So why are you here? On this forum we discuss Railpro. Conversations about Blunami and AirWire should be had at other forums where you will find people who may use those systems. No one here uses them, and likely never will.
The battery power aspect of it is interesting.
Railpro is anti-DCC and proud of it. The reason it was designed in the first place was to be an alternative to DCC. There are enough DCC offerings out there to satisfy those who wish to use DCC. Even though Railpro is DCC-compatible, it will never limit itself to DCC-only protocols. If people want the features that Railpro has in a DCC system then they need to design it and offer it.
That's the problem. They are trashing the DCC standard, and their comparison chart with DCC is hilariously bad, and reads like a caricature of DCC myths and misunderstandings, or invented "features" that are a solution looking for a problem. RailPro doesn't offer any advantage over DCC for track power-based systems, has extensive disadvantages, and their marketing is dishonest.
They would have been much better off to position themselves as a dead rail system that's different from DCC and doesn't compete directly with it.
Those who have Railpro on their layouts (either exclusively or in conjunction with DCC) have done so for various reasons. The majority of users have enjoyed the system and continue to do so. It will likely remain small portion of the total model railroaders, the vast majority of which use DCC. So DCC will always be around and Railpro will continue to be used. There is no threat of DCC going away. I don't understand why people get so upset that Railpro is not DCC.
Of course DCC isn't going to go away, RP usually uses DCC power on the rails or operates with battery power over the top of it anyway, it just rectifies it. Which points out the pointlessness of a closed, proprietary system duplicating (in terms of a DCC signal) and triplicating or quadruplicating (in terms of the RF interfaces) the control infrastructure already in place.
If RP hadn't been so obnoxiously anti-DCC, they would probably have an interesting product for large scale battery-radio users by combining everything together into one receiver and providing a physical throttle.
