Model Rail issue 107 August 2007 Hornby Digital

Hello Gary

In relation to your first question:

The wording of the standard is specific and clear. Conformance requires all DCC items to operate within the limits of relevant CE or FCC regulation. That is not ambiguous, and it is a clear obligtion of the Mfr to comply with standards in each country the product is sold in for it to be called either conformant or compliant. This is clearly stated and unambiguous. If it does not do so, then it cannot be called compliant and could not claim a conformance warrant.

NMRA are not able to police anything as they are not a regulatory body - they DO however take the issue very seriously.

Products submitted for compliance testing are run through a large battery of tests several of which will clearly show whether a product would indeed be likely to meet FCC or CE - circuits that radiate do so for a reason and those reasons are visible on any comptetent digital test equipment.

FYI the reason many do not pre-submit isn't anything to do with the fact that the specs are hard to meet or onerous - its simply that as a volunteer body, it takes the NMRA a long time to do the tests - and Mfrs are wanting to get things to market fast.

To help improve this, with the positive support of all the main brands, the NMRA are actually commissioning the design and Mfr of dedicated test computer linked equipment to simplify compliance testing, allowing Mfrs to pre-test before submission - I think that is clear evidence of NMRA's wish to make it easier for Mfrs to follow the standard.

Back to the nub of the issue:

Hornby however chose to (a) make a totally incorrect statement in relation to the NMRA specification and ( pass off their waveform error as a result of the need to meet CE standards.

Both are patently, to put it simply, untrue.

In particular the existence of the flaky waveform has been specifically blamed by Hornby on the need to pass CE standards - that is patently incorrect, and needs no other evidence to be proven as an incorrect statement as other EU compliant / NMRA compliant products did not require or end up with the select problems in order to comply.

The waveform is symptomatic of problems within the unit. In two units tested it shows a peak to peak ringing of over 60v. three other brands tested with the same source power supply and the same screen resolution on the same oscilliscope show a clean square waveform and a sensible peak to peak for that waveform.

In relation to your second question:

You ask about a square wave being transmitted at 5 amps. It is not... ever. The digital signals are created by the command station portion of a system - the same signals irrespective of current level, and the complexity and waveform that results will change based on the number of issues it is addressing at any one time.

The items on the track simply use current as available from power resources / by the booster(s) as needed... it never "broadcasts" a 5 amp signal.

(FYI - the largest layout I know of uses 30+ 5 amp boosters - if the generation of noise is within CE standards at source, and all components pass CE, the layout will not fail to meet CE either)

The control signal is simply transmitted on the top of the power provided via the booster, whether integral or separate, and variances in the nature of the signal carry the commands.

However, your question is perhaps too simplistic to have relevance. FYI I have over the past few years been involved in certification of many products to CE and C-tick - many more complex than DCC. BTW, CE would be better described as "almost global" rather then European - they have been adopted by many nations.

A clean square wave is not enough on its own to pass EU standards which have a far wider scope, however it IS what the standards require and is anyway symptomatic of a good design that has been designed to pass such regulations.

There is no reason at all why a unit designed and built to meet all NMRA requirements by those competent to do so will have any reason to fail,as these are well understood international standards and qualified and competent engineers are trained to be cognisant of needs and design accordingly.

You make the point that other manufacturers do not always submit for compliance. True, however they DO by policy set out to design to meet the standards and this is clear from the seamless cross brand performance of the brands you mention. Hornby does not design to conform and misses compatibility and any possibility of compliance, and is therefore largely incompatible with those brands that DO.

Finally - please understand: I posted on list to clarify a couple of points - and encourage those on list to read the whole story to balance the errors in the published interview. NOT to debate the clear, accurate and concise content of the letters.

Please don't look for any other agenda in the comments from myself or the NMRA - There isn't one. All parties really would be delighted to see them do it properly... And would happily recommend the brand if they did.

Richard Johnson
DCCconcepts.

