UPDATE From MTH....DCS/Proto-Sound Lives On....!

Alan this is great news .

That is great news!!  Thank you Alan for posting and alleviating some gloom and doom elsewhere!!

There is a light at the end of the tunnel and it is NOT another train! The proprietary MTH electronics/control systems will be supported and presumably enhanced!

Needs a small clicker for locomotives like Lionel.

I wonder if Bachmann might put in DCS/DCC decoders into their product line?

I hope they pickup the Z4000 too. Great transformer. 

Thanks, Alan. So good to hear factual news over all the speculation.

fyi,

 I talked to mth service yesterday.  Not that its a big surprise, but they are taking repairs as normal.  My Tiu needs some attention and I got an RA# to send it in.  I was told 2 to 3 weeks turn around time.  That's the same amount of time my son's video game console needed, so no big deal to me.  (Although I did a factory reset on a few engines last night with the working channel just to make sure they were working properly in conventional!)

Makes sense to spin off the DCS system into a new company. It's one thing to turn on a transformer and run a post war Hudson. Not being able to run thousands of dollars worth of electronic engines would be a big problem.

But then again- our phones and computers are obsolete almost as soon as we buy them.

@Ken-Oscale posted:

I wonder if Bachmann might put in DCS/DCC decoders into their product line?

Sure don't know why they would.  The two prime modeling scales, HO and N, are firmly entrenched in DCC (and that is a good thing).  Two rail O scalers are predominately either still straight DC, or DCC.  Yes, there are outliers out there (John Sethian and Engineer Joe come to mind) that have been successful with two rail DCS, but they are a small minority. 

Regards,

Jerry

Just to confirm, this includes manufacturing the physical proto 3 boards? If so, this is the perfect silver lining to Mike's well deserved retirement.

If they weren't making the boards, it would be somewhat pointless I would imagine.   However, it's actually pretty clear that they do intend to make the boards.

"The new tech company will continue to manufacture and provide support including any necessary software updates to the DCS hardware or DCS WiFi App."

This is amazing news for me.  I adopted DCS when it first came out 18 years ago.  I went through a phase where I had to sell most of my engines, but I was just starting to take the plunge again.  The news of MTH closing made my heart stop and took the wind out of my sails...  Mostly because I am wedded to DCS.  This news today gives me hope for a hobby stretching into my retirement years.

Hate to be a downer, but I really can't see them having enough business to stay afloat.  Hope I'm wrong!

@Frank Mulligan posted:

Hate to be a downer, but I really can't see them having enough business to stay afloat.  Hope I'm wrong!

If no one picks up new engine manufacturing....yes, DCS will fade away as older locos die. I'd see a solid 10 years minimum before the market share shrinks.

Offering retro-fit kits as the technology advances will likely keep them afloat indefinitely.

If they would price the boards ($200 DCS Upgrade Kit) closer to say$150 then I'd upgrade more of my PS2 engines to PS3.   As it stands now I can buy a nused PS3 Railking engine for around $200 and cannibalize the PS3 board for one of my Premier PS2 engines.   PS3 gets me DCC and a better sound set including a quillable whistle on steamers.   With no more new MTH engines after 2021 upgrading PS1 may be the only way to get a certain engine under command control.   A reduced PS3 board would make upgrading fiscally more attractive and generate business for upgrade techs and expand DCS user base.

See my PS3 upgraded 1997 C&O Allegheny here: I bought the engine nused for about $350+$200 Ps3 upgrade kit (DIY install) = $550 for a Premier articulated steamer.

This is great news, I'm sure there will be more.

That is truly wonderful news!

Seen this news posted last evening on the other forum and was glad to see it. But what about parts like traction tires and smoke units, etc,etc,etc..........

This is very good news indeed.

Hopefully the iconic Z-4000 will continue to be supported. I have one in use which I purchased in 1998, and it works fine! I love those digital readouts for the volts and amps.

" In fact, new and exciting product ideas are currently under development."

Better more diverse sounds please.

