QUOTE 1. Is it true that all systems must be passing the same protocol OUT to the tracks to enable us of common decoders for loco's and common decoders for points etc.?
Yes
QUOTE 2. Is it true that the RETURN bus for detectors etc. is proprietory and so all circuits will not be common, because of different protocols?
Yes
QUOTE 3. If I built a detector of some sort, how do I encode the address into it so that the system knows which detector it is?
That's the tricky bit. Essentially you have two different systems. The standardised DCC control system is "fire and forget" and apart from RailCom which is developing at glacial speed (that's speed of flow down the mountain, not the rate of summer induced melting) there is no standard way of getting setting information back to the control unit.
My background is similar to yours, and I suspect that I have been down the same path. I initially short listed the Lenz because it seemed to be the most complete system with regard to feedback. A freak of circumstances led me to postpone buying such a system - out of stock - and during the ensuing months I became disillusioned with the lack of new product development on the Lenz system. I eventually bought an ECoS, not because I was taken by the S88 feedback bus which as far as I can tell is proprietary and difficult to get information on, but because I decided that for the volume of feedback detectors I needed, I would probably need to build them myself so the feedback bus became irrelevant. I liked the basic hardware and "took a punt" on some interesting firmware appearing in the distant future given that it had an addressable pixel based display.
For a feedback bus I did not want to reinvent the wheel so I joined MERG and I have been particularly interested in the CBUS project. If you have not come across the MERG website, I suggest you have a look. MERG website.
As you may have noticed from other threads / blogs on the Forum, the ECoS has good support for shuttle operation. The operating firmware has gone beyond the "introductory" phase and is now starting to add some really interesting features but it is significantly more expensive than the NCE.
I hope this helps
David
Yes
QUOTE 2. Is it true that the RETURN bus for detectors etc. is proprietory and so all circuits will not be common, because of different protocols?
Yes
QUOTE 3. If I built a detector of some sort, how do I encode the address into it so that the system knows which detector it is?
That's the tricky bit. Essentially you have two different systems. The standardised DCC control system is "fire and forget" and apart from RailCom which is developing at glacial speed (that's speed of flow down the mountain, not the rate of summer induced melting) there is no standard way of getting setting information back to the control unit.
My background is similar to yours, and I suspect that I have been down the same path. I initially short listed the Lenz because it seemed to be the most complete system with regard to feedback. A freak of circumstances led me to postpone buying such a system - out of stock - and during the ensuing months I became disillusioned with the lack of new product development on the Lenz system. I eventually bought an ECoS, not because I was taken by the S88 feedback bus which as far as I can tell is proprietary and difficult to get information on, but because I decided that for the volume of feedback detectors I needed, I would probably need to build them myself so the feedback bus became irrelevant. I liked the basic hardware and "took a punt" on some interesting firmware appearing in the distant future given that it had an addressable pixel based display.
For a feedback bus I did not want to reinvent the wheel so I joined MERG and I have been particularly interested in the CBUS project. If you have not come across the MERG website, I suggest you have a look. MERG website.
As you may have noticed from other threads / blogs on the Forum, the ECoS has good support for shuttle operation. The operating firmware has gone beyond the "introductory" phase and is now starting to add some really interesting features but it is significantly more expensive than the NCE.
I hope this helps
David