The Next LC / LC+ multi remote?

"Always insulting and always assuming you know intent.  So here we go again"

When someone posts that expecting rational thought is a "lost cause," you don't consider that insulting?  Are you a native speaker of English?    There is no way the intent of John's comment was to be flattering or collegial, no matter how you read it.  I would ask you to consider whether or not it is you and your partner in contemptuous attitudes who are the instigators. Your relentless drumbeat of doom and gloom about LC/LC+ is boring, transparently self-serving and factually wrong.

Landsteiner posted:

"Always insulting and always assuming you know intent.  So here we go again"

 

When someone posts that expecting rational thought is a "lost cause," you don't consider that insulting?  Are you a native speaker of English?    There is no way the intent of John's comment was to be flattering or collegial, no matter how you read it.  I would ask you to consider whether or not it is you and your partner in contemptuous attitudes who are the instigators. Your relentless drumbeat of doom and gloom about LC/LC+ is boring, transparently self-serving and factually wrong.

See,  Your making stuff up again.  If in fact you want to comment on John's post, quote it with those little buttons on the bottom of the screen.  Do not use a shotgun approach.

Second, if you want to be treated nicely, treat other's with the same respect.  Even this post of yours is full of insults.

Third, just because some on has a similar opinion doesn't mean they are partners.

Fourth, I did not doom and gloom LC+.  I commented about the variety of available systems Lionel has provided, and reflect that it may make more sense to pick the system "already built" that gives you want you want.

Again, anyone with a different opinion than you, or who challenges XY and Z of the LC product gets a full dose of insults.  Primarily with a selection of words and phrases that try to show the offender how much smarter you are.  Unfortunately, you just come across as a troll with your approach.   G

Landsteiner posted:

"don't you know that's a lost cause?"

 

It's a lost cause to expect the DCS and Legacy gurus to have any tolerance for those who like the new LC and LC+ systems.  .

Let's not lump us all in one ho-chunk.  After all it was a "Legacy Guru" (not self appointed) that started this post asking the original questions.  None of which I thought were intolerant to LC and LC+. 

Landsteiner posted:

Your relentless drumbeat of doom and gloom about LC/LC+ is boring, transparently self-serving and factually wrong.

I'm missing where I was was ever suggesting doom and gloom for LC/LC+, please point that out.  Self-serving?  I have no dog in this fight, I have stuff from all the camps, Legacy, TMCC, DCS, and LC/LC+.  BTW, if you're so bored, why not take your attitude someplace else? 

I'm pretty sure that a majority of my comments here about "improvements" merely mention the realities of marketing and engineering.  The fact is that LC/LC+ is a different product line than Legacy, I don't find that hard to understand, I'm not sure why you do.  Nobody is forcing you to take part in the conversation.

"Again, anyone with a different opinion than you, or who challenges XY and Z of the LC product gets a full dose of insults. "

You've just rather accurately described yourself and gunrunnerjohn, but neither of you realize it.  You are so used to people fawning on you because of your acknowledged expertise in technical matters that anyone who stands up to you is viewed as insulting to the royalty of the forum . Your condescending tone,  refusal to acknowledge the validity of the points of view of those lacking your technical expertise, and defensive, accusatory posts about me all betray an insecurity and sense of entitlement and superiority that do not have relevance to this topic.    And are very unattractive.  You don't like my posts, that's fine.  Just ignore them.  I won't be insulted .  But if you are disrespectful, as John clearly was in his post, you are going to be nailed about it.

 First off my disclaimer: Run whatever you want I honestly don't care.

BUT....

I think the irony here is many of these Lionchief locos were at one time offered with TMCC for a signifigantly lower price than the full scale TMCC stuff. Where were these folks then??

Some feel TMCC and/or legacy is too complicated and or expensive so Lionel offeres a basic inexpensive remote that operates the loco it comes with.

Now folks want multi train operation via this remote, ( and now switches too) but they already had multi train operation of semi scale locos 10 years ago

Lionel offers the simplest remote possible, by overwhelming request....but...now...its too simple

IMO as far as legacy goes, the whole "complicated to program and operate" is blown WAY out of porportion like some kind of boogeyman.

If you can program your cable remote to operate your TV you can program a legacy remote to opertae your locomotive.

 My youngest is 10 and shes been using my TMCC and legacy remotes since she was 5 without issue, even operating my TMCC crane.

You figure you need to defend all the people here from any slight, real or imagined?  Or is it if anyone seems to suggest that LC/LC+ isn't the perfect solution to every problem, you feel duty bound to jump in and defend it? 

