current Lionel best practices with legacy command systems?

@PeterB posted:

what are folks doing/using/buying today, and what drives the decisions of whether to go with Legacy, TMCC, or DCS?  Are Lionel and MTH's systems the only game in town, or are there third party systems?  Is anyone using raspberry pi-based solutions (I have seen arduino type solutions, but that's a little too close to layer one for me -- RBP uses more layer 3 full stack code capacity).

It sounds like you're looking for automation beyond the "standard" capability of the control systems.  There's all kinds of options there.  As for the basic control system, there is also the dead rail stuff that is frequently discussed here, also some folks have gone to DCC.

It's pretty hard to answer such a general question, you could write a book trying to come up with an answer...

@PeterB posted:

..  what are folks doing/using/buying today, and what drives the decisions of whether to go with Legacy, TMCC, or DCS?  Are Lionel and MTH's systems the only game in town, or are there third party systems?  Is anyone using raspberry pi-based solutions (I have seen arduino type solutions, but that's a little too close to layer one for me -- RBP uses more layer 3 full stack code capacity).

Peter,

Even though it's been 15 years nothing fundamental has changed with respect to TMCC/Legacy or DCS.  In three-rail all that old stuff still applies.

You have newer options but these have made very little inroad against the established leaders.  These include DCC, coming from HO, N and G, and Bluerail if you prefer Bluetooth.  Arduinos and Raspberry PI's are only an option if you customize the hardware and program them yourselves.  With any of these you have substantial conversion costs, or personal effort if you'd rather do it yourself.

One important consideration is that by leaving the established leaders that we have presently only a small potential market exists to offload your stuff to, after you convert it, if you decide that you want or need to sell.

Many of us would like to see these alternatives make a big difference, but in the end it's coming only very slowly.

No big news here.

Mike

Leaving out automation (which given you mention arduino or raspberry pi could be used for that), with command control it really hasn't changed. If you want out of the box command control, it is still Legacy and DCS. In terms of why someone would go with these, it is because even now they are simply the only out of the box solutions (I'll get to that). With legacy at the moment (pre base 3.0), you have legacy through the command base, and in legacy 2.0, you also can go bluetooth from an app running on a device to control the engine. (Lionchief , Lionel's 'starter' command control, works via a remote; the later lionchief engines also can work from an App via bluetooth, not sure if lionchief+ or lionchief can work via an app). With Base 3, you can control any lionel command control engine, it will be accessed via wifi using a new app.

For MTH engines, you still need DCS to use them in command mode, using either the old TIU based system, or the new TIU that integrates wifi into it (which also is for the moment going to be app control only , no remote). MTH TIU can connect to a lionel command base and allow controlling lionel engines (I don't know if you connect base 3 to the DCS TIU and  if it can control lionchief engines or not, my guess would be no though MTH as far as I know hasn't said anything about lionchief support via base 3). So again, basically no major change.

DCC , which is the standard in 2 rail O and HO/N worlds, is not used much in 3 rail world. MTH supported DCC in its PS 3.0 chip set, prob because some of the engines could work in 2 rail, were convertible. DCC is attractive in that it is an industry standard, it has grown a lot in terms of its functionality, but it is a totally different system than either dcs or legacy.

As others mentioned there is bluerail, which allows for bluetooth control of engines. I don't know if that uses DCC or is its own decoders, but again this is not off the shelf,, you would have to convert engines.

So in a nutshell, it really hasn't changed much in the sense that the DCS/Legacy dichotomy still rules.

