turn off the lights at either end. This does mean removing the body to change them, but given the size this is perhaps the best which will be possible. There probably isn't space to mount them on the bottom of the loco as with some OO gauge models.

    Perhaps Dapol could do similar when designing future models?

    Of course with some models it's possible to simply unplug the lights at one end, but with models where the lighting LEDs are incorporated into the main circuit board, or where the lighting board and the main board and hard-wired together, disabling the lights at one end can't be done without causing permanent (or at least difficult to repair) damage.
    Last edited by DavidInYork; 5 July 2016, 14:32.

    Comment


    • Andy Dapol
      Andy Dapol commented
      Editing a comment
      Keep an eye on the new class 33 when it arrives!

  • #4
    Regarding Halo lamps, Whilst I would never say never, it is very unlikely that this effect will be incorporated into the N gauge version. There is insufficient space to route light guides of an appropriate size to illuminate the halo correctly. This results in a spot of light, rather than a circle.
    Regards
    Andy

    Dapol Staff Member

    Comment


    • JR_P
      JR_P commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks for the info Andy - I had presumed that it would be prohibitive in N gauge but just thought i'd check.... no harm in trying to push the boundaries of what can be achieved in N gauge :-)

  • #5
    Personally, I can't see why a small slide switch on the under side of the loco couldn't be easily achieved - various DMUs/EMUs already have that feature (eg. Farish 350), so I can't see the difference in doing it on a standalone loco.

    I'm not even looking for an implementation that eliminates 'the hand of God' required to slide a switch; robert shrives has proposed an elegant solution, but I would wonder if there might be too much in the way of electro-magnetic field energy in such close proximity to an electric motor for this to work reliably....?

    As DavidInYork suggests, just physically disabling is the only solution for most locos at the moment - this works fine in certain circumstances, eg. my Arriva 67 is always coupled in the same orientation to my Arriva mk3 coaches, so I've just un-plugged one set of headlights - relatively easy to do, but why make it 'that hard' at all.... just have a slide switch :-) !!!

    Andy Dapol I'm just trying to make suggestions to progress the hobby and if, as you allude to, you've incorporated this aspect into the new class 33, that is great news; just be sure to incorporate it into *all future* locos (including the 68, of which I'll be a buying several!) - thanks!

    Comment


    • #6
      A bit off topic for the class 68 thread, but many good points have been raised and I would like to discuss (Maybe I should create a 'blue-sky' discussion topic?

      I too feel that switches for DC and Control by DCC is the minimum that should be offered. Certainly you can look forward to this in future 'ground-up' designs, (which would include the '68). Existing projects will have this dependent on the stage the project had reached, i.e. the 33 does have a rear lamp disabling switch on the underside, but incorporating other features was not appropriate at the time.
      Whilst DCC opens up the possibility for remote control of many features, its possible to offer this (via a 'hands on' operation) to DC modellers as well. I'm fully committed to this approach.

      I could write reams on crystal ball gazing; consider from conception to shop takes quite some time and that the design commitment is made early in the process. Adding features for the sake of marketing spin or 'just in case' isn't my style (unless there is minimal impact on our customers choices and pocket), so putting a Next-18 or Plu-X socket into the model and restricting our customers to a choice of only (at the time) 2 DCC decoders, each at circa £30.00 each, when there was a plethora of 6-pin units available at a low cost seemed plain wrong to me.

      As of a few months ago, my 'spidy-sense' tells me this won't be the case for too much longer, more decoders with this interface are being released and are in development, therefore options are opening up and will be incorporated into our models in the future. By doing so, decoder manufacturers will find the market more viable.

      Also don't forget that we are also developing our own leading edge products, we're working with mechanicals, electricals and other 'stuff' - Black Label being a currently announced example. There are more, looking around my office as I write, I feel that we are punching above our weight in terms of development of technology. Some will see the light of day earlier than others - Tickets to my lab are available (blank cheques accepted), however a mandatory MIB neuralyzer exam will be required on exit)

      Overall we really appreciate the ideas which are being posted here and used as basis for planning. Some ideas align with work we are already involved in, some are new and food for thought. We too want to progress the hobby, and we're implementing this as a multi-forked approach: price, choice, value, technology and quality [listed in no particular order].
      Regards
      Andy

      Dapol Staff Member

      Comment


      • JR_P
        JR_P commented
        Editing a comment
        Thanks Andy - very comprehensive response!

        Indeed, a 'miscellaneous' section for our random thoughts would be helpful.... not sure I'd call it 'blue-sky' though - a bit too cheesy/corporate sounding for my liking!

        Cheers, JR

    • #7
      I'm interested to see the way the market goes with decoder interfaces. NEM651 has been great for size but is limiting in terms of functionality.

      I think that one of the biggest advances that manufacturers could make is making DCC'ing models simpler eg instead of having to pull off potentially delicate bodyshells have an underframe panel that pops out (eg like battery compartments on toys).

      Cheers, Mike

      Comment

      Working...
      X