I think it would bring O gauge together. All engines could run under the same system no matter the manufacturer. Although I don't see some manufacturers giving up their proprietary systems but you never know.
Dave
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Bluetooth is certainly an evolution of the existing communication protocol, but until the limitations are resolved, I am happy with TMCC/DCS.
It would be interesting to see of Bluetooth 5.0 is on the radar of the manufactures. Most important for me is the greater range 5.0 offers. Having two devices connected are also a huge step in the right directions.
Unfortunately, for our modular group events, Bluetooth is really not an option for us, but works fine at home on the smaller layouts.
Charlie
Well first things first, Bluetooth is a communications protocol not a control system. Even if you put Bluetooth in everything, you need to all of the manufactures to adopt a control system that will be universally compatible. Adding Bluetooth to an MTH PS3 engine doesn't make it magically work with the Lionel LC App or Universal remote. You'll need all of the manufactures to settle on a control system for everyone to use first.
Bluetooth is great for a small number of devices but when you start connecting more and more devices, it becomes harder to manage those connections. For example, I decided to test how robust the Bluetooth module is on my laptop by connection as many devices as possible to it. It began to run into problems after the eighth device was connected.
The next hurdle is layout control. Will all of my accessories and switches now have to be equipped with Bluetooth? I currently use a command system that not only runs my trains but also runs all of my switches and accessories.
Also don't forget that Bluetooth runs on a ONE to MANY relationship. Many slave devices (engines) can connect to One master device (controller). For some this okay, but for those of us who like to have multiple controllers that can control the same consist, this becomes a problem.
The range of Bluetooth has been argued to be everything from ugly to great. My personal experience with the Lionel universal remote has been reliable to 20 feet with minimal obstructions. That's okay for small layouts but becomes troublesome for larger layouts where trains may disappear from your view for brief periods of time due to tunnels or other scenery obstructions.
Lastly, adding the technology will also add cost to the locomotive. I think in another thread a user reported that the MSRP difference between LC+ and LC2 on the same locomotive added $50 to the price tag.
I'd like to see it. LC+ was Bluetooth equipped already. So the price increase going to LC+2.0 could more easily be blamed on the addition of TMCC features not Bluetooth.
Mike,
That's true, TMCC features more than likely added the extra cost.
When it come to Bluetooth there are two expenses, first for the hardware, and second for the license to use Bluetooth.
Not me. I like and enjoy the handhelds I have now.
Easy answer, YES.
Ben
"So the price increase going to LC+2.0 could more easily be blamed on the addition of TMCC features not Bluetooth."
After watching the Dave & Ryan Show, it seems the price might also be due to die-cast tenders replacing plastic, back-up lights, and separately applied handrails.
Jon 
Nope, don't see the point in it.
Nope.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Bluetooth is not a reliable protocol.
Sometimes, simple traditional AC power running is just fine........
Yes blue tooth very reliable tmcc is not on my double deck layout dcs is great also
MikeH posted:I'd like to see it. LC+ was Bluetooth equipped already. So the price increase going to LC+2.0 could more easily be blamed on the addition of TMCC features not Bluetooth.
Not true. Not all LC+ has Bluetooth, specifically those engines produced prior to 2016. I, for one, don't see the need UNLESS all manufacturers get on board with a compatible system, and we know that won't happen.
Bluetooth is the wonderful and necessary for our hobby to thrive. Did any one notice how Lionel sort of sneaked it in without any major announcement? That's because of the backlash from detractors. There is a lot of misinformation and myths being perpetuated by hobbyists who know better. Resisting Bluetooth hurts the hobby, and Lionel. I have what I need for the rest of my life, but want the hobby to be accessible/affordable for others, the younger, potential hobbyist. Touch-screen control directly to the loco (or accessory) is what it's all about, and Bluetooth delivers that, simply, no peripherals.
NO!
No. The DCS and Legacy controllers are part of the novelty for me and are fun to use. They're digital but present an analog button feel.
I have to admit since MTH's announcement regarding their handheld controller at the last York I've stopped pre-ordering their engines.
Having a Universal system (one ring to bind them all) is what folks have been clamoring for as long as there's been an OGR Forum. Making it respond to a common household device like a phone or tablet is just brilliant.
Jon
NO, having fun with Legacy and MTH DCS.
Big problem with BT in my mind is the limitations it poses in the current implementations. Having a 1:1 connection to the remote is not satisfactory, at least for me. Of course, the fact that the BT seems to have lousy range in my house adds to my disdain for the idea. I see it as adding expense and reducing operating capability, not the direction I think we should be going in.
KOOLjock1 posted:Having a Universal system (one ring to bind them all) is what folks have been clamoring for as long as there's been an OGR Forum.
Jon
As the former ogr webmaster use to say . "Ain't gonna happen". There's one manufacturer who's not been wanting to share on the comand control playground almost as long as there's been an ogr forum too.
RickO posted:KOOLjock1 posted:Having a Universal system (one ring to bind them all) is what folks have been clamoring for as long as there's been an OGR Forum.
Jon
As the former ogr webmaster use to say . "Ain't gonna happen". There's one manufacturer who's not been wanting to share on the comand control playground almost as long as there's been an ogr forum too.
Well yes and no... That manufacture did however add a universally accepted standard to control their engines with their latest generations of electronics when they included DCC decoders. If all of the manufactures would include DCC compatibility, we would be one step closer to having one control system to rule them all.
so you actually think Bluetooth will still be around in another 10 years? ... hahahaha.
No!
Train time is time to get "away" from the phone for me!
I would only support Bluetooth when it matures away from the 1:1 connection (one controller dedicated to a single locomotive/accessory at a time). I envision that it would be like an LCS or WIU component where the 1:1 connection is made, and then can control any layout activity over that connection, but at that point, every device that has Bluetooth has Wifi and the LCS or WIU solution fits the bill, so why have Bluetooth (beyond the simplistic starter set)?
It is smart of LC+2.0 to have TMCC/Legacy because the biggest gripe was the lack of forward compatibility as the model railroader matures into those systems. LC+2.0 is what LC should have been in the first place.
Only if there was cross compatibility between different manufactures and different apps. Am I really going to use multiple tablets for trains from different brands so I can run trains from different manufactures at the same time? Not in my budget!
I don't care, unless it is the ONLY way to control the equipment; then, a resounding NO.
Isn't the real question how many have used bluetooth??
Since I haven't, no response!
I don't want anything with a touch screen. I am old guy with very dry fingers and when I use a touch screen, very strange things happen, none of which I want.
And I like to run my trains with positive control, not play with a phone of some sort. I like control knobs - must be old fashioned, and I like reversing switches that are toggles with a center off position. That way if I stop a loco someplace I can set the reverse to center off and not have my belly brush it against the throttle and start a train into a collision.
Phones and gadgets and computers dominate a lot of our lives anymore. I want my trains to be my trains and I want to run them, not have some program written by some goofy guy in California decide how they run.
Train Nut posted:Train time is time to get "away" from the phone for me!
Best heard reason yet.
Probably not a good fit for me. If I'm sitting and fiddling with my phone to run trains, sooner or later I'll be compelled to answer a text or email, then forget the trains are running and check Facebook and probably meltdown my railroad.
I would welcome a bridge that allows Bluetooth control of the Legacy base. This would allow for app control of non-BT Legacy locos. It could also solve some of the 1:1 issues since the slave device (the Legacy base) would be capable of controlling multiple locos. This would be useful down the road if/when the handheld remotes become impractical due to component obsolescence.
Jeff T posted:Isn't the real question how many have used bluetooth??
Since I haven't, no response!
Maybe a need for a separate post. I can truly say that after decades of being phone bound because of work, employees, and business. That being tied to a phone even when off work hours because of job contracts, etc. That I never really had a chance to smell the flowers, enjoy people and life around me till my wife talked me into throwing away all the devices after I retired.