These are really useful responses, and I thank you.  I didn't put an email in my profile, as @Alan Mancus pointed out -- that was an oversight on my part.  A couple people observed, correctly, that my initial question seemed to ask more than the original features of command control offer, while others pointed out that SBC*'s offer a lot more options.  One epiphany I had while reading these responses, Lionel's manual for Legacy Control, and third party blogs, is that I don't want more than the original hardware/software offer. Or, at least, not yet.  If neither the technology nor the paradigm for command control, be it TMCC, Legacy, or DCC (which I incorrectly referred to as DCC in my first post), have changed, it may be that they do so much and do it well enough that a change is not actually needed?  That may be a myopic outlook, but I'd love to set up a Legacy system out of the box before I go looking for more functionality.  Okay, why haven't I? Probably because the price of a new Legacy set is akin to a weekend in New York, and I love my travel as much as I love my trains.  This brings me to my final question in this thread (for the moment, at least):

Does Legacy or DC lend itself to a scenario where I can address the engines, but the layouts change with a high level of dynamism (ie, I put up a new layout, and break it down a week later, start all over again)? Or do these systems depend on a static layout?

*** Oops, I meant that email to include a starred breakout of SBC: I was referring to Single Board Computers like raspberry Pis, Arduinos, or similar hardware.  I have a number of raspberry Pis, and they cost a good lot less than a single legacy control system (have not researched DCS basic hardware costs).

Legacy and DCS don't depend on the layout configuration.  DCS is sensitive to how it's connected due to the track and wiring constraints, but Legacy/TMCC can be dropped on most any layout and run.

I've taken a Legacy system and a few Legacy/TMCC locomotives to a club running conventional and demonstrated full command operation in about five minutes.

@PeterB posted:

These are really useful responses, and I thank you.  I didn't put an email in my profile, as @Alan Mancus pointed out -- that was an oversight on my part.  A couple people observed, correctly, that my initial question seemed to ask more than the original features of command control offer, while others pointed out that SBC*'s offer a lot more options.  One epiphany I had while reading these responses, Lionel's manual for Legacy Control, and third party blogs, is that I don't want more than the original hardware/software offer. Or, at least, not yet.  If neither the technology nor the paradigm for command control, be it TMCC, Legacy, or DCC (which I incorrectly referred to as DCC in my first post), have changed, it may be that they do so much and do it well enough that a change is not actually needed?  That may be a myopic outlook, but I'd love to set up a Legacy system out of the box before I go looking for more functionality.  Okay, why haven't I? Probably because the price of a new Legacy set is akin to a weekend in New York, and I love my travel as much as I love my trains.  This brings me to my final question in this thread (for the moment, at least):

Does Legacy or DC lend itself to a scenario where I can address the engines, but the layouts change with a high level of dynamism (ie, I put up a new layout, and break it down a week later, start all over again)? Or do these systems depend on a static layout?

Both systems (DCS and Legacy) in theory were designed for easy use but there are wrinkles on that. DCS sends its commands through the middle (power) rail, and there are limitations with that. With DCS, on a layout outside a small one you need 'power districts' isolated from each other (basically it is like setting up block wiring, without the block switches!). The reason is there are limitations to the DCS signal and of course voltage drops (with DCS, the power to the rail is the same wire that delivers the DCS signal, the TIU output is delivering the power+signal.) Because of interference, you can only have 1 DCS feed per district/block the blocks/districts need to be below a certain length (in standard block wiring, you could have multiple feeders into a block, to ensure consistent voltage. )

TMCC/Legacy delivers its signal 'over the air', it uses the house ground wiring as an antenna.  The only connection legacy/tmcc has with the track is it connects to the ground side of the rails. It has its own quirks with signal strength and the like.

Thus is you rebuilt a layout for TMCC/Legacy, it literally is 1 wire (it was designed to be easily retroffited to an existing layout from what I recall has been said). DCS isn't difficult, you simply would have to have power districts in the new layout, but if you already had DCS on the old layout it shouldn't be a big deal, it basically is isolating the middle rail at the end of each section. 

PeterB

You replied "If neither the technology nor the paradigm for command control, be it TMCC, Legacy, or DCC (which I incorrectly referred to as DCC in my first post), have changed, it may be that they do so much and do it well enough that a change is not actually needed?"

