TMCC Accessories

The input current for an ASC is 50mA. That might also be for 12volts. So at 14volts, I would use 20 per amp as a safe guide. It think the SC-2 came with a 12volt 300mA wallwort.

What is interesting is that the Lionel power supply which is the same for both SC-1 and SC-2 is 12Vac. I just looked and I have been running one of my SC-1's off of a 200mA Dc supply designed to run sample LED strips. Must be a built in rectifier. Been that way for at least a year. No issues.

The operation electrical consumption of each device is minimal.  You do have to be concerned about how many devices are used, each consuming some of the RF signal from either a Cab1 or Cab2 Command base. Eventually you exceed the RF signal available.

Note that operational power is daisy chained with 18 gauge thermostat wire (Red and White)  The RF signal control is daisy chained with 24 gauge twisted pair telephone cable Cat 5 rated. 

There are (10 devices) pictured.   (2) BPC's Block power controllers (6) ASC Accessory switch Controllers and (2) TPC's Track Power Controllers. Note the Command base to the far right.

Closer view.  Note the brown T-stat wire that daisy chains between devices, Power to each device.  Also note the Blue/Blue white twisted pair wire that daisy chains TMCC signal from the command base to each device.

 

Hi. Mike, Looks like he has 16 devices. Clearly current is less than an amp. And not the limiting factor it seems. But his question is still unanswered. How many can be daisey chained and still work? Still only one RS port on the Tmcc command base. Thanks

Look at the SC-2 for the :

(4) Accessory switch controllers

(4) Operating Track controllers

 

One controller for all of the above.

I purchased my TMCC command system 2004 and have been looking for that answer for some time.  IMO, Lionel has never put a number on how many devices can be hooked together via the Command base RF port and the associated cable.  Maybe those guys at Lionel Service, Ohio can put a number to it.

 

SC-2 are different, The RF signal is transfer via air from the track feed similar to an engine receiving signal via it's antenna.  There are instruction about positioning it close to the tracks or the single wire feed from a Command base to the outside rails of the track.

Hi Moonman, After watching all the Lionel videos, I was wondering the same thing. No daisy chain. After all they are all IDed as accessories anyway. The Asc manual is the only one that lists a total of 13 units daisy chained. But I believe that is based on the number of IDs available and not the RF limitation. None of the others manuals give a limit. And it looks like there is nott even an OTC manual on the site and in the instructionvideo Mike R. talks about showing how to wire an 0-27 OTC and never does.

Hi FlatNickel

Search the forum for threads with Dale Manequen responding to me and others on this topic. INHO there is no finite number as an answer, just sometimes the number works and sometimes the number doesn't

 

I have 1 ARC, 4 OTCs, 10 ASC's, 5 AMCs, 8 BPC's, 5 AVC's, 10 TPC's. It is a complicated layout that works for me. TMCC, Legacy and Conventional modes. Another important factor is the Z-stuff, if you have any. The Bus that comes off of the Command base to operate the 2500 series turnout machines consumes a lot of power. Since I have a lot of turnouts, this was a significant issue for me. You didn't mention the TPCs. They use a lot of the base signal as well.

 

I ended up with using Boosters. Dale probably no longer sells his, but you can get them from B&B electronics. Using DB splitters - available cheap on the bay - helps get the power to the appropriate controller group. It was a matter of testing the limit for each "chain" of controllers.  A lot of hard work, but in the end I could find no other way. So I set up the ARC and 6 ASCs as one chain off of a splitter/booster combo. When I added the seventh, the group didn't function properly, so I knew I reached the limit. My second chain is 8 BPCs off another chain, etc, etc.

 

As to Daisy Chaining power - the way Lionel suggests it - feeding thru the controller may not be the correct way to get the Red/Green there. I ended up using Forum advice and wiring each controller to a 'bus' type feed from the power source. I use a dedicated 18 V source powered down to 14 V. Seems this stops dropped feed from the base.

 

Lionel won't tell you because the limits they don't know. A lot has to do with the layout and the configuration of devices. Mike CT is correct about  the RF and that will have a lot to do with the number of TMCC/Legacy engines you run.

 

What I see in the number of controllers you are using you will need a Booster or two. They aren't cheap, but with all you probably have invested, a mere pittance.