Smoke units and parts thereof, as well as other normal wear/tear components should also be supported in addition to the P2,3 boards.

DCS boards to fit Lionel.

A clicker to run all channels of the Z4000.  "LionChief" the thing for Conv.

Ummmmm...well....so what is he business model? Software sales--sure. Upgrade kits--okay but got to be careful about pricing those--that will be low-margin and not high volume neither. Will they make TIUs and AIUs and WIUs? Handheld remotes--probably not. MTH had already announced the end of the handheld.

So I guess the model is about the same as the current crop of DCC guys selling in HO scale? But O scale is a much smaller market. So they will have to be strong into HO and maybe N.

Like ERR at Sunset, they are going to need all of our support (meaning our purchasing) at least initially.

I'm no expert but from a casual, hobbyist review of what's out there for DCC users, DCS is so much better put together, easier to implement and maintain that it should eat their lunch. They have a stable hardware and software base at a very good price point. Or so it appears from a distance.

Don Merz

@Tinplate Art posted:

Hopefully the iconic Z-4000 will continue to be supported. I have one in use which I purchased in 1998, and it works fine! I love those digital readouts for the volts and amps.

I love my Z4000 too, Art!

The Z-4000 is truly one of MTH's benchmark achievements in the hobby! It's UL approval rating remains unique for a high power transformer.

I also hope for continuation of the Z4000.

For DCS to grow in the market it needs to make the protocol open.

Good news indeed to see the DCS operating system will carry forward.

Mr.Wolf is a practicing hobbyist with at least one personal layout as well as an astute business person, so he will do the responsible things to support his fine products after the shutdown. I believe he is also a very ethical person who takes great pride in his company's achievements.

This is good news for sure, very curious like so many about what new things are coming.  I see direct wireless being a big change that would be good.  I really like what Railpro is doing with this.

@carl552 posted:

For DCS to grow in the market it needs to make the protocol open.

I mentioned this in the MTH closing thread but the TIU needs to evolve to be able to operate DCC equipped locomotives without any add on equipment. If the TIU could operate both DCS and DCC equipped locomotives without extra hardware then hobbyists in HO, N, G, and 2 rail O could continue to operate their fleets of DCC locomotives while adding DCS by just buying a TIU. To meet the needs of every model railroad hobbyist the TIU should be able to operate DCS and DCC locomotives right out of the box and TMCC/Legacy locomotives with the addition of the adapter cable and a Lionel command base (as it currently does). 

Just thinking out loud here.  With Mike walking out the back door.  You think there's any chance the new regime will open the DCS system up?  So I can control MTH engines in a command environment with my Cab2 like we can with the DCS system controlling TMCC/Legacy??  One can dream.

That is a relief after the bad news of MTH closing. 

As much as I would prefer one command control system (for ease of having to remember what does what and how to program, troubleshoot, etc), having a viable DCS and Legacy control system actually lends variety and spice to the hobby of running trains in a command control environment. More to the point, each has advantages and features. Now, if one of the "exciting new products" turns out to be a universal remote that operates all command control trains than I wouldn't complain

@superwarp1 posted:

Just thinking out loud here.  With Mike walking out the back door.  You think there's any chance the new regime will open the DCS system up?  So I can control MTH engines in a command environment with my Cab2 like we can with the DCS system controlling TMCC/Legacy??  One can dream.

This is already possible with SDMark's great work.

You could read the TMCC/Legacy commands coming in from the command base, and send out the appropriate DCS sequence. The work is just deciding how to map Legacy/TMCC commands to the desired response from a PS2/3 engine.

I keep meaning to build this as a proof-of-principle but haven't gotten around to it.

The obstacle to developing TMCC/Legacy/LionChief control of PS2/3 locos has always been legal, not technical.  Perhaps this will be one positive that comes out of this transition?

There has never been any real legal obstacle to sending commands to a TIU you have purchased, or creating a device to do so - despite tales of MTH threats to the contrary.

In any case, the patents on the DCS system that have not already lapsed will expire this year.

