I'd take it over smartphone apps for sure.

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

....if mth and lionel joined forces it could run both of there apps and give us the big knob handheld we have been asking for.....

There is vitually no chance this would happen, so you should recalibrate your proposal based upon that. 

I get where your comming from,but this is not the heated 1990's when they both were in fierce competition. The mth app already can control legacy engines. Those days are behind us and thus I say they are more friendly towards each other now.

Also with the slowing market conditions they may well be willing to at least look at commimg together to make a giant hobby shift. This would benitfit all mth and lionel operators. Lets not get stuck in the past and just write this off.

Our controll systems compared to others out there are dated and way behind. This would be a giant step at least in the right direction.

Not to be the bearer of bad tidings, I do not think a new, up to date Cab 3 Remote is even in Lionel’s thoughts. I’ve discussed this with Ryan and Dave of Lionel and they say it’s not in the cards. So, my advice is get your hands on some Cab 2’s, 990 Legacy sets, or a Cab 1L remote and the Cab 3 App, this way you will have a handheld… Many of us older operators have stocked up on the Legacy equipment. Good luck, You have a creative idea, unfortunately I do not see the two companies marrying up at this time. Happy Railroading Everyone

larry, I have 3 cab2's and two 990 bases plus I just got 2 cab1L's and a cab1L command base. I also have dcs and 4 mth controllers. so I am in great shape control wise for a long time. just looking toward the future of our hobby.

I try not to get pessimistic about the future of a new handheld. possibly a third party may step in and develop somthing like this. seems this company did for marklin ac trains. so maybe there is hope yet. this would be nice and it looked so easy and intuitive to use.

Would be a nice thing to see more fluid interoperability between DCS and Legacy, and a next generation remote.  But perhaps not all that likely given Lionel's decision not to do a remote.  Now that MTH and Lionel really aren't in competition any longer, perhaps Mike Wolf would consider such a plan, but in the past, it was a total non-starter.  Lots of changes in plans and attitudes would be needed, to say the least.  But you never know.

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

I was not sure where to post this, so here it goes. this is a made formarklin 3rd party handheld controller.

this is the 21st century controller we need in the ogauge world. if there were at least a physical horn and bell buttons possibly on the sides of the case. this could be the ideal handheld.

if mth and lionel joined forces it could run both of there apps and give us the big knob handheld we have been asking for.

if marklin ho can have this why not american o guage? this type of controller would never totaly be obsolete like the ones we have now. the software apps could be upgraded via wifi when new control feature are added and thus keep the controller up to date feature wise.

the big knob on this one shown is also pressable to get into and help navigate the various menu's to access the train and accessory controlls on the various screens

the screen also rotates like your phone screen so you could use the controller holding it sideways or upside down if you prefer depending on your holding preference.

what are your thoughts on this and could we as an o guage community persuade mth and lionel to partner together to make such a controller?

I for one would love to see this going forward and it just may solve the dcs/tmcc battle that has waged for years.

I think you’re missing the point on this guys, if Lionell and MTH would license someone to make this controller it could work, it would come to market. Lionell does not have to make cab three controller and MTH does not have to make one either. It’s about software and licensing. That should be the point of attack.

@ThatGuy posted:

I think you’re missing the point on the guys, if Lionell and MTH would license someone to make this controller it could work, it would come to market. Lionell does not have to make cab three controller and MTH does not have to make one either. It’s about software and licensing. That should be the point of attack.

Bingo.

@breezinup posted:

There is vitually no chance this would happen, so you should recalibrate your proposal based upon that. 

You may be quite correct, but please give us some reasons that you believe this to be true.

Mike

It's not a standalone system though and it is not compatible with say NCE controllers.

Lodi-Con starter set A

The starter set includes:

1* LoDi-Con A (with battery), the hand controller for controlling the system.

1* LoDi-Rector, the control center for your locomotives and switches.

1* LoDi booster, the double booster with 2* 2.3 amps.

Cost is around 900 Euros which is around $850

There is talk of making it compatible with other systems but that hasn't happened in a year.

John

As I have suggested before, the solution for those of us who didn't stockpile existing systems and are stuck waiting endlessly for proprietary ones to finally be distributed is open source like DCC is.  They are making plenty on engines, etc and they would sell more of those if we didn't have to be victimized by control system nonsense.

@Mellow Hudson Mike posted:

Bingo.