BTW, Why not take your own advice?  If you don't like my posts, PLEASE feel free to simply ignore them, I can assure you that I will not be offended either.

Again, please point to where I disparaged the LC/LC+ product.  However, if you've followed my advice and ignored this post, you can ignore that comment also.

Come on guys, Lots of good ideas and fun stuff in this thread, lets not get it deleted because we can't get along.  I'm actually a bit confused how this 'fight' even started and had to re-read the whole thread from the beginning to see what I missed.  Don't seem to have missed anything and am just as confused now.  

I will say that I don't think any of the actual ideas proposed here are bad ones.  Only one seems to have been knocked down as impractical.  The rest haven't been commented on at much at all.  So, here we have them:

1.  Separate buttons for couplers to remove the lag in whistle and bell functions and chance of accidentally double clicking and firing a coupler.  This one is not too hard to accomplish, but would require tooling to make a new remote and circuit board for the remote, as well as reprograming of the way LC+ engines handle the coupler commands.  Doable, but for the limited added value it brings, not worth the trouble, in my opinion.  

2.  A bridge device to allow Legacy/TMCC to operate LionChief engines.  This one is simple and Lionel could bring it to market at any time they wished at a cost lower that any third party developer could hope to match.  I just don't think it is in the business model for them at this time.  see comments below on legacy users.  

3.  A LionChief remote switch controller.  This one is also doable. In a post above I outlined the method I'd use.  One could also market dedicated LionChief FastTrack switches that come with a dedicated, factory paired, controller.  Such a controller could easily be made in the current case used for wired remotes.  I don't think this will happen, but it is doable, and cheap.  

4.  More interesting/varied crew talk sounds and Station announcements.  It wouldn't be hard to add more sounds, but some of the reasons why it is not likely were discussed above on the points of recording cost and implementation of road name specific engine boards.  As for add on cars or stations with more elaborate sound sets, I think these are very possible, but the controller needed to access each sound independently would require a new product design.  a simple button that just plays the next sound file on the list, however would be pretty simple.  I see either option as unlikely at this time, but third party developers have already shown fairly easy to do options for low cost remote sound devices.  

Unless I missed it those were the actual suggestions for improvements to the LionChief system that were asked for so far in this thread.  Nothing seems outlandish.  Nothing seems to be asking too much.  None are very likely to see market from Lionel either.  In any case, I don't see anything in this list that justifies telling people to forget LionChief and upgrade to Legacy, and none of the people making these suggested improvements are saying LionChief is garbage and needs these improvements to be any good.  They are just thoughts of things people would like to see, if it were possible in future product. 

On to Legacy users.  There have been sever comments to the effect that LionChief is a step backwards, and why would anyone want such limited functions.  I agree with you in principal.  Some of us on the LC band wagon do think the actual nuts and bolts, underlying technology in LionChief is VASTLY superior to that in Legacy, but the end product offers nowhere near the same level of functionality.  It's often been said that a cell phone has more computer power than the Apollo  rockets that went to the moon, and that is more true now than ever before.  The comparison here with LionChief and Legacy is the same with the phone and rocket..." Yea, but can your phone go to the moon?"  The answer is simply no.  not because the computer in the rocket was superior, but because it had a giant, multi stage, rocket attached to it.  The obsolete electronics in a Legacy engine have better stuff connected to them, and that makes them do more things, and do them better.  

In the end, LionChief is not, has not been, and never will be, marketed to folks that operate Legacy.  It is not for them.  It is for folks that like low cost product with a couple of the best and most useful features of command control.  Lots of folks like to tout the virtues of LC for young children.  I don't doubt them, or that the remote is easy for kids to use.  On the other hand I think folks are underestimating just how easily those same children could pick up on how to use a Legacy remote.  Anyone seen a PlayStation4 controller?  

Who I do think REALLY benefits from LionChief Plus products is the conventional operators, who are still a very large part of the O gauge world.  Her you have a nice engine that runs just fine in conventional, so these guys that are not interested in Legacy or DCS or whatever else will still buy it. Then some of them just might give the remote that comes with it a try... and find out they actually like it.  I see LC+ as a gateway drug for conventional operators into the world of command control.  