We have one phone between us, one laptop, one TV. As some have stated, holding a controller in ones hand and making adjustments as I run my layout, is as it should be. I did see at a local train show layout, a run with Bluetooth layout, operator needed constant lowering his reading glasses and an awkward collision when panic set in on using the Bluetooth. To each his own, but holding one or 2 remotes in ones hand(s) is part of the enjoyment.
Also price increase for this innovation to be included (I'm sure its not being added for free).
Just another thing to worry about being defective.
I tried it on the engine from the Broadway Limited set just to see if it worked. Did a few laps using the app, then shut it down and returned to the remote.
I did similar with the Polar Express set I bought a year ago, pretty sure I had some sort of anomaly during my brief test where the engine spiked in speed when I did so. Engine worked fine otherwise(universal LC remote, or it's own), so I didn't pursue it. Didn't impress me when that was part of my first experience trying BT control though.
-Dave
A model railroad is a harsh environment for sensitive electronics. You have sparks, surges, uneven voltage spots, and voltage spikes. If a unit is deliberately engineered for this environment, it can work reliably but I'm not sure that the trains of today have all reached this point. Adding more complexity of operation may not be the best move but that's just one mans opinion. Also agree that there is no standardization of operating systems in today's market.
Mowin' my lawn during the summer via BlueTooth while sipping a cool beverage on my front porch? Okay, I might go for that.
Pushing snow in the winter via BlueTooth while looking out of my living room window and sipping on a mug of hot chocolate? Yeah, I'd probably do that too.
Runnin' my trains any time of the year via BlueTooth? No thanks. That's kinda' like standing in my front yard and running my motorcycle up and down the street via BlueTooth. Somehow, it just don't appeal to me. 
Jeff T posted:Isn't the real question how many have used bluetooth??
Since I haven't, no response!
I have used Bluetooth on the legacy engine I have with Bluetooth. It was easy, smooth and allot of fun. I had no issues with the engine or the Bluetooth itself. I will buy more Bluetooth equipped legacy engines in the future.
Dave
xrayvizhen posted:MikeH posted:I'd like to see it. LC+ was Bluetooth equipped already. So the price increase going to LC+2.0 could more easily be blamed on the addition of TMCC features not Bluetooth.
Not true. Not all LC+ has Bluetooth, specifically those engines produced prior to 2016. I, for one, don't see the need UNLESS all manufacturers get on board with a compatible system, and we know that won't happen.
Absolutely true. They LC+ engine that was spoken of by me was Bluetooth. Came out long before LC+2.0 did.
The 2018 LC+ I have already has BT and the diecast tender body. But the addition of 4 chuffs per revolution instead of 2 will be nice. With better sounds. More lighting. More detail. I think the 50.00 + is MSRP is more than acceptable. More than one thing can be blamed for the increase.
Back to the OP. YES! And improving the BT to LTE will be even better! Allowing more things to be controlled! And better range. Its coming folks! No more tiu, siu, AEIOU, DCC, TMCC, just a universal controller and a DC power pack!
I will say my concern is only with Lionel engines and accessories.
Jim
carsntrains posted:Absolutely true. They LC+ engine that was spoken of by me was Bluetooth. Came out long before LC+2.0 did.
The 2018 LC+ I have already has BT and the diecast tender body. But the addition of 4 chuffs per revolution instead of 2 will be nice. With better sounds. More lighting. More detail. I think the 50.00 + is MSRP is more than acceptable. More than one thing can be blamed for the increase.
Back to the OP. YES! And improving the BT to LTE will be even better! Allowing more things to be controlled! And better range. Its coming folks! No more tiu, siu, AEIOU, DCC, TMCC, just a universal controller and a DC power pack!
I will say my concern is only with Lionel engines and accessories.
Jim
Jim,
Any LC+ engine made prior to 2017 does not have Bluetooth. Those engines can be run with the dedicated remote, the universal remote, and conventionally. The app will not work with those LC+ non-Bluetooth engines.
Range has never been an issue with Bluetooth when implemented with the proper hardware. Bluetooth 2.1 from 2005 had a range of 300 feet when using a class 3 device. For whatever reason Lionel decided to use a class 1 device with a range of 30 feet under ideal conditions, everyone's mileage will vary.
As I mentioned much earlier in this thread, Bluetooth is a communication protocol NOT a control system. Picking a wireless communication standard like Bluetooth, WiFi, or some other RF technology won't solve the problem that all of these manufactures have their own dedicated control system to run trains. You'll need to get all of these manufactures to incorporate a universal control system like DCC first.
Also, nobody to date has released anything operated by Bluetooth that can control a layout. I haven't seen Bluetooth operated switches or accessories from anyone yet.
The current of implementation of Bluetooth 4 uses a Master / Slave relationship which means only one controller can run one or more engines. On larger layouts, many choose to have more than one controller that can run all of the engines on the layout to allow multple people to interact with multiple engines at the same time.
carsntrains posted:No more tiu, siu, AEIOU, DCC, TMCC, just a universal controller and a DC power pack!
No more DCC??? Now THAT'S funny. I don't think you realize how popular DCC actually is in other scales.
Opinion.
The only use that I could see for BT is connecting the sound system to a under layout subwoofer for some serious bass response!
Paul Kallus posted:No. The DCS and Legacy controllers are part of the novelty for me and are fun to use. They're digital but present an analog button feel.
I have to admit since MTH's announcement regarding their handheld controller at the last York I've stopped pre-ordering their engines.
Friends described running trains with a phone the same as distracted driving, and that like in full size railroading, it will cause more crashes. 
John23 posted:The only use that I could see for BT is connecting the sound system to a under layout subwoofer for some serious bass response!
Hmmm 
No.
I found it to be a novel mode but I have also noticed it takes your attention away from the trains. So like all other things if you like it do it, I will stay with my remote and transformer handles. Then I can enjoy my trains instead of the phone.
Bluetooth is the wrong solution for anything more than a few locos operated by one person on a small layout. In today's environment DCC compatibility would be the right direction for O.
H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:Absolutely true. They LC+ engine that was spoken of by me was Bluetooth. Came out long before LC+2.0 did.
The 2018 LC+ I have already has BT and the diecast tender body. But the addition of 4 chuffs per revolution instead of 2 will be nice. With better sounds. More lighting. More detail. I think the 50.00 + is MSRP is more than acceptable. More than one thing can be blamed for the increase.
Back to the OP. YES! And improving the BT to LTE will be even better! Allowing more things to be controlled! And better range. Its coming folks! No more tiu, siu, AEIOU, DCC, TMCC, just a universal controller and a DC power pack!
I will say my concern is only with Lionel engines and accessories.
Jim
Jim,
Any LC+ engine made prior to 2017 does not have Bluetooth. Those engines can be run with the dedicated remote, the universal remote, and conventionally. The app will not work with those LC+ non-Bluetooth engines.
Range has never been an issue with Bluetooth when implemented with the proper hardware. Bluetooth 2.1 from 2005 had a range of 300 feet when using a class 3 device. For whatever reason Lionel decided to use a class 1 device with a range of 30 feet under ideal conditions, everyone's mileage will vary.
As I mentioned much earlier in this thread, Bluetooth is a communication protocol NOT a control system. Picking a wireless communication standard like Bluetooth, WiFi, or some other RF technology won't solve the problem that all of these manufactures have their own dedicated control system to run trains. You'll need to get all of these manufactures to incorporate a universal control system like DCC first.
Also, nobody to date has released anything operated by Bluetooth that can control a layout. I haven't seen Bluetooth operated switches or accessories from anyone yet.
The current of implementation of Bluetooth 4 uses a Master / Slave relationship which means only one controller can run one or more engines. On larger layouts, many choose to have more than one controller that can run all of the engines on the layout to allow multple people to interact with multiple engines at the same time.
Right I am well aware of when BT became available in LC+ engines, and that was before the LC+2.0 engines came out. The comparison was between a 2018 MSRP and a 2019 MSRP. The 2018 LC+ already had BT so it was not the reason for the MSRP to go up.