You may be quite correct, but please give us some reasons that you believe this to be true.

Mike

Why would Lionel build one?

If after all these years Apple is going with a USB charging cord for their new I Phone rather than the Apple proprietary system who of us can say with certainty that what is proposed by this thread cannot/will not ever happen?

Who is to say that some third party once aware of this situation might not jump in and make a pitch to Lionel/MTH to make a universal hand held remote.  If that doesn't work, play one against the other until either Lionel or MTH flips.

Sounds like a candidate for a Go Fund Me initiative at some point?

craftech, thanks for the info on this controller. I saw it in a marklin video. it was all in german so I could only watch it. I could not understand all of it as I do not speek germane and there were now English subtitles.

that guy, you hit the nail on the head. software based. both the lionel app and dcs app could be made to run on a controller like this. the apps would have to be tweeked a little but it could work maybe.

since mth can controll all or most legacy features with there dcs app. perhaps mth could just make this and thus sell more engines. they may be more willing to do this than lionel. dave kribel said a wifi remote was not out of the question. just not in the near future.

even though mike wolf has retired.he is still involved in the tech side no? so maybe he would at least be willing to explore this route. they built there business years ago on listening to the customer. they brought out models lionel never would have and dcs when introduced was way more advanced than tmcc and cab1 at the time.

when I saw this lodi-con controller it made me want to get started in marklin. which is somthing thats always been in the back of my mind. if I can be drawn in perhaps others who may see somthing like this in oguage my be drawn to our hobby as well.

our oguage models are first rate and highly detailed. just look at the vision legacy models and the new mth models being produced.

what is lacking is a up to date controller to go with them. most people dont want to use there phone to controll there trains. they want tactile buttons or at least the most frequently used ones.

now it seems there are two camps here. camp 1 are just fine with what they have cab1,cab2,dcs remote ect. they dont like or want change. they dont like the new phone apps either and seem to always be pessimistic when a new controller idea is floated out to lionel or mth.

they say oh they will never make this or that. plus whats the matter with my cab1 or 2 it works just fine. plus the prices are way to high to get the youth involved anyway so just forget it. it aint gonna happen.

the second camp is always looking to push the evelope so to speak. they like change and the new tech is not a problem to learn. they want somthing like this.

heck if you can use your smartphone you could use this controller I bet. years ago all I heard was I dont need a cab1 I like my ZW and look how far we have come today. so I say this is the next logical step in the right direction.

maybe be it will take a third party to develop this. if so bring it on. I for one am willing to beta test this or give my development input.

also for those in camp 1 please dont bash me. its just facts. this is always what I hear from this group mostly. there are a few exceptions,but mostly what I pointed out is the hard truth.

as far a the youth not buying or affording high end engines. just look at the all the young youtubers channels and see what they are buying. they want the latest  scale size command models. they are the future of this growing hobby also. so that should tell the manufacturers somthing.

maybe I am totally wrong and just pipe dreaming,but dream I shall till I see somthing like this lodi-con in Oscale.

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

that guy, you hit the nail on the head. software based. both the lionel app and dcs app could be made to run on a controller like this. the apps would have to be tweeked a little but it could work maybe.

since mth can controll all or most legacy features with there dcs app. perhaps mth could just make this and thus sell more engines. they may be more willing to do this than lionel. dave kribel said a wifi remote was not out of the question. just not in the near future.

even though mike wolf has retired.he is still involved in the tech side no? so maybe he would at least be willing to explore this route. they built there business years ago on listening to the customer. they brought out models lionel never would have and dcs when introduced was way more advanced than tmcc and cab1 at the time.

when I saw this lodi-con controller it made me want to get started in marklin. which is somthing thats always been in the back of my mind. if I can be drawn in perhaps others who may see somthing like this in oguage my be drawn to our hobby as well.

our oguage models are first rate and highly detailed. just look at the vision legacy models and the new mth models being produced.

what is lacking is a up to date controller to go with them. most people dont want to use there phone to controll there trains. they want tactile buttons or at least the most frequently used ones.

now it seems there are two camps here. camp 1 are just fine with what they have cab1,cab2,dcs remote ect. they dont like or want change. they dont like the new phone apps either and seem to always be pessimistic when a new controller idea is floated out to lionel or mth.

they say oh they will never make this or that. plus whats the matter with my cab1 or 2 it works just fine. plus the prices are way to high to get the youth involved anyway so just forget it. it aint gonna happen.