JGL

I would like to see LionChief forego the cab chatter, and use that button to turn on & off the head/rear lights. I would also like to have better quality sound with a slightly higher volume (which can be reduced for those that wish). I would also like to see provision made for a front coupler (though not necessarily an electric one, a manual-mechanical one is fine) on all locos, not just diesels. Also, a mounting pad to accommodate user-installed Kadee couplers would be much appreciated by this buyer. Choosing smaller prototypes that can be made as 1/48 scale models rather than caricatures would be great, although I really like my PRR mikado, even though it's not dead-on scale. I don't want LC or LC+ to have all the bells and whistles of Legacy locos, nor do I need to operate accessories with the LionChief controller, though the multi-controller could probably do that job as it sits, if the right electronics were in the accessory. I think if a LC+ loco could be operated by a Legacy controller that would be fine, if it could be done without compromising the price of LC+ products, but I wouldn't want (or expect) to be able to use my LC+ controller to try and run a Legacy loco.

Bill in FtL

MartyE posted:

I would suspect a bridging device would be needed.  Like I said I was just curious.  It seems like Lionel met the challenge of a lower cost system, provide (soon) a remote to do 3 engines.  Do the LC operators find this to be enough or do they want it to expand in capabilities?

For me what LC+ does is enough. Expanding will raise the cost knowing Lionel. I'm glad they came out with the multi remote, but I would have been happy with the individual remotes too.

Bill Nielsen posted:

I would like to see LionChief forego the cab chatter, and use that button to turn on & off the head/rear lights. I would also like to have better quality sound with a slightly higher volume (which can be reduced for those that wish). I would also like to see provision made for a front coupler (though not necessarily an electric one, a manual-mechanical one is fine) on all locos, not just diesels. Also, a mounting pad to accommodate user-installed Kadee couplers would be much appreciated by this buyer. Choosing smaller prototypes that can be made as 1/48 scale models rather than caricatures would be great, although I really like my PRR mikado, even though it's not dead-on scale. I don't want LC or LC+ to have all the bells and whistles of Legacy locos, nor do I need to operate accessories with the LionChief controller, though the multi-controller could proba, bly do that job as it sits, if the right electronics were in the accessory. I think if a LC+ loco could be operated by a Legacy controller that would be fine, if it could be done without compromising the price of LC+ products, but I wouldn't want (or expect) to be able to use my LC+ controller to try and run a Legacy loco.

Bill in FtL

Bill, I hear what your saying, but a legacy remote would defeat the reason for having a Lionchief. If you don't already have one, Legacy remotes are pretty expensive and you would have to buy it on top buying the engine. Plus if you have kids or visiting kids or adults, they can operate multiple trains without having to wait their turn. As far as the volume, at least on LionChief Plus, you can control the volume from the remote pressing the whistle and bell buttons at the same time and using the throttle dial as a volume knob. I can turn my LC+ up pretty loud. I agree about sound quality and crew talk. I'm concerned that anything they do will cause the price to go up.

If L does not offer a "bridge", a LC/+ user may not want to upgrade to TMCC/L.  This arguement works BOTH ways!

Dominic Mazoch posted:

If L does not offer a "bridge", a LC/+ user may not want to upgrade to TMCC/L.  This arguement works BOTH ways!

Well for me it's the cost of Legacy remotes. LC+ is one package not separate components. so you pay one price. 

"Well for me it's the cost of Legacy remotes. LC+ is one package not separate components. so you pay one price. "

A point many have been trying to make, and you make it succinctly and clearly. 

I'm sure this is one very attractive aspect of LionChief + for many in the hobby.  The command system is built into the loco and you receive the remote with the loco.  One self-contained command loco and system for a reasonable price.  Even if you already have TMCC/Legacy or DCS, you get a remote for a friend, child, spouse or grandchild, etc. to use.  It's turned out to be a genuine act of marketing genius, whether intended that way or not . 

This is a way of bringing the key features of command control to the consumer at a distinctly lower price point.  Instead of $1,100-1,300 for two diesel locos and a command system, for example, you receive two diesel locos and two remotes for $500-600.  Command control at modest prices.  Small incremental features or operating improvements (such as the multi-loco remote) can be made, as others have pointed out, at equally modest prices.  This is a small revolution in the middle of the marketplace in terms of cost/value/features.   While there is endless whining and moaning about some of Lionel's prices at the high end, they have remade the equation at the economy and middle class end of the market.  LionChief sets are good value, and have ready to rock and roll command control.  LionChief + is likely going to remake the middle of the market is my guess.

I have 3 LC+ locos and l like them a lot. I like the simplicity and don't want to see LC+ get more complicated. I also run traditional size trains so I'm not looking for scale size steam engines. The improvements I'd like to see are simple. My new LC+ camelback has illuminated marker lights. My two earlier locos don't have that. I'd like to see the backup light on the tender light up when in reverse. Simple improvements like this are all I'd like to see. If I want Legacy features I'd buy Legacy.

