Lion Chief Plus performance

Actually, It is not a matter of which technology is better. It is a pure marketing decision. Lionel IMHO really blew it with the introduction of Lionchief. First with having LC then implementing LC plus. So, really they created three distinct technologies. One remote only, one AC and remote and TMCC  (AC and remote)

Why would someone design a system that does not allow upward mobility to your best remote? Why would someone design a system and within that system there are 2 types of engines LC and LC plus.

I'm no fan of MTH because of personal preference. But, they made the "RIGHT" decision with the starter sets with the cheap remotes and upward compatibility to DCS. Something , I'm sure the PROTO1 saga had something to do with that decision.

I was a broad base product buyer. I guess Lionel didn't heed...history's lessons.

shawn posted:

Actually, It is not a matter of which technology is better. It is a pure marketing decision. Lionel IMHO really blew it with the introduction of Lionchief. First with having LC then implementing LC plus. So, really they created three distinct technologies. One remote only, one AC and remote and TMCC  (AC and remote)

Why would someone design a system that does not allow upward mobility to your best remote? Why would someone design a system and within that system there are 2 types of engines LC and LC plus.

I'm no fan of MTH because of personal preference. But, they made the "RIGHT" decision with the starter sets with the cheap remotes and upward compatibility to DCS. Something , I'm sure the PROTO1 saga had something to do with that decision.

I was a broad base product buyer. I guess Lionel didn't heed...history's lessons.

 

Afraid I've been away from the forum and missed this thread as it was happening, though most of what there is to say I've already don on other threads regarding the technology in our hobby.  anyway, in two parts:  

Shawn, I actually think it was fantastic marketing.  The LionChief system was never intended to be anything more than a starter set, and likely intended for the vast majority of the customer base where it will be the first, and likely, only lionel purchase they make.  As a stand alone package the lionChief sets are really pretty great in what they offer, compared to the starter sets they replaced.  Comparing a polar express LionChief set to the Legacy scale version is an exercise in futility.  on the other hand comparing it to the same priced conventional set from a few years back you get a lot more 'play value' from the easy to use control and nice, if simple, sound set.  

"Why would someone design a system that does not allow upward mobility to your best remote? Why would someone design a system and within that system there are 2 types of engines LC and LC plus."

This is one of those things that you have to look at from the business view.  I douby anyone involved with the rollout of Lionchief foresaw the response and demand they got from folks that were not new to the hobby.  LC+ was created by demand for just a little more functionality from folks used to cruise and electro-couplers.  As far as marketing, when you already have a microprocessor and a radio link, the cost of adding the features of LC+ is almost nothing, so why not release a version that will make a larger segment of your costumer base happy.  in the process you can phase out purely conventional locomotives as LC+ can be run as such.  In effect rather than adding two new lines of product as you suggest, Lionel has simply replaced the conventional starter sets with LionChief, and replaced the better quality conventional locomotives with LC+.  

For part two, the dreaded topic of the "technology" debate.  Many here suggest that the radio and the actual guts of the engine are two separate things, and one should not be confused with the other.  This is only true to a point where the radio becomes a limiting factor, or the hardware necessary to operate the radio that must be there anyway adds to the available technology.  On the radio it's self, the 2.4Ghz off the shelf transceiver is vastly superior to the Tmcc/Legacy track signal.  This is not just a case of newer/higher more dependable signal, but also the amount of data that can be sent and the bullet proof system used to send that data.  these 2.4GHz units cost about a buck each in low quantity, and I would guess about 25-50 cents in the bulk orders used by a manufacturer.  For that cost you an off the shelf, no coding on your time redundant, auto error correcting digital data transceiver.  What that means is when you send data, the radio automatically checks to make sure it got the right information without wasting time on any of the other electronics.  In lay terms, the analog signal in TMCC/Legacy is like watching someone choosing cards from deck over and over and holding them up for another person to see for only a moment, and another person finding that same card in another deck and setting it aside.  From time to time, you're looking down to find a card and miss the next one shown, with no way to look back at it.  On the other hand the digital signal used in the 2.4Ghz radios gets the same job done with the first person simply saying what card they want to the radio, and the second radio in the engine passing the second 'person' the desired card.  Not only does this free up the electronics to do other things, but in addition the radios talk back and forth to each other Ex: Radio1 says "I need an 8 of clubs"  Radio two then replies: " Did you say 8 of clubs?"  and the first radio then replies : "Sure did", or if there was a mix up and the information doesn't match, it might reply " No, I said the 9 of spades, you deaf fool".  Only after the radios have confirmed that the correct information was received is it passed on to the rest of the electronics package.  In practical terms what this means if you never have the wrong command sent, and what's more, the radio will repeat the command if it was not received because of a bad signal.  You don't have to press the button over and over, it will do it for you.  