Hello Richard and all

Nobody is doubting or questioning that the NMRA are an organisation beyond reproach and with honourable values. Simon Kohler indicated in his Model Rail interview that European EMC is not recognised in the United States as a legal requirement there. He also indicated that the NMRA appear not to recognise EMC either.

Unless I am mistaken this is the only reference in the NMRA DCC standard that relates to FCC/CE requirements:-

QUOTE All components of a NMRA compliant digital system shall meet all applicable FCC and/or CE
requirements.

The use of "and/or" is ambiguous and implies options. One or the other or both. American FCC standards are lower than European CE standards as they relate to EMC. It would be easier to meet the American FCC standard. Whilst there appear to be assurances made by the NMRA or their representative that manufacturers are aware of their obligations in this regard in order that they may claim that equipment is compliant with local regulations in whichever market they supply to, the NMRA do not police this or carry out any form of spot checks. The values of the NMRA may differ somewhat from the values of the manufacturers. What assurances do the NMRA get from manufacturers that equipement which satisfies American FCC standards only will not be the same equipment sold in Europe?

And what about American grey imports into Europe?

As an example it does seem very odd that one minute the Guagemaster Prodigy won't work with Hornby Digital and all of a sudden a new updated version is released in the UK which will.

When it comes to the NMRA DCC standard for the signal wave there is only one acceptable waveform. This part of the standard has not been modified since 1994 it would seem. Yet the European CE regulations have been modified significantly since this date. This may have been the point Simon Kohler was making in his interview and if it was he could have made it clearer. The NMRA standard appears not to keep up with legislation outside the USA and to accomodate regulation as it changes if this is indeed the case. What I would say is that Stan Ames in his book "Digital Command Control" does make reference to circumstances where non standard signal waves may be required and does suggest that the NMRA can be accomodating. That is how I read what is said by Stan.

On the waveform question asked earlier, I am taking it that the answer was "yes", a square digital wave when transmitted through railway track will satisfy all current and future European CE EMC requirements. This is the rub of the issue as Hornby may have acted with the belief that it does not/will not and may have futureproofed their product accordingly. This is how I understand the explanation provided by Hornby when speaking with them. And the fact is the only impression I get is that they genuinely believe this.

Hornby seem comfortable that the Elite will receive an NMRA certificate of compliance. They also claim that the Select is compatible (works) with all European control equipment out there. There is little evidence to suggest otherwise. Select issues seem to arrise with American equipment. Richard mentions that the views are based on 2 Hornby consoles that have been examined.

Has the Elite been examined yet?

Happy modelling
Gary

QUOTE (Gary)Nobody is doubting or questioning that the NMRA are an organisation beyond reproach and with honourable values. Simon Kohler indicated in his Model Rail interview that European EMC is not recognised in the United States as a legal requirement there. He also indicated that the NMRA appear not to recognise EMC either.
Unless I am mistaken this is the only reference in the NMRA DCC standard that relates to FCC/CE requirements:-

Gary you just summed it up perfectly! you say that european EMC is not recognised in the US, then you point out that it is!
the EMC is part of CE and that is recognised in the NMRA standard. not only that but it would be a legal requirement of the manufacturer to comply with these standards. they can not 'opt-out' of CE!

QUOTE (Gary)The use of "and/or" is ambiguous and implies options. One or the other or both. American FCC standards are lower than European CE standards as they relate to EMC. It would be easier to meet the American FCC standard. Whilst there appear to be assurances made by the NMRA or their representative that manufacturers are aware of their obligations in this regard in order that they may claim that equipment is compliant with local regulations in whichever market they supply to, the NMRA do not police this or carry out any form of spot checks. The values of the NMRA may differ somewhat from the values of the manufacturers. What assurances do the NMRA get from manufacturers that equipement which satisfies American FCC standards only will not be the same equipment sold in Europe?

Gary this is irelevant. a unit cannot be sold in the uk unless it complies with CE. yes it would be easier to meet FCC standards but whats the point?? it couldnt be sold in the UK!!!!!

