Skip to main content

Originally Posted by MartyE:
Not sure you get all the "Legacy Features" though.  With a Base 1L you only get 99 Legacy TRs and Quilling Whistle.
 
 
 
Originally Posted by Trainman9:

Seems like you could use a CAB1L base which is available separately.

 

The current instantiation of iCab seems to only really support the Cab-1L functions. Maybe future growth is possible but it's a reasonable starting point.

 

Leveraging other devices for control (iOS or Android devices) may help supply chain economics if you just have to produce a base-like unit. I dunno, just my two cents. 

What they showed at York was basically a Cab2 on an iPhone so I do believe it supports all if not most Cab2 Legacy functions.  I agree though if this is the "future" of the Control Cab then a option to buy a base only is a must.
 
 
Originally Posted by hirailsteve:

The current instantiation of iCab seems to only really support the Cab-1L functions. Maybe future growth is possible but it's a reasonable starting point.

 

Leveraging other devices for control (iOS or Android devices) may help supply chain economics if you just have to produce a base-like unit. I dunno, just my two cents. 

 

Except there is no DATA Base in the Base 1L so you wouldn't get that info fed back.  So I just really answered my own question above.  You can't use a Cab 2 with a Base 1L because of this so I'm not sure where the iPhone would get it's info other than have Cab1L ability.
 
Originally Posted by Miken:

Stupid Question.  Is the functionality for legacy wrapped up in the controller or the base?  Is the Base-1L the same as the Legacy base minus the charger and module port?  If so, the iCab app could take the place of the Cab2 and be used with a Base-1L base and a wi-fi module just like the 990. 

 

Last edited by MartyE

The main features gained by adding the LEGACY base vs. Base-1L are those relating to the "personality" of each engine. Information such as roadname, number lighting options, etc., are shared among all CAB2 and smart devices when a LEGACY base is present. But a smart device can send LEGACY commands beyond those supported by a CAB-1L, regardless of which command base is present.  

Originally Posted by gunrunnerjohn:

This thread boggles my mind!  Do all you folks throwing rocks at Lionel really think they'd delay this without a good reason?  I guess some folks live perfect lives where nothing goes wrong, and schedules outside of your control never change.

 

Get a grip guys, I'm sure they're working as hard as they can on getting these things to market!

I do not believe anyone has ever stated anything to the effect that Lionel is delaying shipping without good reason.  There most definitely is a good reason but Lionel has not officially offered any definitive statement as to what that reason might be.  No one here lives a perfect life.  We all have difficulties and have to bear up to them but often times in dealing with them we still undergo some criticism and no doubt from time to time those criticisms are justified.  In this case I believe criticism of Lionel is justified. 

 

I might add that just because an individual chooses to comment on a corporate shortcoming does not mean they have to get a grip on life nor does it mean they are not in tune with the realities of business in the global theater.  Some of us would prefer to deal with the reality of the unavailability of the Legacy 990 rather than ignore it. 

Originally Posted by Railsounds:

The main features gained by adding the LEGACY base vs. Base-1L are those relating to the "personality" of each engine. Information such as roadname, number lighting options, etc., are shared among all CAB2 and smart devices when a LEGACY base is present. But a smart device can send LEGACY commands beyond those supported by a CAB-1L, regardless of which command base is present.  

Reading this makes me think a Base-1L and and iPhone, iPad, or Android will make the 990 obsolete. I think that the iPad or iPhone is much more advanced than the 990 and easier to push updates out, seems like a no brainier.  iPad mini is $399 and the LCS is free. MSRP on the 990 is $399. 

Nooooooooo!
 
i don't want to use an iPad or iPhone to run trains. It fine occasionally but not full time.
 
Originally Posted by Miken:
Originally Posted by Railsounds:

The main features gained by adding the LEGACY base vs. Base-1L are those relating to the "personality" of each engine. Information such as roadname, number lighting options, etc., are shared among all CAB2 and smart devices when a LEGACY base is present. But a smart device can send LEGACY commands beyond those supported by a CAB-1L, regardless of which command base is present.  

Reading this makes me think a Base-1L and and iPhone, iPad, or Android will make the 990 obsolete. I think that the iPad or iPhone is much more advanced than the 990 and easier to push updates out, seems like a no brainier.  iPad mini is $399 and the LCS is free. MSRP on the 990 is $399. 

 

Originally Posted by MartyE:
Nooooooooo!
 
i don't want to use an iPad or iPhone to run trains. It fine occasionally but not full time.
 
Originally Posted by Miken:
Originally Posted by Railsounds:

The main features gained by adding the LEGACY base vs. Base-1L are those relating to the "personality" of each engine. Information such as roadname, number lighting options, etc., are shared among all CAB2 and smart devices when a LEGACY base is present. But a smart device can send LEGACY commands beyond those supported by a CAB-1L, regardless of which command base is present.  

Reading this makes me think a Base-1L and and iPhone, iPad, or Android will make the 990 obsolete. I think that the iPad or iPhone is much more advanced than the 990 and easier to push updates out, seems like a no brainier.  iPad mini is $399 and the LCS is free. MSRP on the 990 is $399. 