Really the great thing is the LC, LC+, and LC+2.0 universal controller. For 49.99 you can control 3 engines at one time. No other things to buy. And if you get a LC or LC+ the controller comes with it. Impressive. And I dont think Ive seen many folks run more than 3 trains at one time with DCC unless they are just running loops! And you can do that conventionally! 4 folks could run 12 trains on one layout without a problem. As long as all the engines were different.
Ryan, Dave, and other Dave have already said Lionel is going to expand greatly on that control system. No its not up to par with DCC. Its in its infancy.
ECD Bob yes I know other scales use DCC. I watch "whats neat this week" podcast on youtube lol
Jim
We were at the club last night, and a few of us were trying to use BT for several of the new Legacy locomotives. It was a most unsatisfying experience, and enough for me to write it off in it's current form! The range issues I mentioned previously for my H10 are not unique, nobody was able to control a BT locomotive from more than 15-18 feet before losing the connection. We were using a variety of smartphones, a couple of iPhones, and several Android phones of various vintages.
I say again, this is not a technology that is ready for prime time! I can count on one hand all the times I've lost control of a properly functioning locomotive using TMCC/Legacy, and I have fingers left over! I lost control of two different BT locomotives from less than 20 feet more times than that in one evening! I don't know where the capability is going, only that it's a long ways from the destination IMO. You can keep it, I don't want it!
It’s time for me to say I’ve now got enough engines for my lifetime. No Bluetooth for me. When Legacy goes, I’ll go with it. The two big guys are trying to bring youth to the hobby but I just don’t think it’s going to happen. This is an older persons hobby and it’s not going to change. Just my opinion.
gunrunnerjohn posted:We were at the club last night, and a few of us were trying to use BT for several of the new Legacy locomotives. It was a most unsatisfying experience, and enough for me to write it off in it's current form! The range issues I mentioned previously for my H10 are not unique, nobody was able to control a BT locomotive from more than 15-18 feet before losing the connection.
That doesnt surprise me. In fact, it would be a bit surprising if you could get any distance further than that ever, considering that the class of blue tooth they are using is only good for 16-33 feet. And with the metal chassis in the engines, with a metal wheelset connected to ground, I could see where it would cut the distance down even further unless you were at a higher elevation over the engine.
To me, BT may be ok for starter systems, but I certainly wouldnt want to see it in all engines, because it would be an additional cost most of us would never use. We've heard from some die-hard conventional runners who have no interest in it, but many of us with a control system already have wifi and/or RF capabilities that far exceed BT.
I would, however, like to see manufacturers settle on a standard that's similar to what MTH or Atlas has done, where DCC is either included or the engine is at last DCC-ready.
Not me.
Not me, I don't and won't use it. Its not that great, I've tried it but am thoroughly unimpressed
What an interesting and invigorating discussion! I believe I have more experience with bluetooth train control than anyone so far. Over the past two years, I converted twelve engines to BT, 10 diesels and two steamers, powered by all three modes: track AC, track DC and battery. I used the BlueRailTrains drop in board. I am not advocating BT control above all others. My layout has conventional, TMCC and LC+ as well as BT and each has its pluses and minuses. But for the record, here is my operating experience with BT: When properly installed, BT control is flawless. Over the two year period, I have demonstrated these engines at various club meets. I found the reliable operating range to be over 100 feet. BT control uses an on-screen app, which may not be to everyone's liking. Where this can be a big plus is when you are running many engines simultaneously and can see several throttles at the same time on your screen. I also found the ability to customize the PWM waveform delivered to the motors to be helpful, but that feature is not exclusive to BlueRail. Again, I run all four layout operating modes, but felt I should lay out the purely technical assessment of bluetooth. When properly implemented, it works very well.
Fun to watch folks that are 100% invested in one technology comment on a competing technology! 😁
Jim
BOB WALKER posted:What an interesting and invigorating discussion! I believe I have more experience with bluetooth train control than anyone so far. Over the past two years, I converted twelve engines to BT, 10 diesels and two steamers, powered by all three modes: track AC, track DC and battery. I used the BlueRailTrains drop in board. I am not advocating BT control above all others. My layout has conventional, TMCC and LC+ as well as BT and each has its pluses and minuses. But for the record, here is my operating experience with BT: When properly installed, BT control is flawless. Over the two year period, I have demonstrated these engines at various club meets. I found the reliable operating range to be over 100 feet. BT control uses an on-screen app, which may not be to everyone's liking. Where this can be a big plus is when you are running many engines simultaneously and can see several throttles at the same time on your screen. I also found the ability to customize the PWM waveform delivered to the motors to be helpful, but that feature is not exclusive to BlueRail. Again, I run all four layout operating modes, but felt I should lay out the purely technical assessment of bluetooth. When properly implemented, it works very well.
So BlueRail introduces yet another control system, I'm not convinced that what we need especially since other platforms can do everything it does and whole lot more. Plus to implement it, I'll need to remove a working system and pay for a board from BlueRail, I'm sure that's not free.
As you mentioned the app is nice because you can have multiple throttles on one screen at a time. Nifty but others could also this feature just as easy, It's software that can be upgraded fairly easily. Mark DiVecchio has also develop a similar feature with his RTC program that can also run multiple throttles plus other controls and hot button controls on a Windows tablet. The button and throttle layout is also customizable. It too works very well and more than one device can control the same engine if needs be.
Nobody has addressed how to get more than one Controller and or app to run the same engine on a layout yet nor have they addressed layout control with Bluetooth yet.
Don't worry about everyone using Bluetooth as their communication protocol in their engines, get all the manufactures to adopt a universal control platform first. Then worry about how their app or remote will transmit & receive data to the engines and layout.
Neglected to mention that I worked out a simple procedure for connecting two IoS devices at the same time to two engines with individual control for each engine.
BT today is in it's infancy and I would expect as time goes on it will grow into a system we all can use. Bob Walker has proved it can work.
i think dismissing out of hand is very short sighted. I'll be looking forward to the day BT is on par with other systems, just hope I live long enough to see it happen.
Dave
carsntrains posted:Fun to watch folks that are 100% invested in one technology comment on a competing technology! 😁
Fun to see someone that clearly hasn't actually tried BT try to diss comments about it's shortcomings.
BOB WALKER posted:What an interesting and invigorating discussion! I believe I have more experience with bluetooth train control than anyone so far. Over the past two years, I converted twelve engines to BT, 10 diesels and two steamers, powered by all three modes: track AC, track DC and battery. I used the BlueRailTrains drop in board. I am not advocating BT control above all others. My layout has conventional, TMCC and LC+ as well as BT and each has its pluses and minuses. But for the record, here is my operating experience with BT: When properly installed, BT control is flawless. Over the two year period, I have demonstrated these engines at various club meets. I found the reliable operating range to be over 100 feet. BT control uses an on-screen app, which may not be to everyone's liking. Where this can be a big plus is when you are running many engines simultaneously and can see several throttles at the same time on your screen. I also found the ability to customize the PWM waveform delivered to the motors to be helpful, but that feature is not exclusive to BlueRail. Again, I run all four layout operating modes, but felt I should lay out the purely technical assessment of bluetooth. When properly implemented, it works very well.
Ive read about the blue rail and wondered why Lionel didn't buy into their technology! I see they use a stronger signal, that Lionel doesn't have the license/FCC approval to use yet. Demand for the BlueRail must be very high because they were sold out and expecting an expanded board last time I checked on them.
Jim
gunrunnerjohn posted:carsntrains posted:Fun to watch folks that are 100% invested in one technology comment on a competing technology! 😁
Fun to see someone that clearly hasn't actually tried BT try to diss comments about it's shortcomings.