QUOTE (Gary)And what about American grey imports into Europe?

What about them? A UNIT CANNOT BE SOLD IN THE UK UNLESS IT MEETS CE - PERIOD.

QUOTE (Gary)When it comes to the NMRA DCC standard for the signal wave there is only one acceptable waveform. This part of the standard has not been modified since 1994 it would seem. Yet the European CE regulations have been modified significantly since this date. This may have been the point Simon Kohler was making in his interview and if it was he could have made it clearer. The NMRA standard appears not to keep up with legislation outside the USA and to accomodate regulation as it changes if this is indeed the case. What I would say is that Stan Ames in his book "Digital Command Control" does make reference to circumstances where non standard signal waves may be required and does suggest that the NMRA can be accomodating. That is how I read what is said by Stan.

Gary again this is irelevant. the hornby unit is outputting a very high peak voltage. this is putting tromendous strain on the chips. its like if you buy a vauxhall. its a car and it works. you put in unleaded petrol and it works. if you put in methanol it will work-but for how long? just like the DCC signal it will put strain on the components. they are being asked to deal with extreams they were never designed for. this is the problem and is far far more important than weather it has an NMRA badge.

If you put the wrong fuel in your car the warrenty will be void. will we void the warrenty on the chips if we place our loco's on a track powered by the select? do we void the warrenty on hornby's own chips but using the select with it?

If you were a chip manufacturer, do you now design your chips to meet the recognised standard or the selects waveform? if its the latter then what will happen next week when some other manufacturer comes up with another waveform? do we then design chips to acomodate that one as well? Where will it end?? this is exactly why the standard is there.

I am very glad someone has brought this issue out into the open. we can at last talk about it properly.

Peter

QUOTE Gary again this is irelevant. the hornby unit is outputting a very high peak voltage. this is putting tromendous strain on the chips

Well actually its not for those decoders that have signal dampers built into their design (European decoders by coincidence and some, but not all, American decoders). Hornby have adopted solutions that others have used for the CE EMC issue.

QUOTE A UNIT CANNOT BE SOLD IN THE UK UNLESS IT MEETS CE - PERIOD

I am so happy you have said that!

I am very glad someone has brought this issue out into the open. we can at last talk about it properly.

For example there is no NMRA standard for Loconet. Does this feature have CE certification?

Happy modelling
Gary

Thank you Richard for coming out, I have known about your views on this for sometime. I was sent a copy of one of your posts to a closed DCC forum many months ago and it echoed feelings I have had for sometime. Its about time somebody exposed this complete sham. The article in lasts months MR really was the last straw, and we thought that the labour party were the masters of spin.

By the way Gary it is very disrespectful to the label the Gaugemaster Prodigy as a grey import which is not the case, and at least they have gone to the trouble to modify their excellent DCC offering to fit in with Hornby's non-compliance. However you have kept going over and over the same ground about, this or that approval, but its justification is all meaningless, if the system you have is just plain rubbish.

Again I am not a Hornby knocker, I have the highest regard for most of what they do, but had they sorted this out 6 months or so ago instead of pushing on regardless and trying to hoodwink the public, it would not be blowing up in their face now.

Sid

QUOTE (wiggy25 @ 15 Jul 2007, 23:07) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>MMaD,

Out of interest, does the review also slate the Elite controller?

It will be interesting to see if they have actually made the HUGE difference between the Select and the Elite just for once!

Most articles I've read dont make that difference which I feel is wrong!

Hey ho, I know Hornby are aware of all the comments that are being said on what seems like a daily basis about their DCC system, it might be nice to give them a chance to put things right though.

Completely happy with the Elite, so doesn't really make any difference to me what's been written.
Ian

I have an Elite and can confirm that it does not work with the majority of my TCS decoders, my decoder of choice.
Most do nothing at all. Some buzz and one or two actually run, but performance and fine speed control are very poor.