Obsidian, unless it failed, I would never consider "upgrading[?]" a PS2 to a PS3.  I find the former to be a more solid performer, and by using a supercap, I have eliminated the battery.  That said, what would be the market for DCS equipment---boards, remotes, TIUs, AIUs without also having a loco line?  I would not in passing that for persons who operate only conventional, like postwar Lionel, a TIU plus a remote gives you walkaround control.  I had that for several months before getting my first PS2 loco back around 2002, and it was a drastic improvement in operating.  I didn't have any AIUs then, but adding AIU(s) to a conventional layout would mean that you can turn blocks on-and-off and throw switches, without being tied to a control panel

Have all 4 channels on the TIU work Conv., not jist two.

Have a Z1000/one channel TIU for small Conv. layouts.

Dominic, if you can find the old Z4k receiver that plugs into the Z4000, the remote can control voltage on all 4 TIU outputs

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

If they weren't making the boards, it would be somewhat pointless I would imagine.   However, it's actually pretty clear that they do intend to make the boards.

"The new tech company will continue to manufacture and provide support including any necessary software updates to the DCS hardware or DCS WiFi App."

Does anyone know if the new company would provide replacement boards for PS1, PS2 and PS3 engines as well as all parts and support for the Z4000 and the MTH operating system? If they did, I bet we would all be delighted to hear that. Arnold

Arnold, I'm sure nobody knows exactly what the new company is actually going to provide, or even if they'll be able to pull it off.  Another wild card is what the pricing will be, the prices could go up significantly for any replacement boards.

I seriously doubt they'll be providing anything but PS/3 boards, unless they buy existing stock.  The PS/1 and both flavors of the PS/2 boards haven't been manufactured in years, and they have obsolete parts that are no longer available.  MTH stopped shipping any version of the PS/2 boards some time ago.  It's also been a long time since MTH has provided boards for the Z-4000, so I can't imagine them suddenly doing that, but who knows.

I would think in part what is desire is for your failed PS x engine to be returned to functional.   It would be nice to have a series of boards that are direct plug-in replacements to restore functionality to PS 1, PS 2 and PS 3 engines.  Better yet if the boards offered increased functionality.

@shorling posted:

It would be nice to have a series of boards that are direct plug-in replacements to restore functionality to PS 1, PS 2 and PS 3 engines. 

Well, PS/1 ain't happening, I can't imagine anyone spending the amount of money to replicate 20+ year old technology!  There is a "close to" drop-in board to replace PS/2 boards, it's the PS32 stacker board.  It's the same board that is used for the steam PS/3 upgrade kits, and it's sold with 3V and 5V compatible connectors to replace failed 3V and 5V PS/2 boards.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Well, PS/1 ain't happening, I can't imagine anyone spending the amount of money to replicate 20+ year old technology!  There is a "close to" drop-in board to replace PS/2 boards, it's the PS32 stacker board.  It's the same board that is used for the steam PS/3 upgrade kits, and it's sold with 3V and 5V compatible connectors to replace failed 3V and 5V PS/2 boards.

PS3 Kits are pretty easy to install.  Not sure how they can get easier.  Now in the DCC world the NMRA compliant connectors make it even easier, but not everything has those.  For 3 Rail O, I think the cost of creating the adapter kits would push the price up too high.  Then there's the fact at some point you will have to go wire by wire on many models.

But again, the PS3 kits and instructions are very good and it's a simple enough process.  Read through, pay attention, and take your time.

As for PS1 there is not value there.  Sales would be small, cost would be high, and they're less capable than what I PS3 upgrade will cost.  Just getting components to make the boards would be mostly impossible.

Thanks for your responses.  I'm not talking about manufacturing 20 year old technology.   I'm suggesting new designs with new technology  engineered to be affordable.   Some folks would be just happy to see their engine move again.  Other like all the bells and whistles.  So the challenge is to the new" DCS lives on" owners.  The potential is to capture the legacy DCS PS failed engine and upgrade market plus the  future.

