L85383 LCS. Sensor track add on

Good question. It would be nice if more info were posted on Lionel's site. 

I think they have to be different in that the regular Fastrack sensor track has the feature of a daisy chain wiring to other sensor tracks. It's not even clear if it uses the same single connector that I can see since the wrong side of the IRV2 is pictured in the product view.

Same function, but not likely to be the same form factor.  This unit has a connector on it, and is intended to be connected to the 6-85296 LCS IRV2.  It probably has the same sensors on it.

PLUS

PERMITS SENSOR TRACK APPLICATION FOR NON-FASTRACK LAYOUTS

NO MORE BASHING

Ok. That picture looks like it uses the same connector but you daisy chain the IRV2 instead of the sensor strips. So...basically the same, connectorized differently.

I get what this thing does but when all is said and done, is this thing really worth wiring in to an existing layout?  Not sure I see a major benefit vs work involved.  BigRail

If you don't see the benefit, you're probably not the target market.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

If you don't see the benefit, you're probably not the target market.

I'm probably part of the target audience for more automated control, but at this point I am not likely to purchase many new IR transmitter equipped engines.  By far most of my engines are MTH or engines upgraded with ERR's boards.  Without the discontinued IR equipped cars (which I bought four to see how well they work but two were cancelled) or an add on IR kit, I'm not sure the IR transmitter-sensor system is worth it to me to install for my small percentage of IR equipped engines.

If the target audience is folks who are going to buy new Lionel Legacy engines, then I am not part of it.

I have Legacy, TMCC and DCS. I have TPCs, BPCs, and ASCs.  If I'm not the target audience then I don't know who is.  I'm just asking if this is really worth retrofitting into an existing layout based on what this does vs work involved vs can I do what it does myself?  The major thing seems like self loading engines.  It takes me 60 seconds to program a new engine so I don't really need self programming.  BigRail 

BigRail posted:

I have Legacy, TMCC and DCS. I have TPCs, BPCs, and ASCs.  If I'm not the target audience then I don't know who is.  I'm just asking if this is really worth retrofitting into an existing layout based on what this does vs work involved vs can I do what it does myself?  The major thing seems like self loading engines.  It takes me 60 seconds to program a new engine so I don't really need self programming.  BigRail 

The sensor track does so much more than just loading engines into Legacy.  With this lower cost alternative to the sensor track that will work with almost any track system, these can be added at crossings to signal grade crossings, added to areas of layouts to trigger recordings to control accessories and engine functions and such.  They are a very cool addition but I really think it depends on the layout and what you want to accomplish.  I think the loading engines part of it is minor.

The problem with Lionel and LCS is they don't promote it properly if at all.  They do very little to really expose what the system can do.

Any idea when this will hit the shelves. I'm buying.

Severn posted:

Any idea when this will hit the shelves. I'm buying.

Not yet.  I am going to be sending Dave and the Lionel guys some questions I have for the Legacy meeting.  I'll ask then because I hope to get some info to explain it a bit at the meeting.  Dave last April said it will work exactly the same as the current sensor tracks.

Ok... for those that wonder what to do with it, it's basically a digital event creator.   The event is created when an engine runs over it that has the IR sensor on it -- and a message is sent over the LCS "bus" (serial line),  And then if you've a computer hooked up, you can receive the message and do something.

In theory you could have one of these on every track piece and keep tabs on the entire layout digitally just about.  Of course that would cost a tiny bit of this stuff: $$$.

(it's fall down a little bit in the sense that if your dog takes the engine off the track, there's no way to know it)

It has some pre-canned "somethings" built in - for example you can tell it make the engine issue one of several sounds.   And there's a record function which I've never used also which records a sequence of commands your doing -- so they are redone upon the event occurring again. (that is running over the sensor)

The one big disappointment with LCS is indeed the problem that you can't retrofit it to older stuff or even MTH stuff.  I was really hoping that there would be an ERR upgrade kit, but with the demise of ERR development, that doesn't seem likely.  The sensor cars are neat, but they need to continue producing them if LCS is going to have significant value.  I think I have 10 or 11 sensor equipped Legacy locomotives, and the other 100+ don't have any way to trigger the sensors.  I did buy two of the sensor cars when they were available, but that doesn't solve my problem for passenger trains.

Severn posted:

snip

It has some pre-canned "somethings" built in - for example you can tell it make the engine issue one of several sounds.   And there's a record function which I've never used also which records a sequence of commands your doing -- so they are redone upon the event occurring again. (that is running over the sensor)

 

That's actually the most exciting feature. Think about a sensor track at the entrance of a siding with an engine barn. Record the backing into the barn, run the bell, slow down and stop with brake sounds, etc. And then it repeats for any similar ir equipped engine you back in...forever.

As for more RR specific sensor cars, I bought some identical non sensor refers in road names I wanted and transferred the frame of sensor equipped REA cars to them. Of course I have an excess of empty REA cars...but that's ok. The most difficult issue with the swap was the colored steps at the corners of the refers. Some were glued pretty well, some just popped off for the swap.

I'd like to see an external sensor add-on too.  I suppose one could try to crack the IR interface. I mean just in theory.

Severn posted:

I'd like to see an external sensor add-on too.  I suppose one could try to crack the IR interface. I mean just in theory.

Nothing is so easy as the job you imagine someone else doing.

I know.  But to be fair I did try to crack the MTH remote to TIU interface.  I captured the signal with one of those new software defined radios dongles, looked at the results in audacity.  And Mark Divechio looked at it for me and said, "yeah that's pretty much what I figured out already by hand using just my brain cells and true grit."  Pretty impressive stuff.  Anyway moving on from there since it's already been done -- I captured the signal from the track to engine because it appears to "bleed" through at least on SD70 and I can pick it up on the RF analyzer.  But I don't know what to do with it -- more to the point it looks like a huge effort and I didn't want that.  So I deftly moved onto the infamous legacy signal.  And after some trial an and error, found that I could get too.  I can't get the legacy remote though because its 2 ghz or something and the RF dongle doesn't go that high.

Given all that and not actually wanting to really work that heard, I idenified another 1-2k in more software and hardware that might help.  But then of course decided that was way too much money for a curiosity on my part.