I have two ESU decoders, one seems to be OK, still investigating the other one as the loco tends to jump-start when the speed is turned right down. Not sure whether LokPilots with momentum are an ideal match for a Portescap motor although it seems to be fine on my Lenz 100 system.

Graham Plowman

QUOTE (dbclass50 @ 16 Jul 2007, 02:13) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Who exactly said they could ?

& if you mean NMRA standards, who without them we really would have a hotch potch of different systems that would all work together, at least, until the saint came along with their own system - just because it's American does not mean we should ignore it - or is it the island mentallity ?

So how come Lenz, Flesichmann, Uhlenbrook, ESU, Roco & Zimo to name just some can manage to comply with all the relevent european standards & NMRA standards ?

Gary - answer this if you can "What American DCC kit does not comply with European Standards ?"

BTW - Richard Johnson is very knowledgeable regarding DCC, but he is also impartial & fair - I just wish he was on this forum.

Personally, I think all this issue of European standards and NMRA standards is a red herring as db50 has demonstrated.

The fact is, you can connect all of the above mentioned manufacturer's equipment together as well as the American counterparts (Digitrax, NCE etc) and they all work together without any problems.

Why is it that some products (eg TCS decoders) do not work with Hornby even though they work with everyone else's systems ?

Graham Plowman

QUOTE (Gary @ 16 Jul 2007, 05:03) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>MMaD has indicated that the article should be read and I would like to read the Model Rail article before responding to the question. There is simple logic that time after time seems to be overlooked and it may have been overlooked on this occasion.

Hornby said in their own interview that they make products for their customers, not the NMRA, and when chatting with fellow manufacturers about their attitudes in this regard the feedback that Hornby were given by this group was very similar.

Happy modelling
Gary

Gary,

That may well be the case, but the bottom line is that DCC standards have been in place globally for many years and all problems long since ironed out.

It is only since 2 UK companies have decided to 'toe dip' DCC waters by introducing obsolete DCC systems (2 digit addressing for example) which the rest of the world stopped using 5 years ago or more that we have suddenly got all these problems.

A new entrant to the DCC command station market space cannot go off at a tangent making up their own standards and blaming the NMRA and/or European legislation for their own failure to develop a system which works with everyone else's equipment. Everyone else can do it, why not Hornby ?

I would have thought that 'making products for their customers and not the NMRA' would have included compatibility with everyone else's equipment and thereby, by definition, NMRA standards.

I am advised that Hornby are working with the NMRA to achieve compatibility/compliance. If the NMRA was the enemy portrayed, why would they be doing this ? Simple: the bottom line (sales) are being affected.

Graham Plowman

QUOTE (Gary @ 16 Jul 2007, 22:00) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Well actually its not for those decoders that have signal dampers built into their design (European decoders by coincidence and some, but not all, American decoders). Hornby have adopted solutions that others have used for the CE EMC issue.
I am so happy you have said that!

For example there is no NMRA standard for Loconet. Does this feature have CE certification?
Gary the decoders have dampers designed for an absoloute peak voltage of 22 volts not 60! and an RMS value of 16 volts. (its worth noteing that many turn this down much further to nearer 12 to avoid provblems with overheating stock fitted with incandecent bulbs rather than LED's.)

The unit must comply with the CE regulations. (Alythough the feature you mention is not covered by CE. CE is concerned with the units safty and making sure it dosent interfear with other people. weather the unit has Loconet is totally irelevant for that.)

if the unit does not comply with CE it cannot be sold in the UK. it cannot pass go. it cannot collect £200.

Loconet and the 21/22 pin sockets are however industry standard. the NMRA is not concerned with this. the NMRA is only concerned with what is actually going through the rail. (i hadnt realised this untill i read the MR article.)

QUOTE (Graham Plowman)A new entrant to the DCC command station market space cannot go off at a tangent making up their own standards and blaming the NMRA and/or European legislation for their own failure to develop a system which works with everyone else's equipment. Everyone else can do it, why not Hornby ?