There's that "affordable" adjective again.   It sounds like you're talking about a basic reverse board, tons of them available, and they're affordable.   If you're talking about a DCS board that has the features of PS/3, it's as "affordable" as it's going to get I suspect!

I'm thinking a DCS board in simplest form with basic reverse functions including speed control.  If it's affordable maybe that's all some folks want to fix PS 1 or convert conventional's.   Maybe these core functions can be enhanced with the really cool stuff at increased cost but affordable.  If the boards are direct replacement or almost, there could be a savings on third party installation costs.   I'm just blue skying:  set a goal, understand the market, develop a conceptual design, formulate a business plan.  See how close you get to the goal and still make money.

I'd be very surprised if cutting out the audio and some lighting features changed the manufacturing costs more than $6-8 or so.  Given that the PS/3 diesel board can't possibly be costing more than the $40-50 ballpark, I don't see this moving the needle on purchase costs enough to justify the engineering to create it, and then the ongoing costs to support another configuration.  I'll be stunned if that happens.

What would be useful is a really cheap DCS based receiver that just gives you functionality like the ERR Mini-Commander ACC board to automate rolling stock and the like.  That's functionality that is totally missing from the DCS product line.

     As of yet, who knows which way the new DCS company will go. I would think that, in order to generate business, they would need to expand their install base.

Step one would be to license the product to other manufacturers. Find ways to interest other manufacturers to provide it, at least as an option. Up until now, the purpose of DCS was to help sell MTH trains. Now, they will need trains to sell DCS

Step two would be to come up with retrofit kits. Some people might want to upgrade their conventional powered units to DCS. Part of what enabled DCC to take hold in other scales was that you could modify your existing fleet rather than need to buy all new locomotives for command control. Yes, you had to cut wires, and modify frames. Yes, there were different DCC modules for different manufacturers needed, but it still gave an entry into the arena. It doesn't just work with open standards, either. In the world of slot cars, there are different proprietary digital systems, but there are also retrofit kits that can convert analog cars to digital.   

Step three would be a "PS3 Basic" receiver. Basically, a board that provides command control of more or less the same basic items found on a basic conventional locomotive. Direction, speed, bell/whistle/horn. Lights on/off/direction and smoke on/off could be considered. LC, without the mistake Lionel made of needing a separate controller. Pairs well with step two retrofits.  

Step four would be DCS for non-locomotives. Controllable lighting for passenger cars. Move the conductor out of the locomotive cab and have his announcements come from the cars. Provide accessory control of action cars. 

That may not be the way they end up going, but that is this persons thoughts on the subject

Step One is a logical thing to do if you're in the business of just selling the electronics, you need a customer base to sellinto.

Well, Step Two is already here, that's what the PS/3 upgrade kits are for.  Given the diversity of different configurations that these kits get installed into, I don't see them getting vastly more simple, they are what they are.

Truthfully, I don't see the utility of Step Three.  For the small incremental cost, you have full functionality with the existing kits.  This seems like the answer to a question nobody asked.

Step Four, OTOH, is something that's been sorely missing from the DCS lineup.  One of the few examples I see of this kind of capability is the Coors Silver Bullet train.  The super cool reefers with all the lights and smoke synchronized with the sound are really neat.  I never could understand why they didn't expand on that technology. 

DCS has always been "feature rich". Lionel has not been able to reproduce all of the DCS options. However I rarely use many of the DCS features. Mostly because I cant remember them.

I need to control engine movement, sound, lights and coupling. Not much else. Doppler effects and clickety clacks real neat but rarely employed.

My point, do we really need 80 or 90 percent of what DCS HAS?

Alan, all of those are just software enhancements they threw in because they could.  Removing them wouldn't change the picture much, if at all.

Oh!  In that case leave them in!

One reason I'm a fan of the DCS App is that all of these features become more intuitive.  It's easier to lay these out in an APP than through a physical remote.  One thing I wold like in the app though is the ability to control two trains on the screen at the same time and an attachment thumb/finger wheel for controlling throttle.  ESU has this on their touch screen system for DCC and it's very nice.