Still I'm game to look into an IR sniffer is there is such a thing.

Pretty easy to build an "IR sniffer", and since you're looking at the boxcar, you can do it on the bench with a sensor car.

Marty, I can see a guy with a one track mainline installing them, though since we'll need the 6-85296 LCS IRV2 interface to use it the costs rise pretty quickly. If you have a double track main with 4 grade crossings that's: Eight  6-85383 @ $20 = $160 plus Four 6-85296 @ $ 100 = $400 which gets us to $560 list without any cables if my math is correct. Pricy, even more so for those without many IR equipped engines. And just what will our engineer/operators do if we automate everything?  Looking forward to your questions and answers.

BobbyD posted:

Marty, I can see a guy with a one track mainline installing them, though since we'll need the 6-85296 LCS IRV2 interface to use it the costs rise pretty quickly. If you have a double track main with 4 grade crossings that's: Sixteen  6-85383 @ $20 = $320 plus Four 6-85296 @ $ 100 = $400 which gets us to $720 list without any cables if my math is correct. Pricy, even more so for those without many IR equipped engines. And just what will our engineer/operators do if we automate everything?  Looking forward to your questions and answers.

Actually you only need (8)  6-85383 @ $20 as each IVR2 6-85296 comes with 2 sensor units.  Still I see your point.  This unit also solves the issue for the American Flyer folks who have been left without a Sensor Track option.

here's one of those web articles in regards to an IR sniffer which may or not work... suppose you need an air gap large enough to pick it up & have the sensor work between the engine and track sensor.

https://www.alanzucconi.com/20...r-remote-controller/

MartyE posted:

BobbyD posted:

Marty, I can see a guy with a one track mainline installing them, though since we'll need the 6-85296 LCS IRV2 interface to use it the costs rise pretty quickly. If you have a double track main with 4 grade crossings that's: Sixteen  6-85383 @ $20 = $320 plus Four 6-85296 @ $ 100 = $400 which gets us to $720 list without any cables if my math is correct. Pricy, even more so for those without many IR equipped engines. And just what will our engineer/operators do if we automate everything?  Looking forward to your questions and answers.

Actually you only need (8)  6-85383 @ $20 as each IVR2 6-85296 comes with 2 sensor units.  Still I see your point.  This unit also solves the issue for the American Flyer folks who have been left without a Sensor Track option.

That's my fault Marty, I'd originally estimated it with the grade crossing at a spot crossing 3 tracks and didn't divide out my revised total.  Removed them because at 4 track sensors per device and 6 sensors per crossing I'd have had to add an additional interface. I'm sure this will work well for those with a lot of IR pieces.

Again I say this is a cure in search of a disease!

At this point,  the cost aside, we do not have enough "stuff" to use this with.  Clearly, grade crossings are an obvious use but with many tracks this can get involved.

I have gone toward IR equipped engines to be able to use this but even after reading the catalog descriptions I am still not clear how to use it. . .well.

AlanRail posted:

Again I say this is a cure in search of a disease!

At this point,  the cost aside, we do not have enough "stuff" to use this with.  Clearly, grade crossings are an obvious use but with many tracks this can get involved.

I have gone toward IR equipped engines to be able to use this but even after reading the catalog descriptions I am still not clear how to use it. . .well.

I guess each his own but I see all sorts of uses.

Well, I agree with both Alan and Marty.  While I think it's neat technology and I can imagine a lot of uses, there are problems.  LCS is severely limited by the fact that unless you're going to go massively in for new Legacy locomotives, you won't get nearly as much utility from it as you should.  It really screams for an upgrade kit of some kind so that you can use other locomotives and have the benefits of the LCS system.

Here's our buddy Mark again doing some great stuff in this area.  And he's using very inexpensive RFID tech.  Which I think if read into the details, you might think why IR may be better -- (the data rates are possibly higher -- he was only able to squeeze 16 bytes across the interfaces but that's all resolvable ultimately i suppose).

betcha it could go to a LCS serial interface, betcha it could...

http://www.silogic.com/trains/RFID.html

And I then just about imagine it's entirely possible to spoof the other engine into the legacy base via the lcs bus via his other "panstamp" tiu interface effort ... just about imagine it.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

It really screams for an upgrade kit of some kind so that you can use other locomotives and have the benefits of the LCS system.

I agree 100%.  I doubt Lionel will produce it though.  Dave said they stopped making the sensor boxcars because of low demand.  I can't imagine that would change for a kit.  There seems to be a limited demand to do these types of upgrades.  We can always hope though.  Certainly worth adding to the Legacy questions for Lionel again.  Along with the TMCC signal car Mike Reagan spoke of about a week before he resigned.

i had an interest in the box car but it seemed a little high priced.  why not just put these things in all the cars and at a modest price increase more reflective of parts costs... which has to be pennies. or certainly not $50.

It's called "profit".

Don't you think though more adopters is more profit ultimately?

MartyE posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

It really screams for an upgrade kit of some kind so that you can use other locomotives and have the benefits of the LCS system.

I agree 100%.  I doubt Lionel will produce it though.  Dave said they stopped making the sensor boxcars because of low demand.  I can't imagine that would change for a kit.  There seems to be a limited demand to do these types of upgrades.  We can always hope though.  Certainly worth adding to the Legacy questions for Lionel again.  Along with the TMCC signal car Mike Reagan spoke of about a week before he resigned.

Well that's the thing, low demand is not surprising. I resist buying any rolling stock because of the higher prices of them in general. I did suffer buying the sensor cars because I sensed,  that they were going to become scarce. 

cjack posted:

I did suffer buying the sensor cars because I sensed,  that they were going to become scarce. 

I think the demand is so low because of A) cost and B) no one knows what you can really do with it outside of those that designed the system.  Lionel needs to build a layout full of these things to show what potential they have (And build it using the FasTrack modules to promote those too.).  And then it needs to tour with the train shows, have videos on YouTube, and articles in the magazines and on the websites their customers go to.  It's called marketing, and they have really dropped the ball on the whole LCS system.