the second camp is always looking to push the evelope so to speak. they like change and the new tech is not a problem to learn. they want somthing like this.

heck if you can use your smartphone you could use this controller I bet. years ago all I heard was I dont need a cab1 I like my ZW and look how far we have come today. so I say this is the next logical step in the right direction.

maybe be it will take a third party to develop this. if so bring it on. I for one am willing to beta test this or give my development input.

also for those in camp 1 please dont bash me. its just facts. this is always what I hear from this group mostly. there are a few exceptions,but mostly what I pointed out is the hard truth.

as far a the youth not buying or affording high end engines. just look at the all the young youtubers channels and see what they are buying. they want the latest  scale size command models. they are the future of this growing hobby also. so that should tell the manufacturers somthing.

maybe I am totally wrong and just pipe dreaming,but dream I shall till I see somthing like this lodi-con in Oscale.

I would like to see Lionel allow someone to design a handheld or use their software. About 2 years ago I gave a friend my CAB-2. He designs hardware for a government contractor. He took apart my controller and made a few calls. It could made today with no issues, upgraded parts for those no longer available.

I'll run with a physical remote over a smart device any day, reasons being able to separate from being attached to a phone all the time for everyday life, and the tactile feel of a remote. You don't have that when using the app which is a big loss. I know I'm not alone on this because many people one social media have voiced their concerns, including here on the OGR Forum. What I'm concerned with in the long term is if a product like a physical remote isn't going to be available to satisfy the market's demand and forcing people to run with a control system that doesn't provide the same satisfaction, that could very well frustrate and drive more people out of the hobby. While component shortages are a real problem, the manufactures need to be more conscious of what the market wants and develop a product that satisfies the demand.

For example, TCS Train Control Systems has developed a physical wifi throttle to run DCC equipped trains. The wifi throttle encompasses the best of both worlds, the physical feel of a hand held remote, and being able to update the the hardware using wifi instead of having to swap cables and use a PC to perform the updates. This seems a win win situation what TCS has developed. Here's the link to the TCS website and the wifi throttle:

https://www.tcsdcc.com/uwt-100

A product like this should be encouraged and developed for the O scale market place by the other manufactures. Take it for what you will but it definitely seems the market is still demanding for a physical remote and the demand is very high. Fingers crossed a new physical remote becomes available in the future.

MHMellow Hudson MikeOGR Forum Member SUPPORTING MEMBER

@ThatGuy posted:

I think you’re missing the point on the guys, if Lionell and MTH would license someone to make this controller it could work, it would come to market. Lionell does not have to make cab three controller and MTH does not have to make one either. It’s about software and licensing. That should be the point of attack.

Bingo.

@breezinup posted:

There is vitually no chance this would happen, so you should recalibrate your proposal based upon that. 

You may be quite correct, but please give us some reasons that you believe this to be true.

Mike

Given the history of animosity between MTH and Lionel (especially MTH towards Lionel), cooperation on such a project as this would seem unlikely. Lionel has released information on it's operating system (see below), but MTH has refused to do so with its operating system. MTH's DCS system will operate most functions of Lionel TMCC/Legacy trains, but Lionel's TMCC/Legacy control system cannot operate most functions of MTH DCS trains. That's why.

Each of these manufacturers has spent many millions of dollars developing their respective operating systems. One could understand why they wouldn't want to participate in developing a controller that would encourage consumers to purchase a competitor's trains. Nonetheless, Lionel generously made available information about its system.

MTH has refused to do so, and that attitude is probably not going to change anytime soon. Mike Wolfe had the opportunity years ago to unify control systems by adopting Lionel's existing TMCC system, but, unlike everyone else (Atlas O, Weaver, K-Line and 3rd Rail), he chose to do his own thing. The animosity he felt towards Lionel may have been an important factor in that decision. Since then, nothing has really changed, and MTH has firmly, and apparently irrevocably, determined to keep its system strictly proprietary. It's difficult to imagine how anything is going to change its attitude and move it to agree to cooperate with Lionel on anything.

All of the foregoing is, and has been for a long time, general knowledge among those who have been in O gauge for a number of years.