That would be funny! Can you point this person out?? : )
Jim
I think we'd all benefit by supporting one universal control system with interchangable components and standards, which I believe is DCC. I have read about the WiFi phne decoders and just ask why? I guess there is some novalty or even preference for using a phone, but the decoders and system did not have nearly all the features available for DCC and I dislike small, unidentified buttons. Am I missing something?
astarr posted:I think we'd all benefit by supporting one universal control system with interchangable components and standards, which I believe is DCC. I have read about the WiFi phne decoders and just ask why? I guess there is some novalty or even preference for using a phone, but the decoders and system did not have nearly all the features available for DCC and I dislike small, unidentified buttons. Am I missing something?
Im a bit confused by small unidentified buttons? Is that on DCC controllers? I remember years ago it was said that all the auto manufacturers were going to be forced to use a universal electronics system in all vehicles produced in the US. Never happened. Heck they cant even make all wheels that same lol
Jim
BOB WALKER posted:Neglected to mention that I worked out a simple procedure for connecting two IoS devices at the same time to two engines with individual control for each engine.
So you developed a hack that works on apple devices that somehow circumvents the one to many control relationship that Bluetooth principally operates on. Did you get this to work with Lionel Bluetooth products & apps? How long before Apple releases a security update and breaks your hack? Does it work on android devices?
Looking at BlueRails website, It doesn't look like they make much the really handles more than 1.5 amps of current. Not sure how I'm going get that to incorporate in some of my consists that pull many cars and the engine is pulling down about 2 to 3 amps continuously with the smoke off.
There is one comment left for an mth engine stating that the board goes into shutdown if the engine is started to slow, you have to start fast and then slow down? To me it seems like BlueRail was built to run smaller gauges and not really capable to handle high current loads with all the bells, whistles and smoke that current offerings from the major O scale manufactures.
Again, I'm not sure that another control system is what O scale needs right now or ever.
carsntrains posted:I remember years ago it was said that all the auto manufacturers were going to be forced to use a universal electronics system in all vehicles produced in the US. Never happened. Heck they cant even make all wheels that same lol
Jim
Yes this did happen, it's called OBD-II (ON BOARD DIAGNOSTICS II). All cars made 1996 and newer have an OBD-II port mounted within 36 inches of the steering wheel. This connector is the same on all cars. This allows your to purchase an OBD-II diagnostic tool that will work on any make or model 1996 or newer.
H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:I remember years ago it was said that all the auto manufacturers were going to be forced to use a universal electronics system in all vehicles produced in the US. Never happened. Heck they cant even make all wheels that same lol
Jim
Yes this did happen, it's called OBD-II (ON BOARD DIAGNOSTICS II). All cars made 1996 and newer have an OBD-II port mounted within 36 inches of the steering wheel. This connector is the same on all cars. This allows your to purchase an OBD-II diagnostic tool that will work on any make or model 1996 or newer.
Im aware of the diagnostic port. So I can take the ECU out of my F150 and put it in a 1500 Chevrolet? No. And that was the said purpose. My brother has been doing computer diagnostics for many many many years. I even have the units to read the trouble codes through the "doghouse".
Now are we going to have the government step in and force model train makers to build a system that works with one another. When the companies are trying to distinguish themselves as better than or different?
Jim
carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:I remember years ago it was said that all the auto manufacturers were going to be forced to use a universal electronics system in all vehicles produced in the US. Never happened. Heck they cant even make all wheels that same lol
Jim
Yes this did happen, it's called OBD-II (ON BOARD DIAGNOSTICS II). All cars made 1996 and newer have an OBD-II port mounted within 36 inches of the steering wheel. This connector is the same on all cars. This allows your to purchase an OBD-II diagnostic tool that will work on any make or model 1996 or newer.
Im aware of the diagnostic port. So I can take the ECU out of my F150 and put it in a 1500 Chevrolet? No. And that was the said purpose. My brother has been doing computer diagnostics for many many many years. I even have the units to read the trouble codes through the "doghouse".
Now are we going to have the government step in and force model train makers to build a system that works with one another. When the companies are trying to distinguish themselves as better than or different?
Jim
Jim that's not purpose behind obd-II. The goal was so that car repair shops and consumers didn't have to buy all of these specialized and extremely expensive diagnostic tools for each brand, and in some case for specific models. The consumer grade OBD-II readers give you the most basic troubleshooting codes that are fairly universal between manufactures. ALL ECU's need to provide this basic information in a universal format to troubleshoot drivetrain problems.
The hobby train market is way to small and insignificant for the Government to care for how we run them, I don't think that was ever suggested by anyone but you. However when a group of people got together and formed the DCC control standard for everyone to use an include into their products, that was done independently and available for all train manufacturers to incorporate at their will. Let's get this step done first, then you can choose whether you want to use Bluetooth, WiFi, wired controllers, or telepathy to run your DCC controlled trains.
H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:I remember years ago it was said that all the auto manufacturers were going to be forced to use a universal electronics system in all vehicles produced in the US. Never happened. Heck they cant even make all wheels that same lol
Jim
Yes this did happen, it's called OBD-II (ON BOARD DIAGNOSTICS II). All cars made 1996 and newer have an OBD-II port mounted within 36 inches of the steering wheel. This connector is the same on all cars. This allows your to purchase an OBD-II diagnostic tool that will work on any make or model 1996 or newer.
Im aware of the diagnostic port. So I can take the ECU out of my F150 and put it in a 1500 Chevrolet? No. And that was the said purpose. My brother has been doing computer diagnostics for many many many years. I even have the units to read the trouble codes through the "doghouse".
Now are we going to have the government step in and force model train makers to build a system that works with one another. When the companies are trying to distinguish themselves as better than or different?
Jim
Jim that's not purpose behind obd-II. The goal was so that car repair shops and consumers didn't have to buy all of these specialized and extremely expensive diagnostic tools for each brand, and in some case for specific models. The consumer grade OBD-II readers give you the most basic troubleshooting codes that are fairly universal between manufactures. ALL ECU's need to provide this basic information in a universal format to troubleshoot drivetrain problems.
The hobby train market is way to small and insignificant for the Government to care for how we run them, I don't think that was ever suggested by anyone but you. However when a group of people got together and formed the DCC control standard for everyone to use an include into their products, that was done independently and available for all train manufacturers to incorporate at their will. Let's get this step done first, then you can choose whether you want to use Bluetooth, WiFi, wired controllers, or telepathy to run your DCC controlled trains.
Maybe not the intent of OBD-II... But the intent of the folks that pushed other legislation that was squashed.
I dont think you, me, or anyone else involved here has the right or the ability to tell any company what to do or use. Radio control, bluetooth, and the LC product line itself has done wonders for Lionel! It is the breadwinner for them! Says Lionel! Why would they want to drop the products that are making them money? I love it! No controllers to buy (except for the LC+2.0, which uses the universal remote). No decoder to buy. No signal coming through the track!
The sticky point for the manufacturer that is making money off of the current systems they sell. Lionel is doing their best dealing with keeping the old school folks happy while trying to develop new technology for model trains. Then keeping the TMCC/Legacy folks happy at the same time.
Just my view of what I see. What I see and hear the people at Lionel saying. And what products I see coming our way. The buzz is all around LC+2.0 and the entire LC line.
Jim
Jim, I agree if they are making money, that's great. In fact with LC+2 coming out with TMCC built in, I'm sure they have now picked up a few more consumers.
I 'm planning my purchases and some of the LC+2 engines have my eye. But not because of Bluetooth, the LC App or the the universal remote. In fact, if Lionel would offer the option to remove the Bluetooth and save me $10 on the cost of the engine I'd do it in a heart beat. Bluetooth is is a worthless feature for me due to its shortcomings that haven't been addressed. The TMCC feature addition is the only driving force that even makes me consider the new LC+2.
I'll control them and the rest of my layout with the MTH DCS remote or App using WiFi, both at the same time if I choose to and have other stationary control points (tablets) setup to allow other operators, or layout control access to occurs simultaneously. These are things that Bluetooth and their associated apps can't do as of yet.