If they had IR kits you could add to all your rolling stock I could see it possible for you to pull a train up to a yard feeding a large industrial complex and as soon as it passed over the sensor at the yard lead LCS would take over and break down the train and have a yard engine, or few, deliver all the cars to the correct sidings and spurs while you stand back and watch.  When it was done it would have also built up a trains of cars ready for the main that you can now leave with.  Is this even possible with LCS?  If I understand what I've read about it, yes.  Would it be cheap or easy at this stage of the game?  Nope.  But if Lionel play their cards right and continue to lay the foundation, then the next generation of model railroaders would be able to build these programmable automated layouts with LCS.

The problem with the yard scenario is you need some of the cars to have TMCC controlled couplers.  However, since they discontinued all the Mini Commander stuff and there's no replacement, that leave a big hole in the lineup.

I have my doubts about where Lionel is going, they seem to be trying to force people to buy new expensive locomotives and rolling stock, gone are all the upgrade products.  Soon the only command upgrades will likely be DCS PS/3.

Yes. Not a good thing to ignore the builders and developers since that’s a major part of the hobby. This hobby could die in a hurry if there’r only $100 box cars and $1500 steamers that go round and round...and round.

I agree with the lack of demo and marketing.  Lionel absolutely should be demoing this stuff at York with a working layout.  Show me what this can do and what's so cool about it or take it out of the catalog and forget it.  Who is going to buy something that has no real explanation of what it does.  Especially an explanation that convinces me to spend stupid money on it.  BigRail

I don't see any new videos since 2016.

On the issue of sensors, I have several different types of IR and magnetic sensors all over my layout which do all kinds of interesting things that are kind of fun to watch. The most intriguing sensor I've used is the IR proximity sensor which continuously calculates the distance of the train it is pointed at. 

Now that's one I didn't think about. With some fixed references or and a clear line of site could you triangulate engine location?

cjack posted:

I don't see any new videos since 2016.

Dave has done some videos in the past year. 

To me, the bigger issue is not that lack of marketing that Lionel has done for LCS (which is very little) but the lack of accessories and products that can take advantage of the sensor track.  Where are the breakdown B units that are triggered by sensor tracks?  Where are the train stations that make announcements when the triggered by sensor tracks?  Where are the switch towers and train orders buildings that could calcualte scale mph for a trip around the layout or that could have some action triggered by a sensor track (figure comes out of office with train orders)?  

I have three installed on my layout and to me they are an underutilized item.  There is potential but not much available at the moment.

I make recordings all the time that trigger accessories. 

Can't you do the same with the record function on the Legacy remote?

CAPPilot posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

If you don't see the benefit, you're probably not the target market.

I'm probably part of the target audience for more automated control, but at this point I am not likely to purchase many new IR transmitter equipped engines.  By far most of my engines are MTH or engines upgraded with ERR's boards.  Without the discontinued IR equipped cars (which I bought four to see how well they work but two were cancelled) or an add on IR kit, I'm not sure the IR transmitter-sensor system is worth it to me to install for my small percentage of IR equipped engines.

If the target audience is folks who are going to buy new Lionel Legacy engines, then I am not part of it.

At the last Legacy User Group meeting this past spring at York,  Dave made mention of possibly developing an IR kit that can be installed in these non-IR locomotives.  This is probably if they see a demand for them.  We’ll see!

gunrunnerjohn posted:

The one big disappointment with LCS is indeed the problem that you can't retrofit it to older stuff or even MTH stuff.  I was really hoping that there would be an ERR upgrade kit, but with the demise of ERR development, that doesn't seem likely.  The sensor cars are neat, but they need to continue producing them if LCS is going to have significant value.  I think I have 10 or 11 sensor equipped Legacy locomotives, and the other 100+ don't have any way to trigger the sensors.  I did buy two of the sensor cars when they were available, but that doesn't solve my problem for passenger trains.

John, you should take the dive and go ahead and transfer the guts from a sensor car into one of those non sensor capable engines.  If it can be done,  I know you’re the man for the challenge.  

Micro usb connectors please!

BigRail posted:

Can't you do the same with the record function on the Legacy remote?

Sure you can but each sensor track can create 2 recordings that can be triggered by all sensor equipped engines or by a specific engine without having to manually trigger it. 

Blake Morris posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

The one big disappointment with LCS is indeed the problem that you can't retrofit it to older stuff or even MTH stuff.  I was really hoping that there would be an ERR upgrade kit, but with the demise of ERR development, that doesn't seem likely.  The sensor cars are neat, but they need to continue producing them if LCS is going to have significant value.  I think I have 10 or 11 sensor equipped Legacy locomotives, and the other 100+ don't have any way to trigger the sensors.  I did buy two of the sensor cars when they were available, but that doesn't solve my problem for passenger trains.

John, you should take the dive and go ahead and transfer the guts from a sensor car into one of those non sensor capable engines.  If it can be done,  I know you’re the man for the challenge.  

I was looking at Lionel parts and it looks like several PCBs. Most of that is probably already in a Legacy engine...it would be neat if the IR could be added somehow.

MartyE posted:

BigRail posted:

Can't you do the same with the record function on the Legacy remote?

Sure you can but each sensor track can create 2 recordings that can be triggered by all sensor equipped engines or by a specific engine without having to manually trigger it. 

And different recordings depending on direction.

I really doubt it's any big issue to transfer the guts of a sensor boxcar to another type of car or a tender.  My issue is that I don't want to buy a scale boxcar just to rip it apart and move the sensor guts, that gets expensive.  I had actually ordered a couple of the semi-scale boxcars to do just that, but they cancelled those and only had the more expensive scale cars.  I have a couple of scale sensor cars, but I'm not going to rip them apart just yet.  Also, a very important point.  Since you can't buy any more sensor cars at this time, figuring out how to use the guts seems pointless as I wouldn't be able to get more parts once I've done two conversions.

In order for the sensor tracks and LCS in general to make sense for me, they're going to have to expand the ability to add the sensors to unequipped locomotives and rolling stock at a reasonable price.  Failing that, I'll probably not be interested in the system and I'll simply have one or two sensor tracks in a staging yard to automatically load new Legacy engines and call it a day.