"Lionel Trains Releases Legacy Protocol to Bring Hobbyists Together

Manufacturer-Agnostic System Integrates Mobile Devices, Opens Access to Developers

Concord, NC – January 15, 2014 – Lionel LLC today announced it will make public its Legacy command protocol and open its WiFi-to-model-railroad interface in an effort to grow the hobby by allowing a single remote to control all manufacturers’ locomotives.

"Industry hobbyists have long pined for a universal remote to integrate and control model railroad layouts. Lionel is taking the first step towards realizing this goal via the user’s own smart device and Lionel’s WiFi adapter. Layout Control System (LCS) WiFi creates a common access point with a royalty-free protocol designed for model railroading. Any manufacturer can use LCS WiFi to support their unique locomotive command sets. Within this framework, hobbyists will be able to control different manufacturers’ locomotives seamlessly from one app running on a smart phone or tablet.

“To keep up with today’s mobile-centric landscape, unified control from a smart phone or tablet is critical in growing the hobby of model railroading,” says Jon Zahornacky, Chief Technology Officer at Lionel. “Publishing our WiFi protocol gives the hobby a royalty-free path to controlling any manufacturer’s model trains from smart devices using our WiFi adapter.”

"Lionel is working closely with LCS partners to develop their own apps that connect to Lionel’s WiFi interface. The first announced such product is Blue Train developed by Bob Krivacic, a long-time innovator in the model railroad industry. The BlueTrain app runs on Android devices, connects to LCS WiFi, runs Lionel locomotives and can be used simultaneously with any other LCS-compatible controller.

“By opening the Legacy protocol, Lionel is allowing other manufacturers’ products to control Lionel Trains. It’d be great to see other manufacturers follow suit and begin sharing their own proprietary protocols. Everyone involved in the model railroad world stands to benefit,” says Bob Krivacic, industry innovator and developer."

all valid points here. I did some research into this lodi-con controller. seems its a little more invoved to set up than what us o gaugers are accustomed too.

that being said a remote of this type by mth or a third party could still be the ticket. if the said party would adopt the kiss method and not overthink the connectivity to the dcs and legacy wifi devices. plus if they made the screens easy to navigate and understand they could have a winner on there hands. just thinking outloud again.

This Lodi-Con has a similar form factor to Ring Engineering's RailPro controller (single knob and video screen.)  I have suggested in the past that one of these companies develop an interface that would allow their controller to talk to Lionel's Legacy base.  It seems as though both companies would benefit.  If Lionel doesn't want to produce a handheld that's more precise and feature-rich than the CAB-1L, hopefully they would be open-minded about a partnership.  We'll see!

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

I was not sure where to post this, so here it goes. this is a made formarklin 3rd party handheld controller.

this is the 21st century controller we need in the ogauge world. if there were at least a physical horn and bell buttons possibly on the sides of the case. this could be the ideal handheld.

if mth and lionel joined forces it could run both of there apps and give us the big knob handheld we have been asking for.

if marklin ho can have this why not american o guage? this type of controller would never totaly be obsolete like the ones we have now. the software apps could be upgraded via wifi when new control feature are added and thus keep the controller up to date feature wise.

the big knob on this one shown is also pressable to get into and help navigate the various menu's to access the train and accessory controlls on the various screens

the screen also rotates like your phone screen so you could use the controller holding it sideways or upside down if you prefer depending on your holding preference.

what are your thoughts on this and could we as an o guage community persuade mth and lionel to partner together to make such a controller?

I for one would love to see this going forward and it just may solve the dcs/tmcc battle that has waged for years.

That's it?? Just one knob!! What about all of the other tactile buttons everyone complains about?

The rest of this "remote" works the same way as any other touchscreen app with a smaller screen.

@ThatGuy posted:

I would like to see Lionel allow someone to design a handheld or use their software. About 2 years ago I gave a friend my CAB-2. He designs hardware for a government contractor. He took apart my controller and made a few calls. It could made today with no issues, upgraded parts for those no longer available.

At what Cost? Ongoing support to keep these in stock while dealing with continually changing & NLA parts will cause numerous redesigns and overhead R&D to keep making these things. That's not cheap for a low-volume market.

I have a FLIR One USB-C addon camera. You plug it into the bottom of my Android phone and now  you have a infrared camera. Bought it used off of you-know-where.

With Apple going to USB-C, maybe someone could make a USB-C knob, and then we could have something "good enough"

@H1000 posted:

At what Cost? Ongoing support to keep these in stock while dealing with continually changing & NLA parts will cause numerous redesigns and overhead R&D to keep making these things. That's not cheap for a low-volume market.