The other side of the radio tech is the massive amount of data that can be sent.  Tmcc uses two bytes of actual data to preform every possible action in the system.  That is equal to having 16 light switches that can be on or off.  Legacy improved on the system by adding one more byte of data, or 8 more switches for a total of 24, though in practice they only use 2 of the added bits, or "light switches".  Legacy does allow "multi-word" commands but these are only used in a very few cases.  The radios that are already in LionChief and LC+ engines and remotes, on the other hand can send 32 bytes of data at a time, or 256 light switches, to keep with the analogy.  When you consider what adding 8 bits to tmcc did for legacy, there is no practical limit to what could be done making use of these radios as far as the functions that could be controlled.  

All in all I think anyone should be able to agree that the radio technology in LC is vastly superior to that in TMCC/Legacy.  So what about everything else, the so called electronics package that the radios are talking to?  Well if you have a micro-controler in your engine that is capable of reading the serial data that the 2.4GHz radios provide, it also already has several digital I/O pins.  I don't know what processor they use in Lionchief or of they use the same one for LC+ but I do know that the cost is about $1.50 for one that could easily run any legacy locomotive, so the cost of adding capability is not particularly much if the processor being used is not powerful enough.  Your basic $1.50 micro-processor these days could control about 12 functions on it's own, but the neat thing is, each of those pins could be programed to control another chip turning it into 8-16 channels.  What this means in terms of 'what technology is better" is that theLion chief and Legacy, from an electronics stand point are already exactly the same level.  One just has a few more parts on the board to allow it to take advantage of the full power (actually still a small percentage, just more than LC+) of the micro-processor. The only difference in technology between what makes an LC+ work and a Legacy work is the number of output channels connected to the micro-controller the rest is all physical hardware, such as a better sound chip that allows sounds to be mixed, a few more LED's, and that's really about it.  

The thing I find interesting in all this is that it would be absurdly easy for Lionel to make a box that plugs into the serial of a legacy base that would allow the legacy remote to operate Lionchief/+ locomotives.  It would also be insanely simple to produce replacement boards for the R2LC/legacy equivalent that use the 2.4ghz radio and elimante the track signal problem.  Why is this unlikely to ever be done?  simple, coming out and saying your flagship, top end electronics package was out-dated tech the day it came out and garbage now is no way to run a successful business, and it's better to let people think that because one currently has more features it must mean the other can not do the same thing.  No one needs to know that under the hood someone pulled off half the spark plug wires on LC to keep it dumbed down at the upper entry level price point.  

On the other side of that, if MTH's next system used these bullet proof radios in their next system they would instantly remove the need for PITA star wiring and give buyers all the functions they currently love in DCS with out any of the drawbacks.  

JGL

P.s. sorry for the word vomit.  

"All in all I think anyone should be able to agree that the radio technology in LC is vastly superior to that in TMCC/Legacy. "

I certainly agree with you as a consumer (not an engineering type) who has worked with all of these systems.  But "anyone" apparently excludes a small number of folks here .  Here's a question for those who don't agree.  Why does the entire radio control airplane, boat and car hobby industry employ the communications technology also used in LC and LC+ if the previous citizens band 27 MHz analog technology (and similar stuff in Legacy and DCS) was so nifty and state of the art? 

Landsteiner posted:

Here's a question for those who don't agree.  Why does the entire radio control airplane, boat and car hobby industry employ the communications technology also used in LC and LC+ if the previous citizens band 27 MHz analog technology (and similar stuff in Legacy and DCS) was so nifty and state of the art? 

Technology changes in the R/C hobby aren't as daunting since R/C'ers at that level most likely built all their models from kits and are already familiar with installing or changing out their own receiver/controller packages?

(Just a silly guess)

---PCJ

RailRide posted:

Landsteiner posted:

Here's a question for those who don't agree.  Why does the entire radio control airplane, boat and car hobby industry employ the communications technology also used in LC and LC+ if the previous citizens band 27 MHz analog technology (and similar stuff in Legacy and DCS) was so nifty and state of the art? 

Technology changes in the R/C hobby aren't as daunting since R/C'ers at that level most likely built all their models from kits and are already familiar with installing or changing out their own receiver/controller packages?