Truthfully, I'm very disappointed in Lionel's failure to support the LCS for anyone other than the big spender that's going to buy a fleet of Legacy locomotives and toss all his old stuff.  That's not me.  With the demise of the Mini Commander products, I can no longer equip rolling stock with TMCC control, so there's nothing to keep me from moving to MTH DCS, cheaper locomotives, more flexibility in loading sound files, even the ability to customize them, etc.  Upgrading steamers to DCS is significantly cheaper than to TMCC for full function, so even the still available TMCC upgrades aren't making nearly as much sense nowadays.  Lionel used to have a broad based upgrade path to command, from rolling stock, small motorized units, and full sized locomotives.   Most of that capability is no longer available, IMO a shortsighted decision by Lionel management.

I like your rant but I also just note mth appears to never have the intention of making an lcs-like system.

Severn posted:

I like your rant but I also just note mth appears to never have the intention of making an lcs-like system.

So what?  If Lionel isn't going to make the LCS more useful for more locomotives, including what I already have, LCS isn't a big deal to me now.  My point is that Lionel used to have something that really differentiated them from MTH, mainly stuff like LCS and upgrades for smaller motorized units and rolling stock.  With LCS being very limited except for new and expensive entries, and the other command upgrades gone, their upgrade path is the same width as MTH.

I don't buy that sensor cars didn't sell that well was the reason.  That's probably correct, but what they failed to take into consideration was that the LCS system wasn't properly sold and publicized, so people didn't know what the sensor car would do for them.  If you're going to create a system like LCS, you should be in it for the long haul.  That means that the sensor car should not have been a once-and-done product, but rather offered every year.  The LCS components are offered every year, just not the capability to really use them!

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Severn posted:

I like your rant but I also just note mth appears to never have the intention of making an lcs-like system.

So what?  If Lionel isn't going to make the LCS more useful for more locomotives, including what I already have, LCS isn't a big deal to me now.  My point is that Lionel used to have something that really differentiated them from MTH, mainly stuff like LCS and upgrades for smaller motorized units and rolling stock.  With LCS being very limited except for new and expensive entries, and the other command upgrades gone, their upgrade path is the same width as MTH.

I don't buy that sensor cars didn't sell that well was the reason.  That's probably correct, but what they failed to take into consideration was that the LCS system wasn't properly sold and publicized, so people didn't know what the sensor car would do for them.  If you're going to create a system like LCS, you should be in it for the long haul.  That means that the sensor car should not have been a once-and-done product, but rather offered every year.  The LCS components are offered every year, just not the capability to really use them!

One of my problems with Lionel is they rarely finish what they start through no fault of the engineering department. LCS is a good example. It has potential to be something more. 

Live asked for years why more emphasis wasn’t put on showing LCS and Legacy at York. I was less than impressed by the answers. 

I will say Dave Olson made a pretty nice LCS module center for the last 2 York’s. I’m betting it’s missing this fall. I hope I’m wrong.  

For the record, it is hard for me to envision a decent sized layout without all kinds of sensors monitoring train movements and providing info or controlling accessories.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

The problem with the yard scenario is you need some of the cars to have TMCC controlled couplers.  However, since they discontinued all the Mini Commander stuff and there's no replacement, that leave a big hole in the lineup.

Unless you have uncoupler tracks installed.

But instead of IR, Lionel should have used NFC.  Then the track has a powered reader and to upgrade a freight car all is needed is a sticker.  Sure, it can't do a running fuel used and such, but it can at least identify rolling stock.  So maybe they can do NFC for freight and IR for locomotives.

There are a lot of ways to skin the cat Sinclair, my complaint is Lionel never finished skinning this one!

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Since you can't buy any more sensor cars at this time, figuring out how to use the guts seems pointless as I wouldn't be able to get more parts once I've done two conversions.

In order for the sensor tracks and LCS in general to make sense for me, they're going to have to expand the ability to add the sensors to unequipped locomotives and rolling stock at a reasonable price.

The SensorCars are still available. In the last several months, I've picked up a couple from two different dealers at very nice discounts, and I could have gotten more from either dealer. At the April 2018 York Legacy Users Group, a slide was shown in which Dave Olson wrote that Lionel is "actually still sitting on stock" of the SensorCar. So, if you want them, you can get them.

The SensorCar was only shown in one or two catalogs and not well marketed when it was shown. This is just another example of John's (and other's) observation that Lionel has dropped the ball on consistently and effectively marketing LCS.

Dave also wrote in the same slide that he wants to do what is just what John asked for: "a kit that people could buy to install in their existing equipment."

Here's the slide:

Maybe we need to let Lionel know that we agree with Dave Olson on the need for a kit like this. It would go a long way to allowing folks to really get into using LCS. Of course, Lionel would still need to get behind it in terms of marketing.

Keith L posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Since you can't buy any more sensor cars at this time, figuring out how to use the guts seems pointless as I wouldn't be able to get more parts once I've done two conversions.

In order for the sensor tracks and LCS in general to make sense for me, they're going to have to expand the ability to add the sensors to unequipped locomotives and rolling stock at a reasonable price.

The SensorCars are still available. In the last several months, I've picked up a couple from two different dealers at very nice discounts, and I could have gotten more from either dealer. At the April 2018 York Legacy Users Group, a slide was shown in which Dave Olson wrote that Lionel is "actually still sitting on stock" of the SensorCar. So, if you want them, you can get them.

The SensorCar was only shown in one or two catalogs and not well marketed when it was shown. This is just another example of John's (and other's) observation that Lionel has dropped the ball on consistently and effectively marketing LCS.

Dave also wrote in the same slide that he wants to do what is just what John asked for: "a kit that people could buy to install in their existing equipment."

Here's the slide:

Maybe we need to let Lionel know that we agree with Dave Olson on the need for a kit like this. It would go a long way to allowing folks to really get into using LCS. Of course, Lionel would still need to get behind it in terms of marketing.

Wow somebody paid attention. LOL!  

I bought 6 of them and converted by switching the frames (which has all the guts of the IR) to other road names of the same reefer vintage. So I have SF, UP, NYC, and CN reefers, and still a couple REA ones.

I do think I got fired up in the beginning, and just like Lionel, haven't done much since then. 

Keith L posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Since you can't buy any more sensor cars at this time, figuring out how to use the guts seems pointless as I wouldn't be able to get more parts once I've done two conversions.

In order for the sensor tracks and LCS in general to make sense for me, they're going to have to expand the ability to add the sensors to unequipped locomotives and rolling stock at a reasonable price.