I would like to see someone from Lionel, like Ryan Kunkle, chime in here regarding the range of their Bluetooth products, and get the official line about its limitations, if any. This will put an end to speculation and anecdotal accounts of signal loss. Also I would love to see Dave Rees from BlueRail Trains talk about their first release. The Bluetooth bashing hurts this hobby and the companies trying to introduce a new product/control system. Remember, these posts here on OGR come up in internet searches and can discourage consumers/hobbyists from making a purchase.
Well Joe here are some facts we can get behind:
Lionel's filing with the FCC for the Universal remote indicates that the universal remote has a maximum power output of 1mW. That makes it a class 3 device. You may get more range than that but it's not guaranteed. Most smart phones and tablets have Class 2 power output.
Beings that the Universal remote is a class three device, it would make sense that the locomotives are also class three devices.
If you are interested, here is a link to Lionel's FCC filing for the Universal remote (Functional description of the universal remote). Below is an excerpt from that document which indicates the 1mw power rating:
My experience with the universal remote has been mostly reliable to 20 feet on layouts with a few tunnels and scenery obstructions. I have had some problems on larger layouts with more obstructions.
Class 3 devices have a range that are less than 10 meters. Basically it works in a range of 33 feet or less. I don't think my 20 feet is out spec for the normal operating range considering the environment it is operating in. I suspect that 33 feet can be achieved in ideal operating conditions which most of us won't have.
If somebody has said something that is not correct, then please chime in. But also on the same token, lets not sell Bluetooth as a miracle technology either.
H1000 posted:Well Joe here are some facts we can get behind:
Lionel's filing with the FCC for the Universal remote indicates that the universal remote has a maximum power output of 1mW. That makes it a class 3 device. You may get more range than that but it's not guaranteed. Most smart phones and tablets have Class 2 power output.
Beings that the Universal remote is a class three device, it would make sense that the locomotives are also class three devices.
If you are interested, here is a link to Lionel's FCC filing for the Universal remote (Functional description of the universal remote). Below is an excerpt from that document which indicates the 1mw power rating:
My experience with the universal remote has been mostly reliable to 20 feet on layouts with a few tunnels and scenery obstructions. I have had some problems on larger layouts with more obstructions.
Class 3 devices have a range that are less than 10 meters. Basically it works in a range of 33 feet or less. I don't think my 20 feet is out spec for the normal operating range considering the environment it is operating in. I suspect that 33 feet can be achieved in ideal operating conditions which most of us won't have.
If somebody has said something that is not correct, then please chime in. But also on the same token, lets not sell Bluetooth as a miracle technology either.
RIGHT ON! 33 feet is about it or even a stretch! The truth is the majority of us train folks dont have a 66 foot long layout! Or even a 44 foot long layout! AND we can hope for a step up in the outputs and receivers !!! Mine works great on my 17x11. Blue tooth via tablet and universal remote. Although I only have one BT engine. Ive tried it and I like it! I also enjoy the adjustments in volume and pitch that the BT app has. Momentum also! I suggest watching Eric's Trains last video on the Santa Fe set too! You can see all of this in action!
I must say that app is super cool on a Fire HD10! HUGE! And if you have an Amazon tablet I hope you have a tech guy like I do to get around the block they put on Google Play and the apps in it. Still cant play Pokemon because it doesn't have GPS.
I still prefer the universal remote so I can run 3 engines at once.
Jim
The previously mentioned dual BT simultaneous connected smart devices is not a hack of the IoS software. It is a straight forward step by step protocol which results in two devices communicating separately and individually to two engines at the same time.
I have several locos with Bluerail boards and they have much greater range than LC+. We setup at quite a few shows every year (a few where we are the only model RR) and I have been testing the range in those environments.
Brendan
For one thing, Bluetooth is a universal standard, and I would expect the firmware and hardware to be dirt cheap for that reason. Lots of folks who complain about the proprietary nature TMCC/Legacy and, in particular DCS would I think like to have a universal standard, even if can be operated only by smart devices (and the Lionel universal remote). But I'm sure MTH could easily design a similar remote if they wanted to, at least in terms of Bluetooth capability. I don't see the downside, and I'm guessing the $10 guess as to cost may be on the money (pun intended). If Lionel is smart they might consider licensing their solution to Atlas and 3rd Rail, just as they licensed TMCC to them. One way to promote the common approach. Doesn't make Legacy or LionChief obsolete for those who want to continue to use those or TMCC, which are still part of the line.
Landsteiner posted:For one thing, Bluetooth is a universal standard,.
BLUETOOTH IS A COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL NOT A UNIVERSAL STANDARD NOR A CONTROL SYSTEM FOR TRAINS.
Adding Bluetooth to an engine doesn't make universally compatible. Notice how we can't use the LC app to run BlueRail engines and vice versa?
"Adding Bluetooth to an engine doesn't make universally compatible."
It could if Lionel wanted to share its approach as they've done for TMCC and Legacy. Bluetooth is readily licensed, and I doubt that anyone reverse engineering the Bluetooth approach in Lionel locos would have legal liability. Much like DCC, which is also a communication protocol. Everyone's implementation and hardware is somewhat different but the transmission protocol is a common one. Bluetooth could be the same, ultimately.
Compared with DCS, about which MTH has been litigious (in at least in terms of threats), anyone could choose to adopt Bluetooth as their communication protocol.
In any case, BlueRail isn't exactly a major player in this arena.
On the other hand, it will be interesting to see if Atlas, 3rd Rail, or even MTH considers Bluetooth something worth exploring as a common protocol, along with Lionel. Cheap and widely used, proven platform. More reliable, for example, in my experience than Wi-Fi. And much, much less expensive to implement based upon current costs.
If adopted in same manner, it would be the closest thing to a potential standard since Lionel licensed TMCC to Atlas, K-Line, Weaver and 3rd Rail 20 years ago. Probably won't happen, but worth contemplating. Not as the only system, but one present in all locos.
Why do you need to reverse engineer Bluetooth? It's a published standard for wireless communications it's IEEE designation is 802.15. You can look it up and they'll tell anything you want to know. All that Bluetooth does is provide a wireless conduit for control system to communicate between the controller and devices. In short, it delivers the 1's and 0's.
DCC is open standard that available for anyone to use freely without any license from anyone. Lionel could use it today if they wanted to, it's been around as long as TMCC. But DCC doesn't address the delivery system from the controller to engine. At one time this was done via wired controllers but now all sorts of wireless communications standards exist to used, WiFi, Bluetooth, and other licensed RF systems. DCS isn't a wireless communication system, they use an off the shelf 900MHz transceiver to establish a wireless link between the Remote and the TIU. That has nothing to do with the DCS control system. Others have already hacked & released the DCS Communications and you can control a TIU without a remote using software on a computer, wired or wireless.
While everyone is free to consider Bluetooth, it has it's shortcomings that have yet to addressed. It wasn't too long that we heard about how TMCC was old technology and now it's being integrated into the newest LC+2 engines. If Bluetooth was the technology to rule everything then why start including a 20+ year old TMCC with current premium LC offerings.
I think Bluetooth might have a place or purpose within 3 rail O-gauge but presently believe BT would best be served in action/sound cars and accessories not locomotives. I'd rather see 3-Rail O-gauge accept the DCC standardization. DCC standardization would allow us to use one system across all scales. Locomotive DCC customization settings appear much easier today than years past. However, the existing proprietary nature of both Lionel and MTH likely will prevent DCC from making material inroads unless there is a major shift in either those companies or the majority of their customers or their respective tech ends up reaching its component dead-end obsolence.
Keystone posted:I think Bluetooth might have a place or purpose within 3 rail O-gauge but presently believe BT would best be served in action/sound cars and accessories not locomotives. I'd rather see 3-Rail O-gauge accept the DCC standardization. DCC standardization would allow us to use one system across all scales. Locomotive DCC customization settings appear much easier today than years past. However, the existing proprietary nature of both Lionel and MTH likely will prevent DCC from making material inroads unless there is a major shift in either those companies or the majority of their customers or their respective tech ends up reaching its component dead-end obsolence.
I agree, but do keep in mind that MTH has integrated DCC with all locomotives since the introduction of PS3 about 7 or 8 years ago.