 

Hope this helps. 

Even those instructions do not make sense. You may choose to power additional TMCC products using the same power supply and Command Base by creating a “daisy chain,” or a series of TMCC units wired in succession. In fact, you may choose to connect up to 13 ASC units, bringing up to 100 accessories or 100 switches under your command! Refer to Figure 2 on page 5 and follow these steps to connect the ASC to the next TMCC product. When in a daisy chain, the L.E.D. on the ASC will flash for a tenth of a second to indicate that the ASC is receiving commands for another TMCC product. The L.E.D. will stay on for half of a second to indicate that the ASC has received a command with an address it controls If understand correctly, you can only use the individual Asc's as either a switch or accessory controller. Not the whole daisy chain. So it should be also a combination up to 100. That would then imply a 13 unit limit based of an RF limit. Because to run 100 switches and 100 using all the switch and accessory IDs you would need 26 Asc's I know you can do that with a combination of Asc's and SC-2's. Maybe that is why Lionel made them. The made two many redundant controllers but did not have the capacity to run them all on a daisy chain. They could of also used the uncouple buttons to run the OTCs instead of the Aux buttons. Guess they did not plan properly

Hi Ralph, I was not referring to your post. The reference is to the Asc manual. You just snuck in before me. Lol

No problem. 

Ralph

I have never seen so many confusing answers in my life. The answer is that you can daisy chain an infinite number of the devices.

 

However, the Legacy systems has some limits with respect to how many of them will be able to be addressed. The number seems to be seven without one of the booster devices. I believe Dale still has a few available so you might contact him directly and he can give you some further information.

 

I use the K-Line 120 Watt Accessory transformer with the 14 volt tap to power all of my devices including the Z-Stuff Data Wire driver to control the DZ2500 switch machines. In total I have two TPC 300's, one each BPC,ARC,AMC and an ASC (used to turn power on and off to my yard.

Hi Ralph, It seems you are very knowledgable and have had a lot of on hand experience wiring these devices. I think I have a basic grasp but would like your feedback. Assuming no RF issue and TMCC. And 1 ID# per function. Max # of switches = 100 Max # of accessories = 100 Max number of Engine= 99 Max number of combination Powermasters with Tr ID and MU trains using Tr Id = 9 Thanks.

Hi Trainman, Not to call the kettle black but you answer leaves more questions than it answers. Are you saying that you can mechanically daisy chain an infinite amount? Or that TMCC -1 will address an infinite amount. And Legacy will only address 7? I know nothing about Legacy but that seems to contradict basic logic regarding the CAB-1. With a finite number of accessory or switch ID numbers, the maximum using one device per ID number is the sum of all available ID numbers. Whether that even works, others seem to think not. No one has answered/ confirmed what the maximum total IDs for switches and accesories is yet but I doubt it is infinite.

The TMCC will not string an "infinite" amount of accessories, it all depends on the specific accessories in question.  The old command base has a lot more drive capability than the Legacy base.  For Legacy, Lionel went with standard RS-232 specification drivers, which don't offer the same amount of current as the old TMCC command base.

 

Dale actually measured the differences when he was creating his booster, if you look for the threads on that, you'll get a better idea.

 

Hi Ralph, Getting closer. I am astonished how inaccurate most Lionel instruction manuals are. In the Asc Manual they claim you can control 100 switches. And Daisy chain up to 13 ASCs. Then they say an Asc will control four remote switches. Last time I did the math that added up to 52. LOL But my question regarding the TR function was combinations of TMCC Powermasters And MU Trains ( lashups) I thought it was 9. Are you saying I should only use seven. With two Powermasters and a ZW-C that leaves me with only 1 MU. Starting to think the Lionel Engineers Not all that bright

Fred you can get the 100 switches using the Lionel Sc-2s or the DZ-2500 switch machines with the data wire driver. The Sc2s are wireless from the command base to the Sc-2. I can't comment on the 98/98 sw ids as I don't get that high but you can get at least 97 switches with either setup or by using the new Fastrack TMCC switches. The new switches don't need any data wire or controllers. Also if you use the Legacy control system and Legacy locomotives in your Train you get trains from 01-99 so there is the possibility to have all your powermasters and and 1 TMCC train plus 90 more Legacy only trains. I'm a little confused on using the ZW-C in command mode and the powermaster while running command engines. None of these items are needed for TMCC/Legacy only operation. Also understand the ZW-c and the powermaster are 20+ year old technology and at that time the chipsets available weren't nearly as robust as todays. I believe the new ZW-L is addressable as  2 digit numbers from the Legacy remote.