The SensorCars are still available. In the last several months, I've picked up a couple from two different dealers at very nice discounts, and I could have gotten more from either dealer. At the April 2018 York Legacy Users Group, a slide was shown in which Dave Olson wrote that Lionel is "actually still sitting on stock" of the SensorCar. So, if you want them, you can get them.

Same answer really in any case.  The fact that they aren't going to make any more sensor cars means the future is secure, no upgrade path.  Ditto for the demise of much of the ERR capability.  All the indications are that the bean counters are just trying to squeeze whatever they can out of Lionel before they decide to move on. 

Buy my new overpriced locomotives and toss your old stuff seems to be the mantra at Lionel now.

As you say, perhaps the individual sensor cars are not that popular but maybe a home installed kit would be ... at you know something approaching a reasonable price to the end user.   Which would be?

I think a $50 upgrade kit would sell.  With a list price of $129.99 for the scale sensor car, it's no surprise that they didn't sell.

Bob

I feel like you should be getting a multipack for $129. In addition maybe this standalone interface could support battery power. To me simplifying installation ...  Finally since it sends a packet one assumes similar to the engine... An easy way to program it for your application ("MyBoxCar1"). As usual I think usb to something is the obvious way to go.

The bigger picture is the cost of the whole system.  To be able to have a Legacy engine sound a grade crossing warning on a single track, you need 2 sensor tracks (one approaching crossing from each direction = $190).  For a dual mainline you need 4 (=$380).  The IRV2 is a step in the right direction:  Single track $100, dual track $150 (assuming the 2 extra sensors and cables run $50 - I couldn't find them on Lionel's website).  Then add $130 for a sensor car for each non-legacy locomotive.  Each train station needs a sensor track (or IRV2 sensor) for arrival announcements. You will need the LCS wifi module ($180)  and additional Sensor Tracks or IRV 2 sensors for ipad location notifications.  

For a modest sized layout with 6 grade crossings, 2 stations, and 2 other location notifications and 5 non-legacy locomotives) the total costs are:

Using Sensor tracks: $2590 (16 sensor tracks + Wifi module +16 cables + 5 Sensor Cars) 

Using IRV2: $1430 (4 IRV2 + 8 extra sensors/cables + Wifi module + 5 Sensor Cars) 

(These are list prices, so your cost may be 20% less).

Bob

Sensor tracks should be included with all Lionel starter sets.  Have it trigger some engine functions and include a brochure on what this can do with upgrades for more functionality.  The current usage of this has to be below .01% of train owners.

Good idea overall, except ... the command/packet from the sensor track goes to the base through the LCS serial line, and then the base sends the RF command to the engine.   You need a base, you need the cable, and then the sensor track.  And if you are buying sets, you are getting flyer chief now... so no base.

But maybe it could be included with legacy engines.

I like the idea of the sensor track.  To that end, I purchased one sensor car and upgraded to Legacy.   My layout is Ross track, so use of a sensor track is not desirable.  The new IRV2 sensors which I have on-order give me hope.  Not sure an IR upgrade path would attract me.  Sounds expensive and labor intensive for value added.   My prime command system is DCS.  It would be great if Legacy could communicate to DCS but it can't.  Better yet, a DCS sensor track equivalent which could communicate to TMCC and Legacy.  Seems like a DCS sensor could be pretty simple, all it really needs to do is say:" I'm tripped" and the rest is software.

Steve, you could run a sensor equipped car behind your MTH locomotive and still get some of the benefits of the sensor track.  Things like route changes with switches would still work, and perhaps activating accessories.

I'm not sure I follow you about the DCS sensor track, the "software" seems to be the stumbling block. 

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Steve, you could run a sensor equipped car behind your MTH locomotive and still get some of the benefits of the sensor track.  Things like route changes with switches would still work, and perhaps activating accessories.

I'm not sure I follow you about the DCS sensor track, the "software" seems to be the stumbling block. 

Hi GRJ, I don't have any LCS interface to switches or accessories just AIU.  I have some TMCC/ERR engines but no Legacy engines.  I was just dreaming about a DCS sensor track equivalent.  Seems like there could be just a sensor embedded in the roadbed that talks to the TIU giving trip status and location data.  The TIU could then execute a recorded action.  DCS offers some of this already but DCS doesn't provide precise location that an embedded sensor would offer.  Any feedback is appreciated.   There is probably more to it than I imagine.

Look here. Not a product but mark runs mth.

http://www.silogic.com/trains/RFID.html

An earlier post asked if the smart sensor could calculate distance to an engine. The sensor outputs a DC voltage which is inversely proportional to the distance from the sensed object. I measured this and found it to be quite accurate from 2 feet down to zero. This function can be used to animate and control accessories as a train approaches, but can also indicate where the train is positioned.

really?  you measured it where exactly, on the sensor track?

The distance to the sensor was measured on a spur line with the sensor at one end facing the train. It was quite accurate. Output voltage is zero at over 24 in. and rises linearly to 2.5V when the train is just in front of the sensor.  Makes for interesting sequential animation of accessories as a train enters the spur line.

where exactly do you measure the output volrage?

You are saying to me at least that the IR receiver on the track picks up the IR transmitter on the engine up to 24 inches way approx... at least some fraction of it, improving of course to 100% when they are aligned...  yes?

The IR sensor emits an IR beam which bounces back off the train to a detector mounted in the same housing. It calculates the distance to the train and outputs a DC voltage which increases from zero to 2.5V as the train approaches the sensor. Details have been outlined in three published articles on this subject and there are videos of this in operation.

maybe i going into the "duh" category.  the sensor track is facing the train/engine in this scenario.  it's not located in the rail track itself.

Severn posted:

maybe i going into the "duh" category.  the sensor track is facing the train/engine in this scenario.  it's not located in the rail track itself.

I'm going to say he's not talking about the sensor track.

The smart IR sensor is a separate item and is not part of the sensor track.

The smart sensor is at the left hand side of the spur line in the attached picture.

OK, I'm really confused now.  Isn't this thread about the Sensor Track add-on's.  These are thin flat items mounted between the rails on track like Ross, etc.  The add on  work in combination with IR sensors mounted in Legacy engines and/or the Sensor Track Boxcar.  Please point me in the right direction.  Thanks.