There needs to be an easy to use and economical way to run/control DCS engines from JMRI or/and Freiwald's Train Controller.  Without the functionality that these programs offer DCS will be remain a good limited way to run trains stuck in the past.  TMCC trains can be controlled with both these programs because the protocol is open.  With an open DCS protocol people will start developing innovative new ways to use DCS generating more DCS board sales.  I don't see the economics of a 3rd party developing DCS boards to compete with the company taking over the MTH DCS board business.  I am selfish, 2/3 of my engines are DCS and I would like to see them have a future.

Carl552 is kind of aligned with the direction I was thinking of.  There are a lot of existing MTH eingines out there which could be enhanced or brought back to life: conventional, PS1, PS2 and PS3.   Lets not forget those Lionel folks who would like to run DCS.  The initial market for change seems to me to be strong, but is tempered by declining O gauge train enthusiast  population.   Searching for the sweet spot is the economic challenge.  I would think offering more sooner is a business plan necessity.  Eventually  there is going to be a glut of product on the market and it will be cheaper to toss your broken engine and buy another on the bay.  Unfortunately, for a lot of us this won't be an issue.

So this spin off company will more or less support DCS/PSxx but without a train to put it in will basically support existing product and any possible engine upgrades?

If I were them I would hope someone buys the train business and will contract with them or one of he other companies will want to use PS electronics otherwise this could be a short lifespan. I just don't see a demand in existing and upgrades to keep this going. 

I guess the next question is who will own DCS?  The new support company or someone that might buy the MTH train portion of the company. Lots of interesting months ahead but I wish everyone involved the best. 

I agree with you, MartyE.  I don't see any sufficient market beyond installation in new trains by a manufacturer.

@MartyE posted:

So this spin off company will more or less support DCS/PSxx but without a train to put it in will basically support existing product and any possible engine upgrades?

If I were them I would hope someone buys the train business and will contract with them or one of he other companies will want to use PS electronics otherwise this could be a short lifespan. I just don't see a demand in existing and upgrades to keep this going. 

I guess the next question is who will own DCS?  The new support company or someone that might buy the MTH train portion of the company. Lots of interesting months ahead but I wish everyone involved the best. 

I agree MartyE.  They will have to make a deal with some train manufacturer to have their product outfitted into new trains.  There couldn't possibly be enough of a demand to just make spares for an existing and aging market of old MTH trains.

Have Fun!

Ron

I could and hope I'm wrong. I certainly want to see them succeed. 

Unless the new DCS company lines up a a significant new train contract, I see this either having a limited lifespan, or the components costing way more than they do now.  Either scenario will likely make it a short lived project.  Think if you had to pay $300-400 for a upgrade kit from a company that you didn't know if they'd be around next year!?  That wouldn't be a purchase that I'd be likely to make.

It’s going to be interesting. I wonder, if there will be enough support to economically keep the New Company going? IMHO,, I believe we will see tons of MTH stuff hitting the markets. Relocated, to the please, please buy me on a train show table.

joining weave and a few others..

Well we don't know what deals could be going into place right now. As it is DCS is used in 3 other scales too while being DCC compatible. There is good opportunity here as the DCC market is plenty hot. Pretty much all of the decoder and hardware companies are separate from the locomotive manufactures. The DCS system could be updated to control DCC as well. I don't think it's market is as limited in theory as some might think at first glance.

Fact is the TIUand AIU could benefit highly from new hardware in many ways.  Could this be one of the new things the announcement alludes to? An integrated smaller unit with DCC onboard could be interesting for sure. Maybe an advanced controller combining the touch screen with more tactile throttle control like the ESU system.   One could run the whole thing off a Raspberry Pi sized unit and still have excess computing power.

Not saying any of this is true or what is happening just pointing out possibilities.