Ron

Hi Fredddd

I don't use Powermastrs and as RailfanRon says they are an old technology. Unlike Conventional - which is PW old - these have some electronics in them that have their own subtleties and logic built in to them. I use PoHo's. The manual for these devices says to use TR 1-9 as well. It also says you can use ENG #s for these units. Since the Powermaster does the same thing, maybe the ENG# would work for them as well. Might be worth a try. Otherwise, the limitation of 1-9 for MUs and Powermasters doesn't seem to have a solution.  

 

Out of the box, do you always run the MUs at the same time? perhaps two or three of them can have the same ID, just taking two off the rails when not in use or parked in a storage yard.

 

Do you actually have 100 turnouts? what switch machines do you use for them? If they are fasttrack, are they the wireless kind. 

 

Ignore and do not get frustrated by Lionel's poor manuals. Instead focus on workarounds.

 

Ralph

 

I do not like the idea of a long daisy chain going through a bunch of boxes.  I prefer to start from a central terminal strip and do a combination of star and serial connections.

 

Please don't confuse the Track signal, which is RF, and the 9-pin serial connector signal, which is pseudo-RS232, not RF.

 

The signal limitations on the serial signal involve not only the devices loading the output, but also the resistance and capacitance of the serial cables.

 

The Legacy Base definitely has less serial output drive.  (Only 3 MANCO boosters left!!)

 

Isn't the Mode selection - 98/99 - done with the programming jumper removed?  If so, it may not impact the range of available addresses for normal operation.

 

I believe the Powermasters are strictly limited to single-digit addresses.  Doesn't Legacy allow a broader 2-digit range for TR for MUs?

I have my ZW-C set up as Track 1,2,3,4. All track have a 135 brick. Track 1 is for my outer Fastrack command mainline which is a large reversing loop and a small reversing loop linked by a straight section. It is set up in a large u shaped configuration. Inside of that is track 4 which is an 0-27 mainline with two passing sidings and a spur. Inside and connected to that loop is my a/d track, 4 track classification yard, yard lead with caboose service and also loco service that also loops back around to the a/d track. All can be individually isolated with DpDt switches. Track 2 powers yard lights and track 3 powers my switches. I have eight K-line Switches on SC-1s. And run both TMCC and conventional on all tracks. The ZW-C works with conventional using throttle levers, as 4 Powemasters with the Cab-1 and also in Command with the Cab-1. I have at least a dozen uncoupling track sections and also 2 Five rail operating track sections for my coal and log dump cars. And another half dozen manual lever remote control switches. Slowly expanding the mainlines to reach another classification yard and a dozen track turntable and roundhouse. Also a collection of 6 motorized gantry/bucket cranes that will be part of a large coal mine/ coal yard/ lumber facility. And throw in another dozen or so operating accessories of various vintage from prewar Bascule bridge, two Af oil drum loaders, Marx barrel loaders, ice loaders, k-line saw mill, fork trucks etc etc. Plus a few conventional loops for my Porter, Plymouths, trolleys and burro cranes. I am running trains on the two loops and working the yard as I build benchwork and plot out the remaining sections. I still have 2 Sc-2s, an AsC and three AMCs to play with. A 180watt brick, three CW-80's and other power supplies. And I must admit, when someone says" that's older technology" I unfortunately usually dismiss what else they have to say. Maybe throwing the baby out with the bath water. But I am the type of person who not only owns unique one of a kind antique motorcycles, I restore, rebuild and much to the chagrin of " collectors" I modify them to my own desires and requirements. That said, it seems that older or newer technology IMHo when it comes to a lot of Lionel does not mean it is better or worse. They all seem to have been designed by engineers who could not make it in the real high tech engineering world where things are usually expected to work and the as-built documentation by definition is usable for servicing , maintenance and operating equipment. Just my take on things. Workarounds are usually for badly designed cheap software. But I am open to looking at this from a different angle. Just never occurred to me when I got into this hobby how poor some of this stuff functions and how many features listed on Lionel website, in the catalogues, manuals and on the boxes do not exist when you actually open the box.