We are not reinventing the wheel, there are plenty of stock handhelds they just need permission to use Lionel software.

@ThatGuy posted:

We are not reinventing the wheel, there are plenty of stock handhelds they just need permission to use Lionel software.

You already have the permission, just build the handshake module. It's no different from how a TIU controls a Legacy or TMCC Base. However now we become dependent on another small company for remotes that could just as easily pull the plug.

@H1000 posted:

You already have the permission, just build the handshake module. It's no different from how a TIU controls a Legacy or TMCC Base. However now we become dependent on another small company for remotes that could just as easily pull the plug.

Your missing the whole point.

We have been having this discussion for quite some time now which begs the question:

Are any of them listening to their customer base?   Why are we stuck with unavailable control systems because of proprietary secrets?

John

@H1000 posted:

You already have the permission, just build the handshake module. It's no different from how a TIU controls a Legacy or TMCC Base. However now we become dependent on another small company for remotes that could just as easily pull the plug.

No there is not, you cannot use there proprietary software so you can operate every option.

@ThatGuy posted:

Your missing the whole point.

So you want Lionel (and MTH?) to license their software to a 3rd party and build a product that will directly compete with their own control products in an already small market?  They are also supposed to willingly provide the source code of their software to allow modification and Lionel now has to support that modified software when customers have issues with it not working with a base? That's not a very sharp point.

If LodI-CON wants to capitalize on Lionel's remote shortage and customers' "high" demand for their app based controller with a knob, they can do that today with a small WiFi interface box that would translate commands from their remote to a Lionel base via the DB9 port. Software be dammed because everyone is going to complain about one GUI interface or another regardless if it's Lionel's or LoDI-CON's. If there was a ton of money to make here, they could already be doing it.

@H1000 posted:

So you want Lionel (and MTH?) to license their software to a 3rd party and build a product that will directly compete with their own control products in an already small market?  They are also supposed to willingly provide the source code of their software to allow modification and Lionel now has to support that modified software when customers have issues with it not working with a base? That's not a very sharp point.

If LodI-CON wants to capitalize on Lionel's remote shortage and customers' "high" demand for their app based controller with a knob, they can do that today with a small WiFi interface box that would translate commands from their remote to a Lionel base via the DB9 port. Software be dammed because everyone is going to complain about one GUI interface or another regardless if it's Lionel's or LoDI-CON's. If there was a ton of money to make here, they could already be doing it.

You have circular logic, this post is based on someone else building a handheld. And by the way, many companies license, their proprietary software to other companies. It’s not going to hurt them since they don’t make the handles anymore. Can we stick to the post

the lodi-con contoller is like the ring railpro. it has a slightly better form and nicer color screen. the ability for the screen to rotate is a big plus.

I realize its software based, but the lodi-con still has a box to talk to the various command stations. if I got it right.

how much would it cost to develop a basic controller and box to connect to the legacy or mth wifi network is probably the hurdel for most start up commpanies.

when I saw this though I just thought this is the controller we need and being software based it surley would not get obsolete like the ones we have now.

both mth and lionel could still develope thier apps and add features as they evolve. they could still sell engines. so where would a third party remote like this cut into say lionels new base 3 or mth dcs app?  this type of remote will still need to link up to the legacy base or mth wtiu to run each system right?

seems dcc gets new physical remotes all the time. tcs,digitracks,lodi-con just off the top of my head. the oguage manufacturers seem dead set against physical remotes for some reason. so maybe a forward looking third party is needed to bring somthing like the lodi-con for oguage.

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

the lodi-con contoller is like the ring railpro. it has a slightly better form and nicer color screen. the ability for the screen to rotate is a big plus.

I realize its software based, but the lodi-con still has a box to talk to the various command stations. if I got it right.

how much would it cost to develop a basic controller and box to connect to the legacy or mth wifi network is probably the hurdel for most start up commpanies.

when I saw this though I just thought this is the controller we need and being software based it surley would not get obsolete like the ones we have now.

both mth and lionel could still develope thier apps and add features as they evolve. they could still sell engines. so where would a third party remote like this cut into say lionels new base 3 or mth dcs app?  this type of remote will still need to link up to the legacy base or mth wtiu to run each system right?

seems dcc gets new physical remotes all the time. tcs,digitracks,lodi-con just off the top of my head. the oguage manufacturers seem dead set against physical remotes for some reason. so maybe a forward looking third party is needed to bring somthing like the lodi-con for oguage.