Pretty sure you mean DCS! I use DCS on my 32X50 layout and run conventional, TMCC, Legacy, Lionchief, Lionchief Plus and Lionchief 2.0 with no problems. Though I started with a 12x8 and expanded several times I have experienced  no problems with DCS. One point noted earlier is I have districts. Meaning I have isolated the center rail every 12 sections of track (regardless of track section length - every 12 sections is a district). Bluetooth does drop out when at the far ends or in a mountain sometimes. Legacy and TMCC also require ground wire planes at times. I also have Dale/Johns signal extender.

For me DCS was the way to go as I could and can run anything out there except 2 rail DCC. I could run that if I converted to 2 Rail on my MTH Engines. It would have to be it's own loop of course!

Curtis

@CurtisH thanks for that break-down!  I have often thought I need to use districts or powerblocks, or *SOMETHING* to distribute power more evenly.  The fact all my layouts are temporary (this will change when I own property and have a huge swath of space to deploy something more permanent) has .

I *really need to proofread my posts more carefully.  Can someone distinguish between DCS and DCC?  I think each represents a real product/technology, and I clearly need to be set straight!

DCS is MTH Digital Command System and is used for OGauge 3 rail. DCC is Digital Command Control and is used mostly in HO and N gauges. DCC is set by CV's. (with me having a terrible memory it is hard for me to use). CV is Control Variable. Here is the NMRA Definition -  https://www.nmra.org/beginners...mand-control-and-dcc.

There is plenty of YouTube videos from Lionel , books on basic TMCC / legacy to advanced. Also the fourm produced vhs tapes when TMCC was in full swing.

@Jerryc86 I feel as if I drowned in *all* of the videos and stuff out there the second I went looking.  I have no shortage of resources to explore.  What I really wanted to know (which I think @Mellow Hudson Mike answered) was, 'given what your collective experience has taught you, what is a sane and manageable route to pursue?')

For my part, the Legacy product seems the most manageable approach for me, but I could be mistaken. Twelve years on the networking team of a federal agency, paired with five years of smart home construction and maintenance, gives me a modicum of confidence, but what I'm reading about MTH's DCS product doesn't seem ideal for my environment.

@PeterB posted:

@Jerryc86 I feel as if I drowned in *all* of the videos and stuff out there the second I went looking.  I have no shortage of resources to explore.  What I really wanted to know (which I think @Mellow Hudson Mike answered) was, 'given what your collective experience has taught you, what is a sane and manageable route to pursue?')

For my part, the Legacy product seems the most manageable approach for me, but I could be mistaken. Twelve years on the networking team of a federal agency, paired with five years of smart home construction and maintenance, gives me a modicum of confidence, but what I'm reading about MTH's DCS product doesn't seem ideal for my environment.

It is going to depend on your motive power.  If you have or plan on having MTH PS2 and PS3 engines, you cannot control them with legacy (the obverse is true, though, DCS can control Lionel engines via a Legacy command base to DCS TIU cable). If you plan on running engines from  both Lionel and MTH, then you need both command systems, pure and simple. The  new DCS TIU and the Lionel base 3 use apps to control them, there is no remote for either (MTH has said they might...).

If you stay with Lionel products only, the new base 3 is able to control any of Lionel's engines, tmcc, legacy and lionchief. If you add a legacy powermaster assuming legacy only, you can use the legacy base to control conventional engines (the powermaster varies voltage to the track, like a transformer).  If you go DCS only, the TIU has variable output that allows controlling conventional engines as well.

One of the features/problems of 3 rail is that there are two different, incompatible systems. In the HO/N/O scale world, DCC is a standard, while all systems offer some custom extensions, they all support the basic DCC command structure, same for DCS decoders.

@bigkid posted:

The  new DCS TIU and the Lionel base 3 use apps to control them, there is no remote for either (MTH has said they might...).

That could be incorrect.  The BASE3 will have the CAB1L which is remaining in production.

