Any interest in a bridge from TMCC to DCC?

Caution! Integrating DCC presents a unique set of issues which are a whole lot different than those encountered with LC , TMCC/Legacy or DCS.

@BOB WALKER posted:

Caution! Integrating DCC presents a unique set of issues which are a whole lot different than those encountered with LC , TMCC/Legacy or DCS.

Well that certainly sounds ominous anything at the top of that list that you have in mind?

I mean I know they are fundamentally different all the way down to even a basic electrical level like one running AC vs DC and the two obviously not running on the same track as a result. but you already are getting me scared with an opening message like that. Like I am about to sail into the Bermuda Triangle without realizing it and am simply wondering why I see so many boat parts floating over there. Definitely a sense of foreboding all of a sudden.

@BOB WALKER posted:

Caution! Integrating DCC presents a unique set of issues which are a whole lot different than those encountered with LC , TMCC/Legacy or DCS.

Id like you to elaborate on this.

The point of this integration is to be able to have the user perform basic control of a DCC decoder with a “inverter board” like BlueRail or the Airwire 900 from CVP products. These products can be used in a AC, DC, and Battery powered environment. These basic controls would follow: Direction, Speed & Functions 0-24.

Bit info for TMCC is public and found in the original user guide of TrainMaster command control manual on Lionels website. LEGACY/LC is not.

Programming CVs with these remotes is off the table at this point in time. To keep this less complicated.

I somehow doubt there are very many folks wanting to control DCC locos with TMCC/Legacy/LionChief/DCS, so it would have to be for the challenge and pleasure of doing it, and not for any market I can imagine.  I suppose there are some with three rail O gauge who might like to control their DCC HO or N gauge locos with their cab-1, LionChief remote or DCS handheld, but I would think using a DCC remote would make more sense.  It's not like they are fabulously expensive.

Considering I do indeed run DCC and have the lionel cab remotes, I would love to see this happen. I do have a question and a thought.

If I am reading this correctly, there is going to be an "interface" that will allow a cab 1 remote to send commands to the dcc command station to operate locomotives. So is the "interface" going to be connected as an accessory device in the command system bus (loconet on digitrax for example)?

Now just a thought to put out there (or pipe dream, whatever you want to call it). DCC, as you know, is self destructive to any electronics that do not isolate the strange dcc waveform that is the signal. Therefore, no non dcc decoder equipped locomotives will last on dcc powered rails. This is an issue for many dcc users since its an "all or nothing" approach. What I shall throw out is, what about an interface board that receives tmcc signals, and outputs a dcc signal to control an individual dcc decoder? That way, the entire layout can be powered with straight, constant AC power. This would allow owners to install a dcc decoder with sounds and control they want, while controlling it, and the rest of their stock engines, with the classic cab 1 and TMCC.

In short, think of it as airwire, but instead of radio control and battery power, its tmcc and track power. Again, just a thought, as I have NOT tried this or have plans of doing so. But I figured if you were looking for feedback, I would throw out a couple of cents.

I've never been able to get DCS to work on my layout. I have a lot of MTH Premier locomotives that are now paper weights. I haven't bought an MTH engine since 2013. TMCC and Legacy work perfectly on my layout. Any solution that allows me to run those PS2 locomotives using either Legacy or TMCC would be a worthwhile investment for me.

I don't run any DCC locomotives but I'm working on a project where we want to use DCC(++?) to run some model cranes. I need to move at least three DC motors. The current stumbling block? How do we control this? Buy a pricey DCC system? DCC++? I gotta admit, it's enticing to just be able to flip over to DCC from my CAB1L or CAB2 remote instead of introducing a separate remote.

In short, I would be very interested if you went the DCC++ route. Mainly because it's affordable and accessible.

I had heard that TMCC actually uses DCC command protocol, but uses a Radio Carrier rather than square wave voltage on the track. This supposedly was to maintain compatibility with conventional AC trains. It would be interesting to see if a relay transmitter could be set up to pass the commands to TMCC locomotives.

@Santa Fe 3751 posted:

think of it as airwire, but instead of radio control and battery power, its tmcc and track power. Again, just a thought, as I have NOT tried this or have plans of doing so. But I figured if you were looking for feedback, I would throw out a couple of cents.

This is exactly what I’m getting at. A board that goes into the engine. Converting input power into DCC signal for the decoder and acts as radio receiver to TMCC and mini DCC command station. Like Airwire and BlueRail.

Here's my reasoning on why a bridge from TMCC to DCC is questionable.  Achieving interoperability between TMCC and LC is essentially the design of a link between system A and system B. In contrast, ea ch brand of DCC decoder offers a unique set of features and more importantly utilizes a particular approach to the all important management of CV's.  Also, each brand has its set of strong adherents. So which one do you choose for the link project? Not a simple decision.

@BOB WALKER posted:

Here's my reasoning on why a bridge from TMCC to DCC is questionable.  Achieving interoperability between TMCC and LC is essentially the design of a link between system A and system B. In contrast, ea ch brand of DCC decoder offers a unique set of features and more importantly utilizes a particular approach to the all important management of CV's.  Also, each brand has its set of strong adherents. So which one do you choose for the link project? Not a simple decision.

I don't think any of that matters unless you are trying to link a control system like NCE to the Cab1 for example. That be pointless anywasy because there are already things out there that are free and can do that.