Just got my first Lionchief Plus loco yesterday. I have been running conventional since 1960.

So far, so good. Cruise control is great, especially on grades. Remote is reliable, works from all corners of the basement. Loco pulls well, looks great by PW standards Cruise control also seems to work in conventional mode, which I wasn't expecting. I had only one "duh" moment, was running it in conventional and realized that the couplers won't respond to an uncoupling track....duh...

Couple observations-

1. I could live without the brake release sound and cab chatter or crew talk or what have you. All I need is the horn and bell. Unfortunately, they are a package deal.

2. I might be able to fix this, but my remote has 4 clicks of "off." That is fine, makes it easy to find the off position in an emergency, but they are not centered; there are 3 "off' clicks in the reverse direction but only one in forward. Might be a simple matter of repositioning the knob - I will take it apart one of these days.

3. Seeing as my layout is set up for block control this isn't an issue for me, but there appears to be no way to completely shut down the engine from the remote. I have the RS-3, and as long as it is powered the cab is lit and the smoke unit runs. If you shut off the power switch on the remote the loco shuts down but beeps every few seconds to tell you that the remote is off.....

4. Instruction sheet talks about adding "3 or 4" drops of smoke fluid at a time. 30 or 40 is more like it.

All in all, very pleased, a terrific upgrade for an old conventional layout, one of these days I will pick up the multi-remote and a Hudson.

PLCPROF: you will like the Hudson, it is a classic loco that looks great (and runs great with LC+).  Good chuffing and whistle.

PLCProf posted:

Just got my first Lionchief Plus loco yesterday. I have been running conventional since 1960.

So far, so good. Cruise control is great, especially on grades. Remote is reliable, works from all corners of the basement. Loco pulls well, looks great by PW standards Cruise control also seems to work in conventional mode, which I wasn't expecting. I had only one "duh" moment, was running it in conventional and realized that the couplers won't respond to an uncoupling track....duh...

Couple observations-

1. I could live without the brake release sound and cab chatter or crew talk or what have you. All I need is the horn and bell. Unfortunately, they are a package deal.

2. I might be able to fix this, but my remote has 4 clicks of "off." That is fine, makes it easy to find the off position in an emergency, but they are not centered; there are 3 "off' clicks in the reverse direction but only one in forward. Might be a simple matter of repositioning the knob - I will take it apart one of these days.

3. Seeing as my layout is set up for block control this isn't an issue for me, but there appears to be no way to completely shut down the engine from the remote. I have the RS-3, and as long as it is powered the cab is lit and the smoke unit runs. If you shut off the power switch on the remote the loco shuts down but beeps every few seconds to tell you that the remote is off.....

4. Instruction sheet talks about adding "3 or 4" drops of smoke fluid at a time. 30 or 40 is more like it.

All in all, very pleased, a terrific upgrade for an old conventional layout, one of these days I will pick up the multi-remote and a Hudson.

 

 

Welcome to the LionChief+ Club!  These are proving to be real winners for Lionel.

Agree with you on chatter and the smoke.  Other than using it (chatter)  as a "gimmick' to entertain train visitors I rarely use it.  And -- yes -- definitely go with more smoke fluid than recommended in the instructions. There was a recent thread discussing this and everyone pretty much agreed that the 3-4 drops is not the way to go.

PLCProf posted:

Just got my first Lionchief Plus loco yesterday. I have been running conventional since 1960.

So far, so good. Cruise control is great, especially on grades. Remote is reliable, works from all corners of the basement. Loco pulls well, looks great by PW standards Cruise control also seems to work in conventional mode, which I wasn't expecting. I had only one "duh" moment, was running it in conventional and realized that the couplers won't respond to an uncoupling track....duh...

I think it would be nice if there was a way to fire the couplers in conventional.  I expect this could have been added but was left out for one, or all, of several reasons.  1.  LC/LC+ is designed to be very simple, having some "complex" combination of whistle and throttle adjustments to arm and fire the coupler as in other conventional transformer control systems was probably intentionally avoided.  2.  Rather than have access to the 'crew talk' with quick presses of the whistle the coupler could have been fired instead.  I expect this was avoided for the opposite reason, being too simple to accidentally fire the coupler.  3.  The remote couplers are sort of a bonus feature that conventional locomotives won't have, so not having access to them in conventional, you won't really miss them much.  It would be nice if you could still manually open the couplers, but it doesn't really bother me that you can't.  I suppose if you were planning to run only conventional, at least for a steam engine, you could replace the rear truck with one with the sliding shoe pickup so you could fire the coupler from a remote track section.  

