What can I say?

I only build the stuff so what would I know?

Some pwm controllers have the ability to generate "spikes" of voltage greater than the input voltage.

So, unless Stan Ames is prepared to personally guarantee that any pwm controller will not "confuse" or damage any DCC decoder, Caveat Emptor.

Looks like a quality product.

Sheldon said:  "Yes, you hook it up to an AC source and you DC that is filtered and controlled to run your trains. Looks like a decent product."

As Jim says PWM is perfectly good for all DC locos.
However, a PWM output is not filtered DC and should not be used to power locos that are equipped with DCC decoders.  The pwm signal can "confuse" them, and in a worst case scenario, actually damage the decoder.

I would ask the maker if they are prepared to guarantee the product to be safe with DCC decoder equipped locos.

Just don't run it on a pwm type controller.

A pwm signal may "confuse" the decoder such that it can lose all programming, and in worst case situations actually damage the decoder.

Stick to a filtered linear type output.

Hunt and Jim.
I am not disputing the technology has been made to work, and who knows, it may work so spectacularly well it will wipe out battery R/C as a viable alternative to cleaning track.

However, I doubt it will do it on price, using the costing example given.

Don't forget that the consumer will still have to purchase a DCC command station to actually transmit the DCC packets through the rails. 
To which must be added the cost of R/C DCC handpieces and associated paraphernalia to get them to work.  Whereas, any half decent battery R/C system already has the R/C component built in, and doesn't need a command station or boosters.

I would have thought that as Lenz successfully tested the hybrid system at Nuremberg a couple of years ago, the release of such a revolutionary system would be iminent.  Is it?
However, thanks to information supplied by Stan himself, I happen to know the big stumbling block is how to actually charge the batteries from the track in all circumstances.
So, as it seems the proponents of the Lenz hybrid system will probably end up advocating on board batteries only as the solution to dirty track, the only point of disputation really, is how the signals are delivered to the control equipment inside the loco(s).

I wish you all luck in solving the problems successfully and I also look forward to the release of data accrued by totally independent testers that confirms the claims currently being made for the Lenz hybrid technology.

Not far away.

Define close.

Quote from: Hunt on March 04, 2007, 02:55:29 PM

Quote from: Tony Walsham on March 04, 2007, 04:03:05 AM
I think wiser heads will wait and see how the idea measures up under controlled conditions with testing done by truly independent users, and not the "silent" partner to a wife who is the Lenz importer. 

Tony seeing this is Jim Banner's Topic some could be misled with your statement I quoted.

Does not Jim Banner qualify to you as a truly independent user? If not, why not?

Hunt, you are quite correct.
I wrote that incorrectly.
What I should have said was "promoted by" the "silent" partner to a wife who is the Lenz importer.
I have no quibble with the independence of Jim Banner.
However, it is usually very simple to "test" a concept indoors on 5' of track.  I believe Lenz actually demonstrated the principle a couple of years ago at Nuremberg.   
Is this Lenz system readily available in the market place yet?
If so, what are the part numbers?
What I would like to see is the long term testing by an independent observer of the idea on an actual outdoor railroad, not just a 5 foot length of track indoors covered by one foot of tape on each rail.
Once again, I must stress I have no argument with the concept of DCC.
What I would like to see is Bachmann, and other LS manufacturers, take into account the members of the LS market place who do not want to have to purchase equipment they do not need and will have to discard in order to get what they do want.
By all means offer extra add ons but make them optional add ons not compulsory purchases.
Another LS manufacturer tried the same thing and look where that got them.

You never know who actually reads some of the stuff posted here and at other forums.

It might even be someone with no vested interest in DCC who uses DCC and has actually investigated at least some of the possible pitfalls that may beset the battery back up idea.   

I think wiser heads will wait and see how the idea measures up under controlled conditions with testing done by truly independent users, and not the "silent" partner to a wife who is the Lenz importer. 

I think Bachmann would do well to consider the interests of all the various types of LS users who make up their customer base, and insist that all future DCC sound decoders be at least capable of manual chuff triggering and reed switch activation of basic sounds, such as Whistle/Horn and Bell.  After all, what is the sense of alienating a potentially large market that is becoming increasingly irate at the prospect of having to rip out and discard a factory fitted item that they don't need or want, when it would be relatively simple to keep them happy as well.

Make that six for DC.

For those that might be interested on how I went about it, I have published the info at MLS. 
http://www.mylargescale.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=44522

It is quite long.

Congratulations.
Great looking board.  Good luck with eliminating spam.