It’s really are own fault, the consumer in this Hobby. We put up with garbage they would never tolerate in HO or G scale. We have crappy warranties we have companies tell us they can no longer find parts to build things which is just a ghost story, and we do nothing about it. It’s just the way it is. It’s the nature of the hobby, unfortunately. When the companies announced they were going to production date for start of warranty, we could’ve stopped purchasing their product for six months. This probably would’ve caused a change but we just kept on buying.. We clamor for new engines. We can’t wait to get them and we spend our money. How many engines on this forum have issues brand new out of the box? It’s our own fault we have created the world we live in.

well said that guy. 100% agree.

@Craftech posted:

We have been having this discussion for quite some time now which begs the question:

Are any of them listening to their customer base?   Why are we stuck with unavailable control systems because of proprietary secrets?

John

Listen to the hobbyist? Your kidding right? All they care about is collecting our money.

H O people don't have these problems. There should have been a standardized control system from the get go.

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

well said that guy. 100% agree.

Thank you

feet, you said another important thing. a standardized protocol for o guage from the get go. then we would not have to have threads like this.

I don't know what Lionel built for the new Base3 besides the self contained hardware we are waiting for, but one would reasonably expect they have a well documented software API that their hardware will interface with. Lionel could/should document the API and allow any device to interact with it.  I don't see a reason they would have a business reason not to since the app will be free, so there is no lost revenue there. It would only be people that would then purchase a Cab-1L remote that might choose an alternative device. Or are they coming out with a yet to be announced new device?

Opening up APIs is no longer a scary concept and companies find that doing so actually increases sales of their product. Imagine if there were folks that have no need to go from a Base2 to a Base3 today, but if there were new ways to interact with their trains, maybe folks would have a desire to purchase the Base3 and leverage those new operating options.

@David_NJ posted:

I don't know what Lionel built for the new Base3 besides the self contained hardware we are waiting for, but one would reasonably expect they have a well documented software API that their hardware will interface with. Lionel could/should document the API and allow any device to interact with it.  I don't see a reason they would have a business reason not to since the app will be free, so there is no lost revenue there. It would only be people that would then purchase a Cab-1L remote that might choose an alternative device. Or are they coming out with a yet to be announced new device?

Opening up APIs is no longer a scary concept and companies find that doing so actually increases sales of their product. Imagine if there were folks that have no need to go from a Base2 to a Base3 today, but if there were new ways to interact with their trains, maybe folks would have a desire to purchase the Base3 and leverage those new operating options.

Amen

@Lionelzwl2012 posted:

feet, you said another important thing. a standardized protocol for o guage from the get go. then we would not have to have threads like this.

Lionel pretty much did this. All their protocols are published.  The purple guy kept his under lock and key... still does for the most part

chris,you miss the point. the nmra set dcc standards from the get go almost. albeit not perfect,but set standards none the less. so to this day any dcc equiped loco can operate on most any controll system.

o guage never had any standards. it was and still is tmcc vrs. dcs

lionel may have published there tmcc/legacy codes,but that still is and never will be basic standards like the nmra has. tmcc and dcs are vastly different also. tmcc being one way communications and dcs being two way communications just for one example.

if all the players back then would have made some basic decoder type standards. we would not be forced to this day to buy there respective controll systems to run their engines.

its not as easy as us armchair railroaders think it may have been to have at least lionel and mth back then come to agreement on some standards. it would have been nice though. just saying.

Here are my ideas for a similar device to the one mentioned at the start of this post for running both MTH and Lionel engines:

-A physical remote that uses a phone (either an I-Phone or Android Phone) as the screen

-Remote connects to phone through its USB plug (or maybe through Wi-Fi) to interface with either the MTH or Lionel app

-Remote is compatable with both Legacy/TMCC and DCS

-Remote is Bluetooth and Wi-Fi compatable

-Controls on device: throttle knob, quilling horn/whistle control (works with both DCS and Legacy), Legacy train brake slider, and bell control

Basically, this device would look similar to a Legacy or DCS Remote, but with a phone holder instead of the screens of the original remotes. The trottle knob, whistle/bell control, and train brake slider would be next to the throttle knob like they are on the Legacy remote.