BOB WALKER posted:

An earlier post asked if the smart sensor could calculate distance to an engine. The sensor outputs a DC voltage which is inversely proportional to the distance from the sensed object. I measured this and found it to be quite accurate from 2 feet down to zero. This function can be used to animate and control accessories as a train approaches, but can also indicate where the train is positioned.

I think the thread took a turn about here. Bob was not talking about the sensor track, but IR in general I think.

Is it this?

http://www.lionel.com/products...-controller-6-14111/

My SER2 just arrived.  While I had another use for it, perhaps one could jury-rig a connection from the above to send a packet onto the LCS bus though the SER2 also.

Does anyone know what the included cable length will be between the sensor sled and the IRV2 ?

MichRR714 posted:

Does anyone know what the included cable length will be between the sensor sled and the IRV2 ?

From April's Legacy Users group originally they were to be approx 2'-3' but they've added some shielding that would hopefully add some length to that. 

Thanks Marty.

Hi, Guys !

I just read this topic and I really interested to put in my new layout !
So I searched the product but he still in backorder? This is same?

Thanks,

According to TrainWorld, not until the end of the year.

Charles Ro is a little more optimistic.

Anyone seen the Lionel 6-85296 LCS SensorTrack 2 (IRV2) yet?  This has been "coming" for a couple of years, if it doesn't ship soon it'll be obsolete.  Every time the delivery date gets close Lionel moves the goalposts!

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Anyone seen the Lionel 6-85296 LCS SensorTrack 2 (IRV2) yet?  This has been "coming" for a couple of years, if it doesn't ship soon it'll be obsolete.  Every time the delivery date gets close Lionel moves the goalposts!

John,  I found out a few days ago that they are in the Lionel Warehouse and as soon as the shutdown is over,  they will be sent out to the dealers.  Probably in the next few weeks or so.

Blake

Well, that's a pleasant surprise if it's true, it's about time!

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Well, that's a pleasant surprise if it's true, it's about time!

Agreed!  It came from Dave Olson so we'll see.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Anyone seen the Lionel 6-85296 LCS SensorTrack 2 (IRV2) yet?  This has been "coming" for a couple of years, if it doesn't ship soon it'll be obsolete.  Every time the delivery date gets close Lionel moves the goalposts!

How true.  

Part obsolescence issues before the product even ships, now that would be funny.  Well not really.

I have one on order and the add on, curios to see how well they work vs the Fastrack one I tore apart to put under Atlas track.

Jim

I have a few of the Fastrack ones, but since I'm going to Gargraves/Ross, those aren't going to be as useful as they might be.  I'll probably take them apart and hide the electronics and use them, but I'd like to get some of the ones made for alternative track brands.

@Jim Sandman posted:

Part obsolescence issues before the product even ships, now that would be funny.  Well not really.

I have one on order and the add on, curios to see how well they work vs the Fastrack one I tore apart to put under Atlas track.

Jim

Jim,  according to Dave Olson,  these IRV2’s will work just like the individual sensor tracks work.  The difference may be that the sensor may have a little issue if using more than 3 foot PDI cable.  

We've been waiting for the Sensor Track Add On for quite awhile.  Glad to hear it is on the horizon.  Disheartened to hear there is a little issue.  Do you know any more about the issue ?

@shorling posted:

We've been waiting for the Sensor Track Add On for quite awhile.  Glad to hear it is on the horizon.  Disheartened to hear there is a little issue.  Do you know any more about the issue ?

I don’t know of anymore issues.

@Blake Morris posted:

Jim,  according to Dave Olson,  these IRV2’s will work just like the individual sensor tracks work.  The difference may be that the sensor may have a little issue if using more than 3 foot PDI cable.  

That's going to limit it's usefulness I would imagine!

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

That's going to limit it's usefulness I would imagine!

John, I think they are guaranteeing a good signal with the 3 foot cable but more than likely, you could stretch it out and see what you get.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I have a few of the Fastrack ones, but since I'm going to Gargraves/Ross, those aren't going to be as useful as they might be.  I'll probably take them apart and hide the electronics and use them, but I'd like to get some of the ones made for alternative track brands.

I took one apart and mounted it on a spacer to allow the sensor to be read from tubular track between the rails. Works fine and the cord can be 20 feet long.

cant seem to get it small enough to fit under gargraves I may need to use roadbed thickness.

tried to simulate the ties to get the resin thickness so its strong enough

@Blake Morris posted:

Jim,  according to Dave Olson,  these IRV2’s will work just like the individual sensor tracks work.  The difference may be that the sensor may have a little issue if using more than 3 foot PDI cable.  

The 3-foot specification refers to the cable between the sensor and the module with the electronics, and that’s the length of the cable provided.

The PDI cable, which the user provides, between the IRV2 module and other LCS components can be as long as that between any other LCS components.

I like that 3D printing Alan, you could just extend the "ties" and paint them to match the existing ties.

@Keith L posted:

The 3-foot specification refers to the cable between the sensor and the module with the electronics, and that’s the length of the cable provided.

That makes sense, not as bad a restriction as it first sounded like.

The ties do match Gargraves. To get more space for the electronics while maintaining a reasonable shell thickness the rails fit between the tiles in the spaces provided.

the electronics is still too high to fit underneath which is why I will need to add in the height of the roadbed and add that as resin to match the roadbed. The only roadbed I have is the cork material.

Fasttrack has no issue because they use their track roadbed to obtain the height required for the electronics package to fit.

I think it is reasonable to assume that Lionel made the sensor track difficult to use with any other track format (including Gargraves) other than their own. That has a name. It's called tie-in Monopoly and is illegal under the Clayton and Sherman Anti-trust Acts.  Contact the Anti-Trust Division of our justice department. Good Luck with that!

I'm using 1/4" foam, it's slightly thicker than the Midwest cork roadbed, so if it works for cork, it would work for mine.

@AlanRail posted:

I think it is reasonable to assume that Lionel made the sensor track difficult to use with any other track format (including Gargraves) other than their own. That has a name. It's called tie-in Monopoly and is illegal under the Clayton and Sherman Anti-trust Acts.  Contact the Anti-Trust Division of our justice department. Good Luck with that!