I think you took my older technology in the wrong way. I was defending what Lionel has done with there products. I also work on antiques and old cars and have for years as well as the PM 1225 on a weekly basis. I came back into this hobby only a few years ago and have found that everything I have obtained which also includes a lot of the "old technology" works the way it's supposed to when I follow the directions explicitly. Good Luck on your venture.

Ron

Hi Railfan, Interesting.... Than show me how when following the ASC manual EXPlCITALY you get to control the 100 Switches instead of the 52. After you do that.... I will toss out another of SEVERAL documented INCORRECT instructions in out TMCC manuals. I really do not understand your need to DEFEND Lionel. Let Mike R. do it. Have not heard from Mike R tried to tell us not to clean tracks with alcohol and a bunch of chemists gave him a lesson on H2o and oH As I implied earlier, These guys are either not too bright, hire really lousy technical writers, or just do not really care and do business by the PT Bartum method

I think you can find plenty of documentation mistakes in any manufacturer's products, it's not just Lionel.  

 

Note that I'm not defending Lionel, or any other maker for that matter.  I think they all should strive for 100%, and the closest one there gets the prize.  Very few people or companies are perfect, and flaws in the products and the documentation are inevitable at some level.

 

I worked for years in the aerospace industry, I could tell you stories about documentation and procedure errors that might curl your hair, and there real lives were on the line if you followed the instructions to the letter! Remember the Mars probe that crashed because the guys programming used the wrong units in the calculations?  It doesn't take much.

 

Perfection if very hard to achieve, just ask me how hard it was to reach it!

 

Interesting point.  Even the old RS-232 "standard" was that, mostly in name.  The results varied widely depending on whose 232 drivers and hardware you were using.  The old Digital Equipment Corporation implementations on PDP-11s and PDP-10s were very robust, often driving ASCII terminals at distances approaching 1,000 feet (if I recall correctly - way in excess of the standard).

John, as for that Mars probe - wasn't that crash caused by a bad Fortran DO loop?

 

George

Nope, not the one I was talking about.

 

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/

 

NASA lost a $125 million Mars orbiter because a Lockheed Martin engineering team used English units of measurement while the agency's team used the more conventional metric system for a key spacecraft operation, according to a review finding released Thursday.

Guess I just found all of the answers rather confusing. Should not have used the word infinite.

 

Actually I think the number depends on a couple of factors. TPC's can be programed as engines so depending on how many engines you have just subtract the number of engines from 99 and that is how many TPC's can be addressed. The same is true for the Accessories. You can program 99 accessories so add that to the number of engines and that might be the defining number.

 

This would be for the CAB1/TMCC system. Legacy uses the engine #99 so you would not use that number. You would also need the booster or maybe several of them depending on how many devices they allow.

 

After rethinking this I did some additional math and calculated that even it worked It would cost close to $2600. to run 100 switches using Asc's Which is pretty ridiculous considering that you can switch 20amp circuits with remotes for about 5 dollars per circuit. I can pick up used SC-1s for a fraction of the cost. Will run off the switch power in most cases. Never given me a problem. Sure the screw terminal layout would never pass basic electrical codes for clearances. (Refer to my previous comments) And to actual run accessories another relay is needed to overcome the low current carrying issue. ( pure genius) But I did say that I might be open to to work arounds. Seems like a requirement in this hobby. And no offense to Mike R. I actually felt bad for him. Good thing he did not try to make a video of that with flip charts.

Hi Trainman, no offense. But what about the switches? Is the limit 99 switches, 99 accesories, 99 engines and 9 Tr(Powermaster)/ MU combinations? No one has fully addressed the question in its entirety.

I think the basic issue is that when much of this stuff was developed, very few people at Lionel (if any) ever contemplated folks building layouts that would actually require the full range of addresses for accessories, switches, or MU configurations.  In truth, 99.9% of the user base will never run into any of the limitations for the equipment.  There are not many layouts that tax all the limits.