Its a shame that The three rail market did not Go with the open DCC system that the rest of the model railroad industry uses. it seems MTH could have as there HO locomotive decoders handled DCS , DCC and DC so I would assume his system is somewhat similar to DCC. DCC has many company's using producing it and adding new tech as they go and its been backwards compatible from the beginning . A 5 or 8 amp DCC sound and control; decoder is about 2" X 3" in size and $150 or less. this sure beats the multiple boards that are packed into Lionel and MTH locos. I use DCC in some of my O scale narrow gauge and like the flexibility of not being tied to one manufacturer , I did put a 5 amp decoder in a three rail loco and unhooked my 3 rail system and tried it , seemed to work flawlessly. if I did not have so many Locos at this point I might think about converting them.  just my two cents worth    Rick

It's  not just a question of maintaining it's also a question of advancing the art.

Limited lifespan with a known obsolescence is a deal killer.

Opening the software would be nice yes.

GRJ is right, it's unlikely that anyone is going to buy an engine for which there is no support system.  I don't think there is a large market for $300-$400 upgrade kits, not to mention any install cost.

As others have said, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.   Other companies foreshadow with tooling broken up and sold to various companies which installed their various electronics systems.  Even Lionel couldn't/wouldn't keep ERR going at their price point.

Obsolescence?  What could be more obsolescent that a loco with whistle/horn that only goes through a fwd-neutral-rev-neutral sequence, and can only have one loco running on a block/track at the same time?  That's late 1930s tech---but it's still popular.

I've reached an age where I expect that most all of my PS2 & PS3 locos will outlast me, and their quality is such that I expect my train-nut grandson will operate them for many more years (right now, he's using one of my original issue Rev G TIUs and an equally old remote).  Unlike the competition, with its multiple types of control systems, my 2002 dcs system runs any DCS loco ever made and via software upgrades is also the most-up-to-date.

@Rick Rubino posted:

Its a shame that The three rail market did not Go with the open DCC system that the rest of the model railroad industry uses.

Because those companies knew that people would want to operate their existing equipment with the command controlled ones which you cannot do with DCC.

seems MTH could have as there HO locomotive decoders handled DCS , DCC and DC so I would assume his system is somewhat similar to DCC. 

A dcc decoder has been standard since Protosound 3's introduction into o scale and, I believe, is on some proto 2 locos. That way, if you do convert to dcc, you can run any proto 3 engine in dcc mode without having to rip out the boards. It seems Mike did plan a little for the future.

I really hope the new company works out with its goal to support and advance DCS technology. Having said that, I just can’t figure out how this works. For example, the DCS app doesn’t pay for itself standalone. It is obvious that development  and maintenance are subsidized by train sales as a loss leader by MTH in promotion of the entire train line. And just how many in-app upgrades to the premium version are left to be reaped by whoever is selling them a year from now? Maybe it will go to a subscription?

@GregR posted:

I really hope the new company works out with its goal to support and advance DCS technology. Having said that, I just can’t figure out how this works. For example, the DCS app doesn’t pay for itself standalone. It is obvious that development  and maintenance are subsidized by train sales as a loss leader by MTH in promotion of the entire train line. And just how many in-app upgrades to the premium version are left to be reaped by whoever is selling them a year from now? Maybe it will go to a subscription?

Exactly, Just like the TMCC upgrades. It nice to have the availability. I even understand the rise in prices. But, the price is now at a point. I will not be upgrading anything new. Only, using boards for repairs.....Hopefully, it works out for everyone! 

@Santa Fe 3751 posted:

 A dcc decoder has been standard since Protosound 3's introduction into o scale and, I believe, is on some proto 2 locos. That way, if you do convert to dcc, you can run any proto 3 engine in dcc mode without having to rip out the boards. It seems Mike did plan a little for the future.

DCC was never available on any of the PS/2 chipsets.

OK, question. I currently have two TIU's and two DCS handheld remotes. The TIU's are Rev. L. Nothing ever upgraded. Been using them since 2013 and no issues. Handhelds show 2003, I think. One of my DCS handhelds has a "wobbly" thumbwheel, but it works for now.

1) Will a new version (current catalog) of the handheld communicate properly with my TIU's without any further upgrades ? Will I even get it if I order one ?