Couple observations-

1. I could live without the brake release sound and cab chatter or crew talk or what have you. All I need is the horn and bell. Unfortunately, they are a package deal.

Once again, I think features could have been added with a 'program mode' that would allow users to turn on and off each sound on the engine.  I expect this will not happen, in the interest of keeping things simple.  Not much to be done for the brake release sound, however the same solution that has often been offered to TMCC and Legacy users that don't like crew talk can apply just as well to LionChief/Plus.  If you don't like crew talk, you don't have to use it.  

2. I might be able to fix this, but my remote has 4 clicks of "off." That is fine, makes it easy to find the off position in an emergency, but they are not centered; there are 3 "off' clicks in the reverse direction but only one in forward. Might be a simple matter of repositioning the knob - I will take it apart one of these days.

The  LionChief/Plus remotes actually have 41 clicks, or places where the wheel can stop.  If all is aligned correctly there should be 20 'clicks' in each direction from center.  The first click from center should do nothing.  This is likely so that the engine will stop without having to perfectly align the knob.  Probably very useful for both younger and older folks that may not be very good at precision control with their hands.  After that first click, the next 16 spots will be the speed steps.  In both of the engines I tested, there is one duplicate speed somewhere in the range, but it was not the same step on each.  In effect each LionChief/+ engine has 15 speeds.  The final 3 clicks in each direction do not make the engine go any faster.  

When it comes to opening your remote to see what is wrong, there really is very little that can go wrong with the control, unless you very forcefully twist the knob past it's last stop.  It is possible that the potentiometer got twisted a bit out of alignment from through some fluke as well.  

The most difficult part of opening the remote is prying the speed knob off it's shaft without damaging it.  I've found using two very tiny flat screw drivers worked fairly well, one on either side of the knob to pry it up.  The plastic is pretty soft, however, and you may end up bending the bottom edge of the knob when you pry it free.  Take your time and pry evenly from both sides and you should be alright.  Once the knob is free, there is a nut on the shaft of the potentiometer that must be removed.  After that you can remove the 4 screws on the back of the remote and carefully separate the two halves of the case.  Be careful here as the wires to the battery compartment are on one half and attach to the circuit board on the other half.  The board is held in with four more screws.  Once those are removed the board will come loose.  Be careful here as the plastic buttons will fall out of their slots without the board holding them in place.  From here I would look to make sure the leads from the potentiometer are aligned straight up from the board to where they bend toward the pot.  The Pot should be perfectly aligned on the board, not twisted to one side or the other.  

If it is twisted, you can try very carefully twisting the  body of the Potentiometer to the straight position.  There should be a small tab on the left side of the case that locks into the plastic of the case to keep it from twisting out of alignment.   If the pot is not twisted the fix is a bit more complex.  You may want to just contact Lionel for a replacement remote.  

3. Seeing as my layout is set up for block control this isn't an issue for me, but there appears to be no way to completely shut down the engine from the remote. I have the RS-3, and as long as it is powered the cab is lit and the smoke unit runs. If you shut off the power switch on the remote the loco shuts down but beeps every few seconds to tell you that the remote is off.....

This is correct.  There is no shut down function from the remote or otherwise.  The best way to deal with this is probably to have power switches installed on sidings where you may park your engine when you are running others.  This is just good practice for any layout with several engines as brief power spikes can cycle the e-unit in conventional engines, and command controlled engines are known to occasionally have a fluke and take off down the rails at full power.  

LionChief engines will enter a standby mode if they sit idle with a remote turned off for a long period of time, but I'm unsure about how this function works when the remote is on or on LC+ engines.  I'll have to research it further.  LC+ engines can also enter a 'Motor lock-out' state where they will not move if they have an error in detecting the motor's speed.  This can usually be corrected by setting the remote to the stop position or turning off the transformer in conventional for a few seconds.  