 

I'm sure that when TMCC came out people were saying I'm not going to like running my train with a TV remote.  The color screens, processing power, easy updates, and intuitive interface make these devices far superior to what is an old tv remote with a Casio calculator screen. 

Originally Posted by MartyE:

Maybe but I want to watch my trains not a tablet looking for controls I can feel.  But to each his own.  Like I said I'm not opposed but certainly don't want to loose a remote either.

Not to worry Marty, soon capacitive touch screens will arrive in the marketplace so you can have your cake and eat it too. 

 

Like many here, I'll operate via Cab-2 then add the Wifi Module at some point. I figure it'll certainly aid use of new accessories planned by Lionel. 

Last edited by hirailsteve
Originally Posted by MartyE:
Nooooooooo!
 
i don't want to use an iPad or iPhone to run trains. It fine occasionally but not full time.
 
Originally Posted by Miken:
Originally Posted by Railsounds:

The main features gained by adding the LEGACY base vs. Base-1L are those relating to the "personality" of each engine. Information such as roadname, number lighting options, etc., are shared among all CAB2 and smart devices when a LEGACY base is present. But a smart device can send LEGACY commands beyond those supported by a CAB-1L, regardless of which command base is present.  

Reading this makes me think a Base-1L and and iPhone, iPad, or Android will make the 990 obsolete. I think that the iPad or iPhone is much more advanced than the 990 and easier to push updates out, seems like a no brainier.  iPad mini is $399 and the LCS is free. MSRP on the 990 is $399. 

 

I'm with you MartyE. I like the idea of ipad's too, but I also want a 990 remote. I don't have an iphone, just an ipad.  Miken may have a point though, during my wait for a 990 I have wondered about this myself.

I've gotten to play with the LCS app a bit when we had the LUG meeting demo.  I loved it for layout control.  It does ok for train running.  The iCab app Lionel showed at York looks much better to handle running trains from.  I can see folks embracing this technology.

 

I just like to be able to "feel" the controls so I spend less time looking at the iPad/iPhone.  I'll still use the iCab but not as my primary controller.

Originally Posted by OKHIKER:
 

 There most definitely is a good reason but Lionel has not officially offered any definitive statement as to what that reason might be.  

From the Lionel sensor track thread:

 

Originally posted by Santafefan: 

 

The Legacy 990 systems with issues had only newer versions of the *same* part numbers, which caused some issues and delays to the consumer.  The newer parts should have worked, but did not.  The changes to the code and hardware were such that functionally the Legacy 990 design has not changed, but adjusted to continue to meet specifications.  Engineering was responsible for the direction to make these parts work, and they were very, very, minor adjustments.  It just takes time to research and correct, hence the delays.  We are truly sorry for the delays, we want the product to be right.

Thanks, RickO and Santafefan!  I think that's all a lot of folks wanted to hear as opposed to being left wondering what was going on. Sometimes a little communication means a lot. Also keeps the speculation and rumors down.

 

Since I'm one of the ones with no 990 yet, I haven't been following the LCS threads, I appreciate you posting this here.

 

RickO, could you post a link to the LCS thread you are following above? I have been looking, but haven't found the right one. You have re-kindled my interests here.

 

Never mind the link, just found it after adding the request.

Last edited by rtr12
Originally Posted by RickO:
Originally Posted by OKHIKER:
 

 There most definitely is a good reason but Lionel has not officially offered any definitive statement as to what that reason might be.  

From the Lionel sensor track thread:

 

Originally posted by Santafefan: 

 

The Legacy 990 systems with issues had only newer versions of the *same* part numbers, which caused some issues and delays to the consumer.  The newer parts should have worked, but did not.  The changes to the code and hardware were such that functionally the Legacy 990 design has not changed, but adjusted to continue to meet specifications.  Engineering was responsible for the direction to make these parts work, and they were very, very, minor adjustments.  It just takes time to research and correct, hence the delays.  We are truly sorry for the delays, we want the product to be right.

RickO,

        Thanks for posting the above.  I have not been following the LCS thread.  I am glad that someone in a position to know at Lionel finally provided some specificity as to what the problem is with new 990.  All I can say is that if enough people comment on a given issue at some point in time it will be addressed. 

Originally Posted by cbojanower:

 

OKHiker.. This is essentially the same explanation made back in April. We have known the entire time that the delay is being caused by new components  that didn't work like they should have. Sorry if you missed that.

cbojanower, thanks for the info but as best as I can recall the few posts which mentioned that the cause of the 990 delay was due to new components which weren't functioning were only conjecture and speculation on the part of various forum members and not any kind of specific statement from anyone at Lionel. I'm pretty sure if there had been a definitive statement from Lionel all the way back in April someone would have made me aware of it before 8/1/14.  However, I admit it is possible that an official statement was made and that I and others were not aware of it. 

FYI, for what it is worth Mike Reagan explained the component problem at the Saturday Morning Legacy User Groups Breakfast Meeting in April 2014. Not sure if that is the official statement you are looking for, but I for one was there and that is what I remember.

 

Please, if anyone else that was there, and I did not properly convey Mike's Communication, please correct me.

Last edited by PRR2818

Add Reply

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×