I am advised that Hornby are working with the NMRA to achieve compatibility/compliance. If the NMRA was the enemy portrayed, why would they be doing this ? Simple: the bottom line (sales) are being affected.

Graham Plowman

I am really not sure what you are trying to say there Graham. I dont recall anyone sugesting the NMRA as the enemy. quite the opposite infact. i think people now realise how important it is to have these standards. i think the NMRA ahs been a little slow at times for instance the 21/22 pin sockets.

Peter

Hello Gary

Overall I think that your interpretation is convenient rather than factual, sorry:

***You said: Simon Kohler indicated in his Model Rail interview that European EMC is not recognised in the United States as a legal requirement there. He also indicated that the NMRA appear not to recognise EMC either.

REJ: No, he said that the NMRA didn't seem to acknowledge CE - he was wrong, and if he had actually read the standard he would have known that he was.

***You said: The use of "and/or" is ambiguous and implies options. One or the other or both. American FCC standards are lower than European CE standards as they relate to EMC. It would be easier to meet the American FCC standard. Whilst there appear to be assurances made by the NMRA or their representative that manufacturers are aware of their obligations in this regard in order that they may claim that equipment is compliant with local regulations in whichever market they supply to, the NMRA do not police this or carry out any form of spot checks.

REJ: No, its not ambiguous at all.

I have been intitately involved with CE type issues for nearly 20 years, and directly with CE for about half that.

ALL countries and all industries and all regulations put the onus on the manufacturer or distributor to ensure that their products comply. It is proimarily a self regulation regime by design even at CE level. NMRA state the Standards clearly, state any requirements that are product category or class specific and add the over blanket of the need for local emissions compliance.

NMRA have no policing ability but its is NOT an option if the product is to be marketed in a country - its up to the Mfr to ensure the product will comply, and up to either the Mfr or the ;ocal distributor to gain local approval.

All this ignores the fact that the standards were actually created primarily by EU based mfrs before they were adopted by the NMRA and so were primarily written so that DCC product would also by default comply with FCC or CE if it met the standards. That is why a clean square wave is important, among other things.

***You said: "And what about American grey imports into Europe?

REJ: What about them: Just blowing smoke in this question I'm afraid... The issue is Hornby, and only Hornby as far as this thread is concerned. Whether other brands do or do not, it won't make hornby any different.

You Said: As an example it does seem very odd that one minute the Guagemaster Prodigy won't work with Hornby Digital and all of a sudden a new updated version is released in the UK which will

REJ: Wrong example: Gaugemaster = MRC Prodigy etc. They started upgrading units in USA long before the hornby existed - and it was primarily becasue of a wrong implementation of function operation code plus other operational problems that needed to be sorted. Like Hornby they had gone their own way and the market demanded they did it right. They statred with an upgrade programme for existing products long before the H issues surfaced.

***You Said: When it comes to the NMRA DCC standard for the signal wave there is only one acceptable waveform. This part of the standard has not been modified since 1994 it would seem. Yet the European CE regulations have been modified significantly since this date. This may have been the point Simon Kohler was making in his interview and if it was he could have made it clearer.

REJ: Nonense: The standard was written to meet all applicable regulations. The degree or basic levels aren't moving, the paperwork and test procedures do change, but the standards regime is not really different in scope or levels/degree. NOTHING will make the Select waveform correct - especially as by its very nature it will always do worse in CE tests than a pure square wave which is what it should have been!

***You said: The NMRA standard appears not to keep up with legislation outside the USA and to accomodate regulation as it changes if this is indeed the case.

REJ: There has been no need to change the NMRA spec: It clearly states that the units must pass standards in countries they are marketed in. Changes in CE paperwork don;'t change this which is a clear statement, not subject to convenient interpretation.