BT in our trains has to offer more range in order to be useful. Nothing worse than having a remote control communications channel that works half the time. I keep hearing that Lionel used a low power and short range standard, but guess what, that's what we're stuck with! Until the communication is reliable for more than 10-15 feet, and doesn't blank out as soon as the locomotive enters a tunnel or goes around a layout obstruction, it's pretty worthless for anything more than a loop around the Christmas Tree!
gunrunnerjohn posted:BT in our trains has to offer more range in order to be useful. Nothing worse than having a remote control communications channel that works half the time. I keep hearing that Lionel used a low power and short range standard, but guess what, that's what we're stuck with! Until the communication is reliable for more than 10-15 feet, and doesn't blank out as soon as the locomotive enters a tunnel or goes around a layout obstruction, it's pretty worthless for anything more than a loop around the Christmas Tree!
GRJ how true! Good news is I watched Eric Seagle do a review on the LC Santa Fe starter set. He used the controller and the LC/BT app. I made sure to ask him about the app on his FB page so everyone could see it. He said the app worked fine all around his layout and had no problems. I have to imagine his layout is bigger than 10 or 15 feet. And again it works fine on my 17x11 layout. Ive been meaning to do a test of mine for distance. But I'd have to leave the room the trains are in to get any further away.
OH and I got some nice Lionel rolling stock from your friends at Henning's Trains!
Jim
That's not a universal experience. We tried two of the BT equipped locomotives with a variety of smart phones at the club, and reliable operation was simply not happening! More than around 15 feet and you'd lose connection and have to start over. I thought initially it was just my H10, but apparently it's not just me or my phone.
gunrunnerjohn posted:That's not a universal experience. We tried two of the BT equipped locomotives with a variety of smart phones at the club, and reliable operation was simply not happening! More than around 15 feet and you'd lose connection and have to start over. I thought initially it was just my H10, but apparently it's not just me or my phone.
Did anybody try using a universal remote when the BT app failed?? Another problem I see with the app is if the engine looses power for a split second it disconnects with the app. Does not do that with the supplied remote or the universal remote. Plenty of things that need to be made better. For sure.
Jim
I did not try the universal remote, after all, we were specifically interested in how the BT worked with a smart phone as that's the method that's supposed to allow us to have a remote anytime we need one. 
carsntrains posted:"RIGHT ON! 33 feet is about it or even a stretch! The truth is the majority of us train folks dont have a 66 foot long layout! Or even a 44 foot long layout! AND we can hope for a step up in the outputs and receivers !!! Mine works great on my 17x11. Blue tooth via tablet and universal remote. Although I only have one BT engine. Ive tried it and I like it! I also enjoy the adjustments in volume and pitch that the BT app has. Momentum also! I suggest watching Eric's Trains last video on the Santa Fe set too! You can see all of this in action!
I still prefer the universal remote so I can run 3 engines at once.
Jim
Have been to an around the room 31 X 31 layout with a master closet in the center and the LC remote looses contact with the engine as it travels around the layout if you are out of sight, especially if located in one of the corners. (They were running the new Polar Express if that makes any difference.)
For me running it with TMCC rather than the provided remote would have made it more fun. Everyone thought the "Polar Express, All Aboard, Tickets" announcement were cool (the "I'm the King Of The North Pole" which seems to repeat over, and over, and over, not so much " How about a way to select the announcement you desire regardless of control device?
gunrunnerjohn posted:I did not try the universal remote, after all, we were specifically interested in how the BT worked with a smart phone as that's the method that's supposed to allow us to have a remote anytime we need one.
HMMM so yall weren't interested in seeing if either option would work. Only the app. I understand.
Bobby D interesting story. And yes 31x31 with an obstruction in the middle would be tough for it. I take it you can choose what crew talk is played with TMCC.. ??
And to a previous question. Why did Lionel put TMCC ability in the LC+2.0? They are trying to move forward with new to them technology without offending the folks using their aging technology. Its been discussed on notch 6 and or Lionel on Facebook.
It will be interesting to see what happens. I was sure Lionel was going to further their DC power lineup this year .. But they didn't .. But I do find the adjustable DC power pack that comes with the PE trolley interesting. I wonder how many watts it is?
I'd say its a big job trying to keep the conventional folks and the TMCC/Legacy folks happy while they develop the technology to replace it.
Jim
carsntrains posted:gunrunnerjohn posted:I did not try the universal remote, after all, we were specifically interested in how the BT worked with a smart phone as that's the method that's supposed to allow us to have a remote anytime we need one.
HMMM so yall weren't interested in seeing if either option would work. Only the app. I understand.
I was interested in seeing if the BT from various devices had similar issues to mine with a single BT engine and phone. But yes, since the major sales pitch with BT is you can "run it with any smartphone", we wanted to test that capability. It probably also figured into the testing that nobody had a Universal Remote with them that night.
And to a previous question. Why did Lionel put TMCC ability in the LC+2.0? They are trying to move forward with new to them technology without offending the folks using their aging technology. Its been discussed on notch 6 and or Lionel on Facebook.
Just maybe it's also technology that has stood the test of time and works very well.
It will be interesting to see what happens. I was sure Lionel was going to further their DC power lineup this year .. But they didn't .. But I do find the adjustable DC power pack that comes with the PE trolley interesting. I wonder how many watts it is?
What's so great about DC power that we'd be dying to have it power our trains?
I'd say its a big job trying to keep the conventional folks and the TMCC/Legacy folks happy while they develop the technology to replace it.
I predict I'll be on the other side of the grass before Lionel replaces Legacy with BT.
FYI, DCC uses AC track power not DC. So like GRJ says, not sure the motivation to move to DC.
gunrunnerjohn posted:carsntrains posted:I was sure Lionel was going to further their DC power lineup this year .. But they didn't .. But I do find the adjustable DC power pack that comes with the PE trolley interesting. I wonder how many watts it is?
What's so great about DC power that we'd be dying to have it power our trains?
@gunrunnerjohn - I would suggest we stop feeding the trolls, especially about their DC hangup
Uh all modern can motored locomotives run on DC. The boards in the locomotive turn AC current into DC via a rectifier on the board, so your locomotives are running on DC anyway. Plus AC has better distance transmission properties than DC, hence why it's used in your house.
Lou1985 posted:Uh all modern can motored locomotives run on DC. The boards in the locomotive turn AC current into DC via a rectifier on the board, so your locomotives are running on DC anyway. Plus AC has better distance transmission properties than DC, hence why it's used in your house.
Uh, you better test that theory before you espouse it here. The TMCC locomotives, including can motored locomotives, use triacs to drive the motors, if you feed them DC, you'll have a major problem. Triacs are also used on the R2LC and even the Legacy R4LC to control lights, couplers, and smoke. Feed them DC, and all that stuff stops working.
Bottom line is none of those will run on DC.
Lou1985 posted:Uh all modern can motored locomotives run on DC. The boards in the locomotive turn AC current into DC via a rectifier on the board, so your locomotives are running on DC anyway. Plus AC has better distance transmission properties than DC, hence why it's used in your house.
Yes, many modern locomotives make use of can motors operated on rectified DC, but a quick scour over the 2019 Big Book and its 3 rail O Gauge offerings has many examples where DC on the Rails/Accessory Bus isn't ideal along with giving up command control in it entirety and has all be discussed here:
https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...71#83227312740675371
Bottom line, not everything in the latest catalog is DC compatible or is fully functional in a 100% Lionel DC environment, but will run on a 100% Lionel AC environment with all features enabled.
gunrunnerjohn posted:Lou1985 posted:Uh all modern can motored locomotives run on DC. The boards in the locomotive turn AC current into DC via a rectifier on the board, so your locomotives are running on DC anyway. Plus AC has better distance transmission properties than DC, hence why it's used in your house.