With their retrofit package for other track types, I think they have that angle covered.  Not sure even if they didn't that it would be considered illegal.  After all, electronic device manufacturers make products that have unique batteries and other accessories.

being nice is not what will protect them.

I just looked up my previous orders and I ordered this on March 4, 2019.  along with the IRV2.

Yep, it's been a while in the making, I do hope it actually gets produced!

I ordered the IRV2 in February 2018...

I know that Lionel wanted to get it right before releasing it, but, clearly, it wasn’t a priority either. That’s understandable. It’s a small item, and, on top of that, Lionel has pivoted it’s technology and marketing thrust away from Legacy and the LCS system to the LionChief Plus 2.0 platform.

The iPad app, iCab app, third-party apps, and LCS devices, all of which Lionel previously touted so highly, have been largely left in the dust. I suppose that Lionel has only so many resources to go around. Presumably, market potential and technology production issues favor LionChief Plus and LionChief Plus 2.0. Again, I get it, but personally I regret the neglect of Legacy/LCS. I can’t get enough of all the cool capabilities that are possible.

@Keith L posted:

I ordered the IRV2 in February 2018...

I know that Lionel wanted to get it right before releasing it, but, clearly, it wasn’t a priority either. That’s understandable. It’s a small item, and, on top of that, Lionel has pivoted it’s technology and marketing thrust away from Legacy and the LCS system to the LionChief Plus 2.0 platform.

The iPad app, iCab app, third-party apps, and LCS devices, all of which Lionel previously touted so highly, have been largely left in the dust. I suppose that Lionel has only so many resources to go around. Presumably, market potential and technology production issues favor LionChief Plus and LionChief Plus 2.0. Again, I get it, but personally I regret the neglect of Legacy/LCS. I can’t get enough of all the cool capabilities that are possible.

I feel the same thing ! Legacy is not more a priority! 

Speaking of the devil...I just received an email from Charles Ro saying that they’re shipping my IRV2!

I ordered a year later.  Hope they have enough to fill all the orders.

Brendan

My Bag in Charles RO, Am I correct?

Looks like you’re ordering one IRV2 (which comes with two sensors) plus a pair (2) of additional sensors and three PDI cables.

@Keith L posted:

Looks like you’re ordering one IRV2 (which comes with two sensors) plus a pair (2) of additional sensors and three PDI cables.

Ohhh, Thanks !

I didn't know which comes with two sensors for package. So cable is included too? What is size?

@Keith L posted:

The 3-foot specification refers to the cable between the sensor and the module with the electronics, and that’s the length of the cable provided.

The PDI cable, which the user provides, between the IRV2 module and other LCS components can be as long as that between any other LCS components.

So...if you used two sensors, they would be within 6 feet of each other? And if you wanted another sensor across the room, you would have to buy another IRV2? I guess when you compare the price to a sensor track, that seems ok, but odd that the module would support 4 sensors...maybe if they were all at the same position of four loops of track.

@cjack posted:

So...if you used two sensors, they would be within 6 feet of each other? And if you wanted another sensor across the room, you would have to buy another IRV2? I guess when you compare the price to a sensor track, that seems ok, but odd that the module would support 4 sensors...maybe if they were all at the same position of four loops of track.

Exactly...

Each IRV2 comes with 2 SLED sensors that each have cables; Each added SLED sensor also has a cable.

See how nicely the SLED fits between the GarGraves track rails.

CORRECTION:  Each IRV2 can support four(4) SLED sensors.

I haven't tried this with a slide shoe automated car; so I dont know how the shoe slides up and around the Sled Sensor.

Just so everyone knows, the cable between the IRV2 module and the sensor sled is not the same as the PDI cables. It has a different number of pins. We had to limit it to a 3' cable due to possible noise issues we encountered in testing. 

This project was also delayed as it took us time to develop a shield solution over the sensor that would block out interference. In the end, this ended up making this product even more robust than the FasTrack SensorTrack. 

If you receive the IRV2 and have questions, feel free to email me. I look forward to people getting these and hearing first impressions.

@Dave Olson posted:

Just so everyone knows, the cable between the IRV2 module and the sensor sled is not the same as the PDI cables. It has a different number of pins. We had to limit it to a 3' cable due to possible noise issues we encountered in testing. 

This project was also delayed as it took us time to develop a shield solution over the sensor that would block out interference. In the end, this ended up making this product even more robust than the FasTrack SensorTrack. 

If you receive the IRV2 and have questions, feel free to email me. I look forward to people getting these and hearing first impressions.

interesting. I was thinking of buying an IRV 2 and mounting it's sensors on Fastrack somehow. It would take quite a bit of surgery, but doable I think. Two sensors for the price of one...probably on adjacent loops. Or II could just use sections of tubular track...but that requires transition Fastrack sections.

I noticed that if I turn up the GRJ track signal booster, some of the sensor tracks cease to play the recorded action in both directions. I installed a "volume" control on the GRJ booster circuit and turned it down until it just allowed all the sensor tracks to work in both directions. Everything works nicely

@cjack posted:

I noticed that if I turn up the GRJ track signal booster, some of the sensor tracks cease to play the recorded action in both directions. I installed a "volume" control on the GRJ booster circuit and turned it down until it just allowed all the sensor tracks to work in both directions. Everything works nicely

Jon Z. pointed this out some time back, that was the genesis of the amplitude adjustment feature.  It also helps minimize interference between the Legacy and DCS signals if you run both systems.  Adrian was the one that did a lot of research on that issue.

@AlanRail posted:

 

Each IRV2 comes with 2 SLED sensors that each have cables; Each added SLED sensor also has a cable.

See how nicely the SLED fits between the GarGraves track rails.

 

CORRECTION:  Each IRV2 can support four(4) SLED sensors.

Hi, AlanHN !

Please, Can you told me what the size of the wire sensor with box IRV2?

Thanks!

@Leandro Garcia posted:

Hi, AlanHN !

Please, Can you told me what the size of the wire sensor with box IRV2?

Thanks!

If you mean the wire between the sensor and the blue module, it’s one (1) meter.

@Keith L posted:

If you mean the wire between the sensor and the blue module, it’s one (1) meter.