(Just a silly guess)

---PCJ

I think it actually has less to do with the skill level and more to do with the number of parts needed and the cost of those parts.  In an rc plane or boat or what not, most users only own a few, and many just one, where as in trains the people using legacy likely own at least a few engines, and likely many.  Now I'll grant that the high range radios used in planes and such have a higher cost per unit than the standard range ones used in LC/+ that would even out the cost factor a little, but Big L has a habit of charging two to three times more than market value for circuit boards.  I would expect, if such a radio upgrade was ever produced it would have a sticker price of $60-70 per engine, which places it firmly out of the reach of the poor folk such as myself.  then again I routinely see folks here spending that on things without a second thought so maybe even that cost would not be a problem for folks with large rosters of engines. 

Now, I've never opened up a legacy engine, but I think I am correct that they use a radio board something like the R2LC used in TMCC.  I point this out because the entirety of the "upgrade" to a track signal free radio would involve removing the R2lc and replacing it with a new radio board.  Seeing as one of the very first suggestions on every thread regarding problems with tmcc engins is to remove and reseat this board, I think it is safe to assume it is pretty straight forward and simple enough for even the novice. 

Oh to answer Landsteiner's question, "why does the entire radio control airplane, boat and car hobby industry employ the communications technology also used in LC and LC+ if the previous citizens band 27 MHz analog technology (and similar stuff in Legacy and DCS) was so nifty and state of the art?"  The real answer is very simple; if a model train loses communication for a second or two, the worst that happens is the thing cruises on down the rails a bit further than expected.  In a model plane you hit the ground hard.  There is far more demand for a fool proof, 100% accurate radio in model planes, quad-copter drones, and RC cars than in model trains where crashing is not nearly such a likely event.  people are content with spotty radio.  In addition the track signal is carried no more than a few feet between the track and ground plane and radiates from the track;  range is a non-issue.  For other wireless vehicles range is a serous issue and a signal that becomes spotty at 20 feet is right out.  

I apologize if i jumped about here, about to pass out and the old brain is moving slow.

Not sure why everyone has to agree and not sure why some on here tend to mock those that don't agree.  Seems to me this hobby is about the actual train, the detail, scale proportion, weight, material, what it does feature wise more then how it is controlled.

For the basic layout all the command systems work fine.   Sure, the more elaborate there can be issues. 

People buy new phones, cars, tv, to have the latest technology.  For what ever reason people that buy trains want to keep them for ever, and they would like backward or forward compatibility.

No one here really disagrees that the newest LC+ hardware may not be better as a radio control hardware.  BUT they do disagree, that as packaged and with the capabilities installed it is a lesser product then DCS and Legacy, even with their older technology.  JG hit many of the points.

Here is another, performance for an RC Boat, airplane or car is based on lightweight, so the smaller the control package the more capability and room for fuel.  So after you wear out your RC item is a year or two you want an new one with latest improvements.

Who wants a 3lb scale big boy with a plastic shell?  All the RC guy use lexan shells, diecast RC Airplanes just don't cut it.  So when will we get the Lexan trains.  Plastics and composites are the latest and greatest!    G

GGG I agree with most of what you have there.  I had not thought about the weight issue, but the size is just as valuable in 'O'scale and more so for other smaller scales.  Take away a cubic inch of radio and you can replace it with something else.  maybe a second memory chip for better sounds, or maybe a couple to220 case transistors to operate more power hungry features.  

As a 'system', the way it comes in the box, sure, LC/+ is a much lower end product than Legacy or DCS, however it is still worth talking about the underlying technology for many reasons. The one that strikes me as most important is to make sure that people in the hobby are aware that the feature set in LC is limited only to keep it from competing with the higher end products, and to keep it's cost down to stay in the entry level range. People still need to be aware however that this is NOT a limit of the technology it's self so that they can make informed decisions in the future. This is particularly important for the folks that have even a little sway in future product development.  for example if a r&d department were working on developing the next generation of DCS and they knew that the perception with lionchief's 2.4GHz signal was 'this is junk', it may swing them to stick with a spotty track signal that requires special wiring for optimal performance as opposed to embracing a superior radio that would eliminate the biggest problem with their system.  

I don't think anyone is saying that lionchief is a better product than legacy or DCS at the moment, only that the parts of the tech that are actually different from those control packages is better.  How detailed the model is, how many features it has, or the number of I/O pins actually being used on the micro-processor has nothing to do with the capability of the tech.  