Uh, you better test that theory before you espouse it here. The TMCC locomotives, including can motored locomotives, use triacs to drive the motors, if you feed them DC, you'll have a major problem. Triacs are also used on the R2LC and even the Legacy R4LC to control lights, couplers, and smoke. Feed them DC, and all that stuff stops working.
Bottom line is none of those will run on DC.
I said the motors run on DC that is rectified by the boards from AC track voltage. So the locomotive is running on DC 😁.
What's the point of have DC track voltage if the locomotives are already running on DC, provided by the board?
bmoran4 posted:Lou1985 posted:Uh all modern can motored locomotives run on DC. The boards in the locomotive turn AC current into DC via a rectifier on the board, so your locomotives are running on DC anyway. Plus AC has better distance transmission properties than DC, hence why it's used in your house.
Yes, many modern locomotives make use of can motors operated on rectified DC, but a quick scour over the 2019 Big Book and its 3 rail O Gauge offerings has many examples where DC on the Rails/Accessory Bus isn't ideal along with giving up command control in it entirety and has all be discussed here:
https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...71#83227312740675371
Bottom line, not everything in the latest catalog is DC compatible or is fully functional in a 100% Lionel DC environment, but will run on a 100% Lionel AC environment with all features enabled.
Since the motors are already operating on DC what's the point of switching track power to DC?
Lou1985 posted:I said the motors run on DC that is rectified by the boards from AC track voltage. So the locomotive is running on DC 😁.
No, you said the locomotive runs on DC. If I rip out all the electronics and run the motors on track DC, I think I can safely say I've just converted it from a modern locomotive to a soundless conventional only runner.
Lou1985 posted:What's the point of have DC track voltage if the locomotives are already running on DC, provided by the board?
No reason at all to have DC track voltage, that's why I run with AC. 
gunrunnerjohn posted:Lou1985 posted:I said the motors run on DC that is rectified by the boards from AC track voltage. So the locomotive is running on DC 😁.
No, you said the locomotive runs on DC. If I rip out all the electronics and run the motors on track DC, I think I can safely say I've just converted it from a modern locomotive to a soundless conventional only runner.
Lou1985 posted:What's the point of have DC track voltage if the locomotives are already running on DC, provided by the board?No reason at all to have DC track voltage, that's why I run with AC.
Can motored locomotives do technically run on DC, rectified by the board from AC. Feed one of the can motors straight AC track voltage, it won't go very far, but the motors will run great on DC voltage supplied by the board (which converts AC voltage to DC to operate the motors). But now we're both getting pedantic about this .
The whole point I was making is that track DC voltage is unnecessary. The boards in the locomotives already turn AC track voltage into DC current to run the locomotive's motors. Converting everything to DC track power isn't going to change locomotive performance one bit, since the motors are already operating on DC current.
Well, I'm confused! You sure seemed to be arguing for DC on the rails, now you're switching horses and going to AC? In that case, we're in agreement, job done.
gunrunnerjohn posted:No, you said the locomotive runs on DC. If I rip out all the electronics and run the motors on track DC, I think I can safely say I've just converted it from a modern locomotive to a soundless conventional only runner.
NOW, we're making progress!
palallin posted:gunrunnerjohn posted:No, you said the locomotive runs on DC. If I rip out all the electronics and run the motors on track DC, I think I can safely say I've just converted it from a modern locomotive to a soundless conventional only runner.
NOW, we're making progress!
Whatever floats your boat.
gunrunnerjohn posted:Well, I'm confused! You sure seemed to be arguing for DC on the rails, now you're switching horses and going to AC? In that case, we're in agreement, job done.
I think our (pardon the pun) signals got crossed . We were both arguing the whole time that DC track power made no sense.
Dave,
I like the idea of direct communication from the remote to engine. Simpler than having base stations.
Part of bluetooth is the low level communication prototcol. But also they do publish higher level application specs as well. Bluetooth Audio and Bluetooth Phone are ones folks are probably already familiar with. What would be great is a standard Bluetooth Train Control protocol like those above.
-Bill
Bill, having a much longer range version of BT would be a great idea, it's kind of a bummer they decided to go with the wimpy standard that has no range!
bmoran4 posted:gunrunnerjohn posted:carsntrains posted:I was sure Lionel was going to further their DC power lineup this year .. But they didn't .. But I do find the adjustable DC power pack that comes with the PE trolley interesting. I wonder how many watts it is?
What's so great about DC power that we'd be dying to have it power our trains?
@gunrunnerjohn - I would suggest we stop feeding the trolls, especially about their DC hangup
Bmoran you better quit feeding Lionel then! They are the ones that told me I could double if not triple the life of my LC, LC+, and soon to own LC+2.0 engines by running them on DC. But hey what would Lionel know about the engines they build and service.
I called Lionel to buy a ZW-L and they told me not to buy it. To instead invest in a good DC power source. At the time they didn't have any 72w units in stock. But said I may want a larger unit than the 72w units when they restock them. My local Lionel repair facility echoed that sentiment. Stating the CAPACITOR and BRIDGE RECTIFIER were the #1 and #2 reason for failure.
I think the rectifier should be removed and run them 100% on DC. But they say the rectifier does nothing and the capacitor has little work to do when running on DC. Again what would Lionel and a Lionel service center know about Lionel trains? : )
Like I should have said to start with. IF I had invested the time and energy into TMCC/Legacy and then figured out it was obsolete I would be upset too! Just like the steam guys were when diesels came about. And the phone book folks felt when Google made them obsolete. Remember BT in model trains is in its infancy. DCC in general has been around in analog form since the 40's. (says google) lol
Jim
carsntrains posted:Bmoran you better quit feeding Lionel then! They are the ones that told me I could double if not triple the life of my LC, LC+, and soon to own LC+2.0 engines by running them on DC. But hey what would Lionel know about the engines they build and service.
Who EXACTLY told you this? I always love the <xyz> told me "bla bla bla". Was this an official statement of Lionel's position on the topic, or some guy that just likes DC stated his opinion?
Insert appropriate company name for <xyz>
I called Lionel to buy a ZW-L and they told me not to buy it. To instead invest in a good DC power source. At the time they didn't have any 72w units in stock. But said I may want a larger unit than the 72w units when they restock them.
I will venture a guess if management finds out who is telling callers not to buy their flagship expensive transformer, they'll be looking for a new job! Who exactly is making such recommendations, this certainly rings like a fairy tale!
My local Lionel repair facility echoed that sentiment. Stating the CAPACITOR and BRIDGE RECTIFIER were the #1 and #2 reason for failure.
In all the locomotives I've serviced, and that's been a bunch, I haven't seen failures of either of those components represented significantly more than many other components.
I think the rectifier should be removed and run them 100% on DC. But they say the rectifier does nothing and the capacitor has little work to do when running on DC. Again what would Lionel and a Lionel service center know about Lionel trains? : )
Well, the rectifier is passing the same amount of current when running on DC as it is running on AC, so that statement is clearly false. In truth, given most have a full-wave rectifier, parts of the bridge are actually carrying twice the average current they would running AC as half the bridge isn't being used at all. As for what the service guy might know about the electronics, that varies widely. I spent my life designing and building electronics, including high reliability products, I think I likely know a bit more than the average guy servicing Lionel trains about component reliability and MTBF.
Like I should have said to start with. IF I had invested the time and energy into TMCC/Legacy and then figured out it was obsolete I would be upset too! Just like the steam guys were when diesels came about. And the phone book folks felt when Google made them obsolete. Remember BT in model trains is in its infancy. DCC in general has been around in analog form since the 40's. (says google) lol
That's actually pretty laughable. The successor has to be better than the previous product in order for me to consider the first obsolete. I've seen zero evidence that running on DC is going to be a better user experience, even if my "obsolete" and magnificient Legacy steamers are, in your mind, obsolete.
One of the key points for Lionel pushing for DC is it's cheaper to make a DC supply than an AC supply. Leaving out the AC power supply components also makes the devices cheaper, something that I'm sure the bean counters are looking at for future products when they get all the sheep to adopt DC track power.