***You said: What I would say is that Stan Ames in his book "Digital Command Control" does make reference to circumstances where non standard signal waves may be required and does suggest that the NMRA can be accomodating. That is how I read what is said by Stan.

REJ: I'm pleased you quoted Stan. What he said in a public forum was "The hornby select is not fit to be sold and its waveform is so bad that it really should not be called DCC. His comment about the hornby decoder was also as damning. Search the archives of DCC-UK to find his posts and read them in full.

Off list, Stan also sent me a code readout of the hornby decoder vs the standards (the same check that NMRA uses). It failed on all key points, including easily satisfied and critical points like the correct implementation of the basic and compulsory CV 29.

***Yous aid: On the waveform question asked earlier, I - etc etc etc

REJ Gary, why do you act as it you are Hornbys spin doctor. Its not open to interpretaion, guess, crystal ball gazing or anything else. There is a standard and a need, it doesn't meet it. Period! You cannot futureproof a product by making is incompatible with the very market its sold in, then blaiming all other product for its problems

***You said: Hornby seem comfortable that the Elite will receive an NMRA certificate of compliance.

REJ: It may do eventually - not yet though, there are still some monir gliches they can easily fix though. I sincerely hope it DEOS end up conformant.

***You said: They also claim that the Select is compatible (works) with all European control equipment out there. There is little evidence to suggest otherwise.

Nonsense, there is reams of evidence to the contrary on my own test bench it destroyed 2 lenz gold minis, made significant programming errors and generally caused significant layout problems such as renumbering lots of loco's all back to 3 when there was a momentry short.

The Selct waveform is guaranteed to damage decoders. 60 plus volts peak to peak is not explainable, sorry.

You said: Select issues seem to arrise with American equipment.

REJ: That same american equipment is well respected, reliable and works extremely well with all other EU made and US made products. ONLY the select has problems with it. Surely that tells you something that doesn't need ANY further comment or explanation.

You said: Richard mentions that the views are based on 2 Hornby consoles that have been examined.

REJ: Actually much more than two, but only tweo placed on the oscilliscope to prove the first one wasn't just faulty: Many usits trialled in several countries, all exhibiting the same problems is the reality.

You asked: Has the Elite been examined yet

Its being looked at - its better than select, but not yet perfect. It has all the makings of an excellent unit with some good features. Its ha nothing unfixable and I'm certain hornby will get this one right soon. strangest problem is a semi incompatibility with Select

Gary: Lets not turn this into a nagging set of emails. Lets simply allow others read the two articles side by side and make up their own minds...

Regards

Richard
DCCconcepts

Oh dear Gary...

***You said: Well actually its not for those decoders that have signal dampers built into their design (European decoders by coincidence and some, but not all, American decoders).

REJ: What on earth does that mean? There is no such thing as a signal damper. Exactly which brands have this supposed feature please, and what is your experience of them?

Are you suggesting that all brands built decoders just in case hornby did what they did - they work to the standards set by the NMRA which specifies exactly wht ranges are acceptable and what are not, and what voltage levels they must tolerate.

Hornbys ringing on the primary waveform of 60 volts isn't anything to do with anything but a bad waveform that gives an excessive voltage at the rails, that is far in excess of allowable and will eventually kill decoders.

(Even worse, at recovery from a momentary short, the basic already too high peak will be magified more than 100% momentarily... a real decoder killer, so I strongly anyone with Select had better add a 3 watt 100 ohm resistor plus 0.1mfd ceramic capacitor in series across the bus to minimise it.)

not my words but they "fit" the situation: ....Why do you think hornby deoders are getting a reputation for not needing feedback as they give off smoke signals after an hour or so!

??? Perhaps Hornby forgot to add the "signal dampers" - or maybe the designer of the decoder just didn't understand, expect to have to handle so much excess!

***You said: I am so happy you have said that! I am very glad someone has brought this issue out into the open. we can at last talk about it properly.