4. Instruction sheet talks about adding "3 or 4" drops of smoke fluid at a time. 30 or 40 is more like it.

It seems Lionel likes to vastly underestimate how much fluid should be used.  I haven't taken the smoke units apart myself, but I understand that in LC+ they are similar to other fan driven smoke units and should hold quite a bit more than 4 drops of fluid.  My guess here is that someone didn't update the text copy from LionChief manuals that used the puffer units.  Even with these, 4 drops doesn't seem like much at all.  I'd think something like 10-12 drops would be fine in standard LC engines, and at least 20 drops in LC+, probably much more.  The material used in the fan driven smoke units reminds me of the absorbing material used in the waste ink tanks of inkjet printers.  It looks and feels like the same super absorbent material.  If it is the same sort of stuff, I can see how it would look good on paper as a choice for wicking material, but it really isn't.  It will soak up fluid, but not let it flow very well into dry areas, such as near the heating element.  The replacement wick Lionel sells, however is an actual wick product that lets the liquid flow up to the dry spots.  Short of it is, if you have the original fiber wicking material in your smoke unit, it is going to take a whole mess of smoke fluid to saturate the material to the point where it will remain wet in the area around the heating element.  

All in all, very pleased, a terrific upgrade for an old conventional layout, one of these days I will pick up the multi-remote and a Hudson.

Lionel's Hudson's have always been my favorite engines and the LC+ version carries on the tradition of solid running, hard pulling, and being able to run on tight curves and rough track.  The LC+ version is cosmetically about the same as my older TMCC versions, but the speed control makes a world of difference.  The remote also looks like it will be a nice addition for folks with several LC/+ engines. 

JGL

I might spring for a LC+ locomotive, bit I have plenty already!

JohnGaltLine posted:

PLCProf posted:

2. I might be able to fix this, but my remote has 4 clicks of "off." That is fine, makes it easy to find the off position in an emergency, but they are not centered; there are 3 "off' clicks in the reverse direction but only one in forward. Might be a simple matter of repositioning the knob - I will take it apart one of these days.

The  LionChief/Plus remotes actually have 41 clicks, or places where the wheel can stop.  If all is aligned correctly there should be 20 'clicks' in each direction from center.  The first click from center should do nothing.  This is likely so that the engine will stop without having to perfectly align the knob.  Probably very useful for both younger and older folks that may not be very good at precision control with their hands.  After that first click, the next 16 spots will be the speed steps.  In both of the engines I tested, there is one duplicate speed somewhere in the range, but it was not the same step on each.  In effect each LionChief/+ engine has 15 speeds.  The final 3 clicks in each direction do not make the engine go any faster.  

When it comes to opening your remote to see what is wrong, there really is very little that can go wrong with the control, unless you very forcefully twist the knob past it's last stop.  It is possible that the potentiometer got twisted a bit out of alignment from through some fluke as well.  

The most difficult part of opening the remote is prying the speed knob off it's shaft without damaging it.  I've found using two very tiny flat screw drivers worked fairly well, one on either side of the knob to pry it up.  The plastic is pretty soft, however, and you may end up bending the bottom edge of the knob when you pry it free.  Take your time and pry evenly from both sides and you should be alright.  Once the knob is free, there is a nut on the shaft of the potentiometer that must be removed.  After that you can remove the 4 screws on the back of the remote and carefully separate the two halves of the case.  Be careful here as the wires to the battery compartment are on one half and attach to the circuit board on the other half.  The board is held in with four more screws.  Once those are removed the board will come loose.  Be careful here as the plastic buttons will fall out of their slots without the board holding them in place.  From here I would look to make sure the leads from the potentiometer are aligned straight up from the board to where they bend toward the pot.  The Pot should be perfectly aligned on the board, not twisted to one side or the other.  

If it is twisted, you can try very carefully twisting the  body of the Potentiometer to the straight position.  There should be a small tab on the left side of the case that locks into the plastic of the case to keep it from twisting out of alignment.   If the pot is not twisted the fix is a bit more complex.  You may want to just contact Lionel for a replacement remote.  

Thanks for the photos and info. I would not have expected a pot there. Apparently my pot's mechanical center is not the electrical center. I may just "pad' one side or the other with a 220K resistor or thereabouts to make the electrical center correct. A lot easier than a mechanical fix. 

Thanks again.

PLCProf posted:

 

Thanks for the photos and info. I would not have expected a pot there. Apparently my pot's mechanical center is not the electrical center. I may just "pad' one side or the other with a 220K resistor or thereabouts to make the electrical center correct. A lot easier than a mechanical fix. 

Thanks again.

I would check first that the pot isn't twisted out of alignment, but if all looks well, using a resistor would be one of those 'more complex solutions' I mentioned.  if this is your solution, when you choose a value, the center wiper should read exactly 1.65 VDC when the dial is at the center position.  Make sure your batteries are good before testing this, as you will not get correct results if the input to the on board regulator is below 3.6 volts. 

JGL