Replies sorted oldest to newest
No matter how the trains are controlled, they still run on tracks. I don't think most folks will ever consider trains to be remote controlled.
I agree the tracks are the limitation
K.C., I don't think so. I thought I recalled seeing somewhere that command control, regardless of system brand or technology, only made up 10% of the O gauge segment of the hobby. Maybe someone with some market data can chime in here?
George
Why is it a shame?
I don't see anything particularly desirable about being categorized as "remote control" in the sense you are using.
Toy Trains have been touted as being "remote control", or "distance control" ever since reversing units were invented.
Yeah it might be the track thing. We have a great hobby with lots of variables but we can't control the steering.
Jim
The real beauty of our hobby is the operator has all kinds of choices in controlling the operation of their trains. There is no generalization needed.
Toy Trains have been touted as being "remote control", or "distance control" ever since reversing units were invented.
Lots of gizmo-oriented folks around, but thank goodness there are still a great many in this hobby, in all scales, who are more interested in railroading, trains, and individual creativity. Those folks will always trump everything else in the electronic/digital world when it comes to representing model railroading as the world's greatest hobby.
Yes Lionel and everyone else is incorporating more and more of their trains today with remote control features in almost every shape and form. Nonetheless, less than 18 years of product makes up what actually can be done with anything remote control wise. There's still plenty of people after Prewar, Postwar and even older Modern era trains that are 100% conventional and I find much more of them than almost all of the remote controlled equipment out there today.
Lots of gizmo-oriented folks around, but thank goodness there are still a great many in this hobby, in all scales, who are more interested in railroading, trains, and individual creativity. Those folks will always trump everything else in the electronic/digital world when it comes to representing model railroading as the world's greatest hobby.
I think it's important to remember that Gizmonic control of model trains is an enhancement to the hobby of model railroading. It is not the hobby of model railroading.
Rusty
IMO, Model railroading is a multifaceted hobby that has recently acquired remote control capability.
No matter how the trains are controlled, they still run on tracks. I don't think most folks will ever consider trains to be remote controlled.
Even though there is command control and other features of remote type control, I don't think that anybody will ever say this is a remote control hobby. The trains can not take their own path but are restricted to running on tracks, so in my opinion that makes it Not remote controlled.
Go look at remote controlled race cars or remote controlled airplanes, they have nothing to restrict their pathway other then a tree or the ground.
Trains have tracks and may never be considered remote control items.
Lee Fritz
Well, all I can say K.C. is I really don't much care how the hobby is classified elsewhere. These days I operate virtually ALL of my trains by remote control (DCS and Legacy), but I don't worry much about what others may use or prefer to control their own trains. So long as an individual is interested in trains and model railroading, I'm perfectly content to have anyone and everyone involved in this great hobby in any way they care to be involved, ranging from clockwork to digital.
It isn't that simple. Terms have changed.
When Lionel adapted Ives' mechanical E-unit, catalogs hyped REMOTE CONTROL / DISTANT CONTROL to the skies. Locomotives could be reversed, whistles blown, cars uncoupled, and cars operated BY PRESSING A BUTTON. That was hi-tech in the 1930's through the 1960's.
Terms changed around 2000 when REMOTE CONTROL became DIGITAL CONTROL.
EVERYTHING changed when 3-rail SCALE locomotives began to arrive in the 1990's. Curve diameter clashed with radius; switches with turnouts; then pure sine wave power with chopped sine wave power.
Lionel was the last 3-rail manufacturer left standing, so everyone used Lionel terms. Formal standards like those of the NMRA were never adopted. The first two BIG differences in the 3-rail world were TMCC and DCS.
Some TV's in the 1960's were romote controlled with a "clicker" which was wired to the TV.
Real railroad CTC/TCS systems were hard wired before radio control cam about, but I would say that signalling system was "remote controlled".
I suppose that the LionChief remotes might confuse the original issue a bit. They make trains remote control, with a conventional remote control technology, but with the power from the rails rather than the battery. Is that an important distinction? The issue about freedom of movement (limited to tracks rather than able to go anywhere) may also be important.
I suppose that it will be the folks outside of the train hobby who decide this issue, by their choice of terms.
Some TV's in the 1960's were romote controlled with a "clicker" which was wired to the TV.
When I was growing up in the 70's my grandpa had a tv with a wireless voice activated remote. All he had to do was say "Boy, get up and change the channel." and voila, just like magic. 
Some TV's in the 1960's were romote controlled with a "clicker" which was wired to the TV.
When I was growing up in the 70's my grandpa had a tv with a wireless voice activated remote. All he had to do was say "Boy, get up and change the channel." and voila, just like magic.
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