DCC decoders are is designed around NMRA standards so they are consistent in physical function of outputs. Decoders that have sound will follow the same outputs of whistle and bell but everything past that will be mapped slightly different between manufactures. BUT since DCC is very user customizable....the user can map the functions in the KEY pattern they want.

LIKE I SAID BEFORE. The best way going about this is almost the same concept of BlueWire and AirWire 900 from CVP products. Where you have a board that goes between the input power from the track in the locomotive to the DCC decoder in that same locomotive and that board responding to TMCC commands via the radio signal converting into DCC commands for the decoder. (mini DCC station)

NOTHING is going between transformer and track. Track is the power supply. Everything is self contained in the locomotive.

Not directly related to the question here, but answer this survey

This is interesting to me as I like smaller steam locos and shoehorning in all the ERR and sound cards is challenging.

DCC components are smaller and offer many more sounds than the few Railsounds options making installs easier and providing different sound sets and all controlled by existing Cab1 sounds like a winner to me!

@Bruk posted:

This is exactly what I’m getting at. A board that goes into the engine. Converting input power into DCC signal for the decoder and acts as radio receiver to TMCC and mini DCC command station. Like Airwire and BlueRail.

Ok, my mistake. I must have missed that. This sounds like a wonderful idea and something that has been needed for some time now! I am ABSOLUTELY interested!

With the elimination of DCS, in OGauge, there are only the Lionel TMCC/Legacy and LC control systems  to consider interlinking which seems  appropriate and has been impressively accomplished. But in the DCC world, there are a plethora of control systems and DCC decoders, so what linkup arrangement would make sense?

@BOB WALKER posted:

With the elimination of DCS, in OGauge, there are only the Lionel TMCC/Legacy and LC control systems  to consider interlinking which seems  appropriate and has been impressively accomplished. But in the DCC world, there are a plethora of control systems and DCC decoders, so what linkup arrangement would make sense?

DCS is a clunky home made DCC system. Unfortunately its going to survive because of Atlas's last newsletter.

They ONLY "linkup" that makes sense is what I mentioned above. I will SAY it again.

"LIKE I SAID BEFORE. The best way going about this is almost the same concept of BlueWire and AirWire 900 from CVP products. Where you have a board that goes between the input power from the track in the locomotive to the DCC decoder in that same locomotive and that board responding to TMCC commands via the radio signal converting into DCC commands for the decoder. (mini DCC station)"

1. Track power/signal is not affected. It's there to supply power as normal.
2. This converter board is in the loco. Inline of the track power and DCC decoder.
3. The board takes the AC power from the track. Converts into Square wave DCC for the decoder.
4. The board will also act as the radio receiver and receiving those commands via TMCC signal.
5. The Commands via the 8 bit TMCC radio signal are translated into DCC commands.
6. Those commands are then sent to the DCC decoder on the output side of this converter board.
7. MAGIC now you can control DCC decoder with a TMCC remote.

All of this information to do this is public. @Ryaninspiron

@Oman posted:

Not directly related to the question here, but answer this survey

That poll means absolutely nothing to this thread.

DCC is not used in O gauge because everyone has been drinking the Kool-Aid since day 1. DCC is used in every form and scale of model railroading, and not in main stream O gauge because of that.

If you want your trains to make mostly inaccurate choo choo sounds and poor lighting effects that you have to beg the manufactures to "fix". Keep playing with ERR, Legacy and DCS.

@Bruk posted:

That poll means absolutely nothing to this thread.

DCC is not used in O gauge because everyone has been drinking the Kool-Aid since day 1. DCC is used in every form and scale of model railroading, and not in main stream O gauge because of that.

If you want your trains to make mostly inaccurate choo choo sounds and poor lighting effects that you have to beg the manufactures to "fix". Keep playing with ERR, Legacy and DCS.

Still interesting to see a little poll on the subject though. Funny enough that poll was asked a few days before you asked about the concept of bridging in the first place. One thing I will say is that my first ever experience with DCC was 17 years ago from Marklin and it blew me away with the sounds and feature control at the time. I still like the interactivity of the Cab though. I personally am now convinced you can run anything with the Cab2 and am even tempted to connect it to my home automation even for the laughs. Imagine closing the blinds with the whistle lever or the big red knob.

I am simply curious if there is any desire to see DCC run by Cab1/2s and the answer seems to be almost a even split between sure and not at all. Which is basically a good enough answer for me to start looking at the electrical aspect of it

@Bruk posted:

Id like you to elaborate on this.

The point of this integration is to be able to have the user perform basic control of a DCC decoder with a “inverter board” like BlueRail or the Airwire 900 from CVP products. These products can be used in a AC, DC, and Battery powered environment. These basic controls would follow: Direction, Speed & Functions 0-24.

Bit info for TMCC is public and found in the original user guide of TrainMaster command control manual on Lionels website. LEGACY/LC is not.

Programming CVs with these remotes is off the table at this point in time. To keep this less complicated.

If we can reach consensus that a module like that is in the best interest that is certainly an option. The only problem is while the Bit level info is available the process of decoding TMCC electrically is not.

I could however use my knowledge of LC to do it though. In theory making the DCC trains speak LC then use my gateway hardware to convert that to TMCC.

At the end of the day it is really adding Bluetooth to DCC locos and then using that to connect to the Cab2 via my existing conversion method.