@CurtisH posted:

DCS is MTH Digital Command System and is used for OGauge 3 rail. DCC is Digital Command Control and is used mostly in HO and N gauges. DCC is set by CV's. (with me having a terrible memory it is hard for me to use). CV is Control Variable. Here is the NMRA Definition -  https://www.nmra.org/beginners...mand-control-and-dcc.

In addition, the NMRA established standards for DCC, so "most" engines will work on any manufacturer's control system.  In the 3-rail world we have a mish-mash of systems.  Oh, and DCC equipment is readily available; TMCC/Legacy and DCS not so much.   Not that I'm bitter or resentful...

@PeterB posted:

@Jerryc86 I feel as if I drowned in *all* of the videos and stuff out there the second I went looking.  I have no shortage of resources to explore.  What I really wanted to know (which I think @Mellow Hudson Mike answered) was, 'given what your collective experience has taught you, what is a sane and manageable route to pursue?')

For my part, the Legacy product seems the most manageable approach for me, but I could be mistaken. Twelve years on the networking team of a federal agency, paired with five years of smart home construction and maintenance, gives me a modicum of confidence, but what I'm reading about MTH's DCS product doesn't seem ideal for my environment.

If you don't mind using an MTH remote/app for your MTH engines and a Lionel remote/app for your Lionel engines, running both systems isn't complicated as noted by @gunrunnerjohn a few posts back - literally one additional wire.

I started with DCS and then added Legacy several years later.  Overall IMO Legacy is easier to set up and manage.  Here are the problems with both systems:

DCS:
Requires a more complex star pattern in wiring, older TIU versions (Pre-"L") produce weaker signal

TIU "L" versions have stronger signal but are susceptible to damage to signal components (unless circuit board modifications are done)

Neither TIU or Wifi-TIU are currently available

PS2 5V boards in engines have a higher failure rate (3V boards are more reliable), PS2 boards don't receive signal as reliably as newer PS3 boards

No handheld remote option with new equipment (phone app only)

Fewer new locomotive models being produced

Availability of boards for engine repair or upgrades is spotty

Legacy/TMCC:
Signal problems can occur with parallel tracks, bridges, tunnels, or if house wiring does not provide adequate earth ground (solved by adding a ground plane wire in problem areas)

Many different configurations of TMCC and Legacy engine electronics make DIY repairs more challenging

Lionel abruptly stopped selling all replacement electronics boards for TMCC and early Legacy engines.  Future availability is unknown.  Electric Railroad Company continues to supply boards for TMCC upgrades and repairs (sound sets are more limited and generic)

Legacy remote and Cab2 base no longer sold, Cab3 base not available yet

Only new handheld remote option will be Cab L which has no display screen (phone app is available)

Conclusions:
Most of these problems can be solved with time, money, and patience.  You may want to wait for the new control systems to be available.  You can purchase a used DCS TIU and remote ($500-700) or Legacy Cab2 base and remote ($800-1400) on the secondary market at greatly inflated prices. Beware that most TIUs being sold are not Rev "L".  Most auction site listings "conveniently" forget to list the version and don't include a photo showing the back of the unit or a view of the ports (where version is could be identified).  

Eventually, new control systems for Legacy and DCS will be available.  But many of us prefer the handheld DCS and Legacy Cab 2 remotes, only available as used equipment.

As I stated, I have had fewer signal problems with my Legacy system, but I have an earlier version of the TIU and my MTH engines are all PS2.  I run both since certain engines have only been available from MTH (DCS).  If you go with DCS, sticking with a Rev "L" TIU or WTIU and PS3 engines will be most reliable.

Bob

@Mallard4468 posted:

Not that I'm bitter or resentful...

Different markets, different methods.

You could always walk away. That's one way to treat your apparent heartburn.

The other of course is to replace TMCC/Legacy and DCS with DCC in all of your locomotives, which may make your heartburn worse although it may not impact your pocketbook too badly.

Mike

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

That could be incorrect.  The BASE3 will have the CAB1L which is remaining in production.

Yeah, forgot about that one.