 

Another point to consider, the old TMCC CAB1/command base has been discontinued for a number of years now, as well as many of the other products under discussion.  Dig out your ten year old computer and see how up to date the documentation or software updates are.   As new products come out, older ones are pretty much ignored, this is not unique to Lionel.  If you want to talk about limitations, I'd be looking at the current product line, I don't think it's realistic to think that Lionel or any other manufacturer is going to go back and tweak all the documentation for obsolete products.

 

I'd rather have the old documents on the website with warts than to have them remove them totally and let it all be a mystery how it all works.  While they're certainly not perfect, they are a lot better than nothing.

Hi John, I will take you up on your offer. Hard to tell which controllers are discontinued. Assuming Legacy Cab-2 and SC-2 are the latest and greatest current technology for switch and accessory controls. And I am the first to admit that Iam not even sure that is correct. What are my options? Limits. Thanks

But for the record. The TMCC was out in the marketplace for at least ten years. Not such a rapidly advancing technology that did not allow them the time to revise the manuals when it was being made. Just did not choose to.

I will freely admit that Lionel "could" have done a better job keeping the manuals updated, my point is that's not uncommon.

 

I'm not sure what my offer was, did I make a subliminal offer?

The AMC is still in the 2013 catalog. Manual was written in 2002. Why not issue a revision on the "daisy" chain issue. ASC still in 2013 catalog. Manual 2002. OTC still in 2013 catalog. No online manual. Mike R. stops video before showing 0-27 connection as implied in beginning of video. Old technology or not. If you are selling it. Support it. To many excuses for Lionel in my opinion.

To discuss the new technology and its limits. See your post.

I have no dog in this fight, I prefer to run my switches and accessories the "old fashioned way". I use the switches that came with them.

 

I also control my blocks the "old fashioned way" via toggles found and the local hardware store, and my remote is strictly for running the trains. 

 

This proves to be far less aggrivating.

 

Incorrect this or that, poor quality of this or that will never change in this hobby. The market is miniscule, and  the precious few of us in this hobby are ultimately forced to "settle" on some degree or just not participate.

 

Compound that with the fact that Lionel has changed owners numerous times over the years.Many instructions, corrections, modifications, or whatever have been lost.

 

Poor "uneducated" MR has spent the past several years since he joined Lionel trying to track down whatever info/records he can. He has even gone as far as contacting folks here on the forum regarding certain models they may own that Lionel lost info on.

 

 

IMO when you start comparing toy trains to NASA, you may want to find another hobby.

 

 

RickO wrote:

quote:

Poor "uneducated" MR has spent the past several years since he joined Lionel trying to track down whatever info/records he can. He has even gone as far as contacting folks here on the forum regarding certain models they may own that Lionel lost info on.

 

Rick is right.  One can imagine the herculean task Mike had in front of him.  He has been on a corporate Odyssey (as in the Greek hero, not the train system) to find, recover, or capture product information in a company that takes a scatter-gun approach to product development.

 

Yeah, Lionel hasn't done a perfect job.  But they are actively working at improving their documentation and their service system.

 

Compare the availability of TMCC / Legacy documentation with what MTH has produced regarding DCS.  It's like comparing a pothole to Meteor Crater.

 

George

 

Personally, for whatever his failings are, Mike R. has done a masterful job at Lionel so far!  The maintenance went from a joke to a first class outfit, and that was totally under his leadership!  I find it hard to criticize his efforts in his somewhat brief tenure there.  IMO anyone that criticizes what he's accomplished just doesn't have a clue what was actually accomplished!

 

Well, I guess you can have 99 engines, 99 accessories, 99 switches, and 9 trains (maybe more with Legacy) and 99 routes with TMCC and one less engine (#99) with Legacy.

 

Just think how big a layout has to be to accommodate the maximum numbers.

Except that without the addition with boosters, you can only get a fraction of that. And mainly a matter trial and error it seems. **** of a way to run a railroad. And not to discount Mike's efforts or accomplishments but I think it is time to put some effort in this area. Unless the plan is to totally phase out this part of the product offerings which seems unlikely. As I understand, a lot of the layouts have many years invested in them. People will not keep buying newer stuff if they have to keep ripping up layouts because the older stuff does not work. And the old " the other guys are worse" excuse gets old really fast.