2) Is MTH reparing handheld remotes with bad thumbwheels ?

3) Best (easiest for an old dude) advice is appreciated.

Note: I'm almost 76 y.o., declining vision, declining mental acuity (not sharp as once was), can not safely use wifi app.

          NEED SOME GOOD INFO OR ADVICE       Thanks..........

Jeff, the wobbly thumbwheel is normally the cradle, I believe that part is still available.  I have them on order, maybe someday they'll come in.  I don't know if MTH is fixing anything right now, you'd have to give them a call.

New remotes should talk to your TIU's just fine, but I'd suggest getting them updated to the current version of DCS, 6.1.

Thanks, GRJ....

Jeff, every remote and every TIU that MTH made will work with each other, and every remote and every TIU is upgradable to the latest software.  But, all remotes and all TIUs should be the same software versions, preferably the latest.  Don't feel bad about the wifi, kid, many of us don't like to use it.

I guess my real question is will the "new" remote in the 2020 catalog work with my (non-upgraded) Rev. L TIU ? 

(i.e. do you know if the 2020 remote has some built in upgrades that would require an upgrade on a Rev. prior to use ?)

Well, since nobody has one, it's not possible to answer that with 100% certainty.  However, I will say with 99.99% certainty that it will indeed be fully compatible with your older TIU's, it should have functionality identical to the existing remote.

While I've mixed version 4.x, verion 5.x and version 6.x TIU and remote software, it's advisable to have them all at the same version.  This is something that quite possibly could cause some compatibility issues.

MTH has always contended DCS has full forward and backwards compatibility.  Hopefully, they haven't changed.  Jim, upgrading the software is not difficult

Thanks, guys....I think I'll go ahead and put one on order. If  compatibility issues arise, I'll deal with it then.

Really appreciate yall's input. Thanks again.

Do not use any MTH remote with any TIU that does not have the same software inside. Results can be all over the charts. 

 Update all to the same DCS versions.

@superwarp1 posted:

Just thinking out loud here.  With Mike walking out the back door.  You think there's any chance the new regime will open the DCS system up?  So I can control MTH engines in a command environment with my Cab2 like we can with the DCS system controlling TMCC/Legacy??  One can dream.

This would be great and a long time coming if we could finally control MTH engines with the Cab2.  

@RJR posted:

Obsidian, unless it failed, I would never consider "upgrading[?]" a PS2 to a PS3.  I find the former to be a more solid performer, and by using a supercap, I have eliminated the battery.  That said, what would be the market for DCS equipment---boards, remotes, TIUs, AIUs without also having a loco line?  I would not in passing that for persons who operate only conventional, like postwar Lionel, a TIU plus a remote gives you walkaround control.  I had that for several months before getting my first PS2 loco back around 2002, and it was a drastic improvement in operating.  I didn't have any AIUs then, but adding AIU(s) to a conventional layout would mean that you can turn blocks on-and-off and throw switches, without being tied to a control panel

RJR, to each his own.  PS2 was a revolutionary improvement over PS1 (if you value command control).  I agree with all of the advantages command control (DCS) you noted.  PS3 is more of an evolutionary improvement.   Better sound sets (improved board memory can store higher quality sound).   As you mentioned, PS3 does not require rechargeable batteries.  Also, OEM engines get Rule 17 led lighting.   If the DCS company part of MTH does not succeed AND my TIU/WIU fail then the only way I'll be able to command control my MTH engines is via DCC.   PS3 has DCC, PS2 does not. 

 Just got a PS3 upgrade kit in the mail today, will be upgrading my PS1 upgraded to PS2 N&W 611 Class J.   Looking forward to quilling that wonderful steam whistle.   Upgrade is super easy since its really just swapping out the control board.   I did all of the hard work earlier when I upgraded my Class J from PS1 to PS2.   As a bonus I'll have a perfectly good PS2 board I can upgrade a PS1 engine.