On a different point that doesn't really fit anywhere;

Lionchief also has a unique marketing payoff that many don't consider when trying to pigeonhole it into some particular place in the lineup.  It places a form of command control into the hands of folks that were either intimidated or otherwise unwilling to move on from conventional control, or that were simply priced out of a command system.  With Plus you give these folks an engine that works just as they are used to, but also the option to give a wireless remote a shot.  some might like it, and move on to the higher end system that never thought it was for them.  For my personal experience, The purchase of a $350 polar express set with LionChief directly brought in sales of two LC+ locos as additional revenue to Lionel, my first purchase of brand new product in 10 years.  I was also impressed enough that I finally picked up a TMCC system as that was what is in my budget, as well as several used tmcc locomotives.  All in all, my experience with that one cheap set left me spending ten times as much on train product last year than I had in years before and freshly motivated to get involved with the hobby again.  I think there are a lot of other folks out there that may have had a small train set in their youth and could be brought back into the hobby by these low cost, feature rich sets... A marketing payoff for Lionel. 

Just as an aside, I bought two LionChief sets intended for kids (the Dinosaur and Pet Shop sets) to donate to our local children's hospital for the holidays (well, Christmas, mostly, as that is what most of the kids celebrate; no offense to anyone else's holidays--may your holiday be joyous and safe for you all).  They were on sale at the Lionel website for $70.00 each ($170 MSRP I believe). Typically one can pick up many of the LionChief sets at 30-40% off this time of year, but this seemed an incredible and terrific bargain.   They are for 8 year olds, not 55 or 75 year olds . Shipping was free in addition.   Obviously not big sellers.  I tested the locos to make sure they work.   Normally I'd pick these up at my local hobby shop, but this seemed a bargain too good to pass up.  The locos and rolling stock compare to the least expensive and least functional of the postwar era (no operating couplers, etc.).  But for play value they are nice and good value.  Loco has remote reverse and forward, a variety of remote control sounds and announcements.  Heck, the circle of track alone is probably close to $70.00 MSRP.

Sure these aren't of interest to the scale model railroader (which I am definitely not), but these are a monster value for a TOY.   Nothing available in HO or N is cheaper or as functional for a child.  And last I heard TOYS are part of this hobby, in fact, its origins and a continuing strength.  LionChief is a terrific and inexpensive TOY right now using superior communications technology.  No error messages, no failures to thrive (pediatric term) electronically speaking.  As JohnGalt notes, these inexpensive off the shelf radio devices have capabilities far beyond those that were used in the radio control industry for decades,  and anything else in the current three rail industry.  Signal strength and propagation, along with error free decoding are the Achilles heels of the older command control equipment (TMCC/Legacy bases, and, as anyone can tell who can read, particularly the DCS TIU).  For those for whom reliable signal transmission/receipt/action is a key issue, for whom value for money spent is very important, and for whom having the whizziest and most scale loco less important, LionChief and LionChief Plus are the best way to go right now in many instances.   I will be somewhat surprised if the next year, two or three, LionChief Plus doesn't find its way into some scale,  higher end Lionel locos.   And that will be a good thing for the hobby and a good thing for Lionel.   For those who enjoy systems that benefit from 200 page aftermarket manuals, this may seem bizarre. For those who prefer trouble free operation this is a nice choice to have.

Just as a coda, each set comes with an offer from O Gauge Railroading for a free DVD and a free issue of the magazine, and an application for LCCA membership.  So the pathway to greater involvement (including descriptions on the outside box) is clear for anyone who wishes to take the next step from these inexpensive, perhaps even disposable sets.  But if you do build a command control or conventional layout, these locos will operate in remote controlled command mode on that layout without any additional expense or equipment, unlike the older conventional locos from Lionel, RMT, etc. or the current Lionel Legacy or PS3 from MTH.  For the conventional locos, you'll need additional equipment (remote and Powermaster) if you want remote control, for the Legacy locos you'll need a TMCC or Legacy system, and for the PS3 locos, you'll need a DCS system.  Pretty simple, pretty inexpensive as it should be for those who prefer such an approach.

Landsteiner posted:

Just as an aside, I bought two LionChief sets intended for kids (the Dinosaur and Pet Shop sets) to donate to our local children's hospital for the holidays...  But for play value they are nice and good value.  Loco has remote reverse and forward, a variety of remote control sounds and announcements.  Heck, the circle of track alone is probably close to $70.00 MSRP.

 Sure these aren't of interest to the scale model railroader (which I am definitely not), but these are a monster value for a TOY.  

I think this is a great point! And remember, some of us are TOY train collectors (like me.) I've only collected starter sets, because I love the toy aspect. My layout is always temporary; I build no scenery. I run trains, and I like it that way.  The Lionchief starter sets are perfect for me, and I'm 61. :-)