REJ: No, you can't discuss it becasue you don't understand it unless you work with or involved with CE. More half-informed speculation doesn't help anything other than adding irrelevant confusion. If you understood DCC inside the box and the overall scope of CE, you'd know it isn't an issue that is of concern in the case of most products anyway.

***You asked: For example there is no NMRA standard for Loconet. Does this feature have CE certification?

REJ: Loconet is proprietary to Digitrax: it is an overlaid signal on the DCC bus, and has nothing to do with NMRA DCC standards. Loconet doen't need to have CE standards certification as its simply a control concept based on a software protocol, not a product. Product which use Loconet are frequently certified though: for example - all Uhlenbrock control systems... and BTW - Digitrax is CE compliant anyway.

Gary: You try hard for hornby and I respect that, but you miss the point: We too want them to do it right, but patting them on the head when they are naughtly won't teach them right from wrong...or lead them to improve. We will all applaud equally when they get it right.

Regards

Richard
DCCconcepts

QUOTE (Gary @ 16 Jul 2007, 20:03) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Hello Richard and all

Nobody is doubting or questioning that the NMRA are an organisation beyond reproach and with honourable values. Simon Kohler indicated in his Model Rail interview that European EMC is not recognised in the United States as a legal requirement there.

Of course it isn't! Its a *European* requirement. This is just another smoke screen. Conversely, the US have their own standards that are not recognised as a legal requirement in Europe. Are you suggesting we should just adopt US law wholesale in Europe? It would certainly save all these silly arguments.

QUOTE He also indicated that the NMRA appear not to recognise EMC either.
No, he didn't, and even if he did, he is wrong.

QUOTE Unless I am mistaken this is the only reference in the NMRA DCC standard that relates to FCC/CE requirements:-
The use of "and/or" is ambiguous and implies options. One or the other or both. American FCC standards are lower than European CE standards as they relate to EMC. It would be easier to meet the American FCC standard. Whilst there appear to be assurances made by the NMRA or their representative that manufacturers are aware of their obligations in this regard in order that they may claim that equipment is compliant with local regulations in whichever market they supply to, the NMRA do not police this or carry out any form of spot checks. The values of the NMRA may differ somewhat from the values of the manufacturers. What assurances do the NMRA get from manufacturers that equipement which satisfies American FCC standards only will not be the same equipment sold in Europe?
It's very easy to make an argument based on very carefully selected words. The key word that you conveniently snipped are "all applicable FCC and/or CE". It's very simple, in Europe, CE is applicable. In the US, FCC is applicable.

All equipment that receives an NMRA conformance warrant must meet the EMC regulations relevant to the sale of that product. The NMRA themselves do not police FCC or CE regulations, it is left to the manufacturer to self declare that they meet them.
QUOTE And what about American grey imports into Europe?
What about them? DCC imports are no different to any other imports. The *importer* is legally responsible for ensuring that what he sell meets all European legislation, whether it's EMC, low voltage directive, toy safety, etc... For DCC systems, whether or not it has an NMRA warrant or is "compatible" or "compliant" is irrelevant.

Andrew Crosland

QUOTE (Gary @ 16 Jul 2007, 22:00) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>For example there is no NMRA standard for Loconet. Does this feature have CE certification?

Happy modelling
Gary
What point are you trying to make? The lack of an NMRA standard for a particular feature is totally irrelevant with regard to CE certification.

CE certification does not apply to features, it applies to products. A product as whole must conform to the CE regulations to be sold in Europe. If it includes Loconet functionality (or Lenz feedback bus, Lenz XpressNet, NCE Cab bus, etc... None of which have NMRA standards) it must still conform to CE regulations. To be sold in the US it would need to meet FCC regulations. Other countries have very similar legal requirements.

If there were an NMRA standard for LocoNet, then a requirement of that standard would be that the product meets all applicable FCC and/or CE regulations. In my opinion, it's unneccessary to include such a requirement, since it's merely gold-plating existing legal requirements in the jursidiction where the product is sold.

Andrew