IF DCS company fails to launch then as a precaution I am downloading the PS3/PS2 sound sets for all of my existing (and perhaps wanted) engines.  Also there are/will be in the future more used MTH PS1/2/3 engines than I can afford to collect or store/run on my layout.   I'll miss MTH new offerings - was really hoping they'd make a new Acela or Western Maryland 1309 Mallet articulated steam.

"to each his own"  True, and if you want the DCC capability, etc., you are correct.

@Engineer-Joe posted:

ObsidianMember Digital Subscriber

…..

 "Just got a PS3 upgrade kit in the mail today, will be upgrading my PS1 upgraded to PS2 N&W 611 Class J.   Looking forward to quilling that wonderful steam whistle.   Upgrade is super easy since its really just swapping out the control board.   I did all of the hard work earlier when I upgraded my Class J from PS1 to PS2.   As a bonus I'll have a perfectly good PS2 board I can upgrade a PS1 engine."

I'm sure you know. Just so it's clear for others reading this, remove any resistors that you attached to the LEDs that were to the head and tail lights, ditch lights, etc. for the PS2 board set. Leave markers alone I believe? … and the polarity of the wires gets reversed from PS2 to PS3.

Nope. PS3 steam upgrade kit uses a PS32 board (PS3 diesel board with a top board containing PS2 3V connectors added). It's set up to run incandescent bulbs. Adding LEDs is the same between a PS2 and PS32 board: https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...h-locomotives?page=1

Despite some failings, I really like and appreciate the DCS handheld remote. Being able to see the train's speed in actual scale MPH is a fundamentally useful and fun thing. To my knowledge, no one else has managed to accomplish this, ostensibly due to a patent.

If any new company can somehow finagle a future command control system that operates all the command controlled equipped engines using the basic DCS handheld platform with scale MPH it'd be a welcome product, at least to this old fart.

@Paul Kallus posted:

Despite some failings, I really like and appreciate the DCS handheld remote. Being able to see the train's speed in actual scale MPH is a fundamentally useful and fun thing. To my knowledge, no one else has managed to accomplish this, ostensibly due to a patent.

If any new company can somehow finagle a future command control system that operates all the command controlled equipped engines using the basic DCS handheld platform with scale MPH it'd be a welcome product, at least to this old fart.

 

I agree.  I like the handheld remote and the scale mph feature.

@Sean's Train Depot posted:

This would be great and a long time coming if we could finally control MTH engines with the Cab2.  

I agree with @Sean's Train Depot here. I really hope we see something like this soon! 

MTH patented the ability to control and display in scale MPH.

Santa Fe, All the Way

Ooops! You are right lou1985

I always buy the diesel kits and forgot about the 32 board. I'll edit my post.

I have several PS1 diesel sets (such as the PRR centipede) that have dual motors in each unit.  Upgrading to PS3 requires 2 kits (one per 2 motor engine), whereas PS2 upgrades allowed for a slave board to control the second engine.  This was available at a reduced cost and it would be great if such an option were made available once again.  It also simplified operation because I didn't need to worry about issues associated with a lash-up.

@ScottM posted:

I have several PS1 diesel sets (such as the PRR centipede) that have dual motors in each unit.  Upgrading to PS3 requires 2 kits (one per 2 motor engine), whereas PS2 upgrades allowed for a slave board to control the second engine.  This was available at a reduced cost and it would be great if such an option were made available once again.  It also simplified operation because I didn't need to worry about issues associated with a lash-up.

Well, I have one PS/2 diesel upgrade and one PS/2 slave kit, drop me a line if you are interested in it.  I bought them quite a while back to upgrade an A-B-A, but never did it, and now I don't think I'll be doing DCS for it, probably TMCC.

I am interested and will reach out to you. Thanks 

Gunrunner,

I just sent you an email, hopefully it was to the correct address 😀 

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

MTH patented the ability to control and display in scale MPH.

MTH introduced DCS in 2002, and probably obtained this patent sometime prior to the introduction date. Someone with the time could investigate the actual date this patent was granted, but since patents are valid for 20 years, it's seems reasonable to assume the expiration date will occur within the next two years.