Yes ! Thanks !

Just a note to save someone some time...

I found it advantageous to put an inch or so of black electrical tape around the sensor receptacle and the one-meter cable plug.  That way the plug won't wiggle out of the sensor receptacle during or after installation.

I installed the darn things without taking pix ... but it's not too hard to imagine.  

I suggest something other than black electrical tape.  That stuff turns to goo after a few months, I won't let a roll of that anywhere near my trains!

John:

What do you use instead of black electrical tape?

Neal Jeter 

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I suggest something other than black electrical tape.  That stuff turns to goo after a few months, I won't let a roll of that anywhere near my trains!

My experience has been similar - until I started buying more expensive, top-quality black tape. 

No longer do I have the goo mess we (un)fondly remember.  

I use Kapton (polyimide) tape, it doesn't leave a sticky residue, it's very thin and strong. 

John:

Thank you.

Neal Jeter

I just installed a sensor on an O60 curve and it works great.  Only this is that the instructions state that two screws are supposed to be included with the sled cover, however, there wasn’t any.  Anyone else missing some screws?  LOL 

Blake

I've been told more than once I have a screw loose, but it's not missing.

@Blake Morris posted:

I just installed a sensor on an O60 curve and it works great.  Only this is that the instructions state that two screws are supposed to be included with the sled cover, however, there wasn’t any.  Anyone else missing some screws?  LOL 

Blake

No screws anywhere with the four sleds I have.  I used 1 5/8 inch panel tack nails pushed through the sled, Atlas track and roadbed and into the cork beneath.  Holds well.

I'm not allowing myself any "screw" jokes.  

@Blake Morris posted:

I just installed a sensor on an O60 curve and it works great.  Only this is that the instructions state that two screws are supposed to be included with the sled cover, however, there wasn’t any.  Anyone else missing some screws?  LOL 

Blake

The screws were missing with mine, too. I called Lionel last week and they ‘re going to send me the four screws (two for each sensor cover/sled). It may be that at some point in the development/production process, they were just forgotten about.

Something else that seems “amiss” is that the green LED that illuminates for Program is next to the Record button—and vice versa. If this was intentional, it’s counterintuitive and confusing. I expected the LED for each button to be next to the button it’s for—not next to the other button. The instructions are not helpful with this. They just refer to the Program LED and the Record LED, and don’t mention the color. I figured it out by looking at a photo of the original SensorTrack, which showed the green LED next to the Program button and the red LED next to the Record button. I emailed Lionel for an explanation for what seems like an odd setup; am awaiting a reply.

Seems we all got screwed by not getting screws.  I just checked mine and no screws either.  No biggie though.  Haven't tried it yet though.  Kid has a mess under the layout - can't get to the last open LCS connector to hook into.

Jim

I just put together a test circle to make sure the IRV2 works.  I used the eTrain command console software to do a complete recording and playback of the events.   You can see it on my youtube channel.

https://youtu.be/0yOxSooRp8I

Thanks,

Blake

So I called Lionel and they have sent the screws that were not in the kit.  

Blake

What are the screws like... picture? Seems like an unnecessary expense to ship if one can just use ordinary screws. I have some black Atlas track screws. Might be ideal.

Lionel should just proactively send out an equal number of screw sets to everyone and each dealer that ordered either the controller or extra sensor sleds.  Save us all a lot of phone calls.  I see no screws in any of the sets I have opened. 

Also it seems that Lionel did take the suggestion to trim the corners of the sled so it can be used with curved sections of track.  Seems to fit my atlas track fine with curves down to O-54.  I will report on operation on curved sections when I have a chance to install some of them.

@cjack posted:

What are the screws like... picture? Seems like an unnecessary expense to ship if one can just use ordinary screws. I have some black Atlas track screws. Might be ideal.

The Atlas track screws should work - depending on your sub-track bed.

@cjack posted:

What are the screws like... picture? Seems like an unnecessary expense to ship if one can just use ordinary screws. I have some black Atlas track screws. Might be ideal.

@Dave Olson posted:

Just so everyone knows, the cable between the IRV2 module and the sensor sled is not the same as the PDI cables. It has a different number of pins. We had to limit it to a 3' cable due to possible noise issues we encountered in testing. 

This project was also delayed as it took us time to develop a shield solution over the sensor that would block out interference. In the end, this ended up making this product even more robust than the FasTrack SensorTrack. 

If you receive the IRV2 and have questions, feel free to email me. I look forward to people getting these and hearing first impressions.

Don't feel so bad about taking the easy way out with limiting to 3 feet. In the early days of High powered switching powers supply design. We would go through masses of TO3 Mosfet's because of transient issues. When, we hit a roadblock. It was time for the ferrite beads...AKA, Rosary beads!.

I've seen a couple posts about people getting these sled sensors to work on curved sections of track. I've tried it on O72 and O96 but cannot find a placement where it works. Run a loco across it and nothing happens.  Move the sled to a straight section of track and it works as expected.   --what's the secret i seem to be missing?

Make sure you are using the inside part of the track curve for the sled.  The engine sensors are on the engine center line and when you go around a curve the center of the engine moves to the inside of the curve.  On a long engine that may be too far from the sled sensor if it is on outside portion of the curve.

@Blake Morris posted:

Lionel also sent me these screws that were supposed to have been included with the IRV2. I think it was a good idea--although evidently it wound up not happening--to include the screws because this is a screw that many of us--including myself--don't have around.

Do they fit the holes easily? I thought the Atlas track screws would work, but they don’t slide easily thru the holes.

@Keith L posted:

Lionel also sent me these screws that were supposed to have been included with the IRV2. I think it was a good idea--although evidently it wound up not happening--to include the screws because this is a screw that many of us--including myself--don't have around.

Same here!

@cjack posted:

Do they fit the holes easily? I thought the Atlas track screws would work, but they don’t slide easily thru the holes.

They don't drop through, but they go through easily enough.

Yes... like everyone else, I did not receive a set of screws with any of my IRV2's or add-on sleds.  I used Atlas screws. The hole ends up being just the tiniest bit wider than it was, but it makes for a good grip on the sled. I'd rather have that than something that could potentially slide a bit over time if the screws just dropped through the sled slotted holes.