Note that all the DC compatible products are the low end products with limited feature sets, and not the high end Legacy products.
Over and out.
Company name. Lionel LLC. I will not discuss the MULTIPLE folks there that I have discussed this with. But they are more than popular people. They say the rectifier does nothing when it is passing DC. And the capacitor is doing nearly nothing when passing DC.
Hey its alright GNJ. I know what they have told me in numerous conversations. If you choose not to believe me fine. We all have that right. And yes it is the lower end products .. You know.. The ones that they actually make money on? And like I said. The LC technology is in its infancy at Lionel. If you would bother yourself with watching some notch 6 and Lionel FB live events you may see what I'm talking about. The successor will be better than TMCC and DCC. They BT tech grew by leaps and bounds in LC+2.0.
Hope yall have and great day and good luck with your layout John. Maybe ask Mike Reagan about that stuff.
I enjoy my lower end products.
Jim
It's important to understand that the fundamental technical difference between TMCC/Legacy and any of the direct controller to loco systems which includes LC, bluetooth, 915MHZ and 2.4GHZ is that TMCC uses a two step track signal delivery system with the second leg operating at a very low frequency. By design and choice, you can provide any amount of operational features in any of the direct systems. An obvious advantage for the direct systems is the freedom from track related issues, which have been repeatedly reported. An obvious thought is why would the largest OGauge manufacturer invest heavily in LC and bluetooth if it didn't see this as the future?
BOB WALKER posted:An obvious thought is why would the largest OGauge manufacturer invest heavily in LC and bluetooth if it didn't see this as the future?
And why would they add the "notoriously problematic" TMCC system to the "already perfect" LC and Bluetooth system?
H1000 posted:BOB WALKER posted:An obvious thought is why would the largest OGauge manufacturer invest heavily in LC and bluetooth if it didn't see this as the future?
And why would they add the "notoriously problematic" TMCC system to the "already perfect" LC and Bluetooth system?
To try to keep you TMCC guys from crying. ?? And that is a direct quote from a recent podcast. I will not state the name of the funny guy that said it. LOL I will salute Lionel for trying to keep everyone happy during this transition!
And one good reason to run LC, LC+, and LC+2.0 on DC … 49.99... That is what a 72w power pack runs. And I can get a 250w unit that is not Lionel for...……… 50 bucks lol No TIU, No AIU, no WIU, No AEIOU, no legacy cab 1, or cab 2. no 180w bricks. I just ran my lower level trains on my useless DC and smiled. Actually I laughed out loud! : ) And I like to kick this in also. BTO
Jim : )
carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:BOB WALKER posted:An obvious thought is why would the largest OGauge manufacturer invest heavily in LC and bluetooth if it didn't see this as the future?
And why would they add the "notoriously problematic" TMCC system to the "already perfect" LC and Bluetooth system?
To try to keep you TMCC guys from crying. ?? And that is a direct quote from a recent podcast. I will not state the name of the funny guy that said it. LOL I will salute Lionel for trying to keep everyone happy during this transition!
We asked for this on day 1 of LC and finally after 6 years we get it. I think it was discussed earlier that the TMCC features dind't add much cost to the overall price, so why the wait.
I still haven't found anyway to operate my layout (switches & accessories) with a Bluetooth remote and/or app yet, when is that coming?
"I still haven't found anyway to operate my layout (switches & accessories) with a Bluetooth remote and/or app yet, when is that coming?"
Many consumers may not be concerned about this. What they are more likely to be concerned about is the cost of command control. To operate a Bluetooth equipped loco, you might need no additional expense if you have a remote included. Command control for no extra charge. Or perhaps 40 bucks for the three loco universal remote.
For a TMCC loco (and I have dozens), you need to spring for a 200-300 dollar Legacy base and remote. For a PS3 loco, you need at least the Explorer (figure about 125 dollars), or for Wi-Fi and more watts on anything larger than a loop or two, you are talking 450 dollars for a DCS and WIU.
For the typical consumer, perhaps those advantages are more important than whether you can control switches or accessories (which also could be Bluetooth equipped, of course, if the manufacturers chose to do so in the future). Lionel already sells TMCC/Legacy controllable switches and accessories, so adding Bluetooth would be inexpensive compared with adding TMCC or Legacy. R/C airplane, boat and car manufacturers are not using 1960s technology for radio frequency communication and data, so why should Lionel or MTH be doing so today? Wi-Fi is OK for many uses, but it is a bit quirky compared with my 2.4 GHz radio control equipment which is rock solid.
To me the attraction of Bluetooth (or LC/LC+) is the value for money, simplicity and reliability. TMCC was relatively simple and reliable, and I liked it, but this technology pairing (Bluetooth and LC) takes the command environment to another level of simplicity, value and modernity for the better. It has only begun to be exploited in toy trains.
Use tour phone to talk on not run you trains .The prices are outragus as it is do;nt keep putting on extra cost. Look and see how many kids are at train show hardly any.
So what we've learned so far is that Bluetooth works great for smaller operators that are not serious about layout control. (Doesn't matter because many consumers may not be concerned about this 
)
Current Bluetooth specs only allow a maximum of 7 simultaneous connections at one time (you can pair as many as you want, but only connect to 7 of the paired devices at one time).
Systems using Bluetooth control still have yet to overcome the Master / Slave operating relationship (apparently the BlueRail app is able to overcome this but no details were given as to how).
Even though we currently have two systems available that use Bluetooth (LC & BlueRail) their apps and engines are not compatible with one another.
Reported user experiences with Bluetooth range (at least when using the LC locomotives) is workable for 10 to 20 feet (possibly more without any scenery obstructions but according to specs its max is 33 feet in optimal conditions).
TMCC is now available on the newest LC offerings but no bridge device exists yet for the last six years of LC engines to allow operation of these older engines with a Legacy or TMCC system.
While Bluerail does have an app that can control more than one engine at a time, its system is not widely available in O gauge and only by removing existing electronics and installing a BlueRail board.
LC also has an app but it is limited to controlling one engine at a time. LC does have a universal remote available that controls up to three engines but it lacks any future expansion capabilities for more engines, additional controls, or layout control unless those are added using cryptic multiple button combinations that are not documented yet.
H1000 posted:So what we've learned so far is that Bluetooth works great for smaller operators that are not serious about layout control. (Doesn't matter because many consumers may not be concerned about this)
Current Bluetooth specs only allow a maximum of 7 simultaneous connections at one time (you can pair as many as you want, but only connect to 7 of the paired devices at one time).
Systems using Bluetooth control still have yet to overcome the Master / Slave operating relationship (apparently the BlueRail app is able to overcome this but no details were given as to how).
Even though we currently have two systems available that use Bluetooth (LC & BlueRail) their apps and engines are not compatible with one another.
Reported user experiences with Bluetooth range (at least when using the LC locomotives) is workable for 10 to 20 feet (possibly more without any scenery obstructions but according to specs its max is 33 feet in optimal conditions).
TMCC is now available on the newest LC offerings but no bridge device exists yet for the last six years of LC engines to allow operation of these older engines with a Legacy or TMCC system.
While Bluerail does have an app that can control more than one engine at a time, its system is not widely available in O gauge and only by removing existing electronics and installing a BlueRail board.
LC also has an app but it is limited to controlling one engine at a time. LC does have a universal remote available that controls up to three engines but it lacks any future expansion capabilities for more engines, additional controls, or layout control unless those are added using cryptic multiple button combinations that are not documented yet.
With Bluetooth 5.0, devices can use data transfer speeds of up to 2 Mbps, which is double what Bluetooth 4.2 supports. Devices can also communicate over distances of up to 800 feet (or 240 meters), which is four times the 200 feet (or 60 meters) allowed by Bluetooth 4.2. However, walls and other obstacles will weaken the signal, as they do with Wi-Fi. All we need it for Lionel to step it up! Although the FCC will limit them due to interference rules.
My Kindle Fire HD 10 uses 4.0. But our Samsung Galaxy 8 uses 5.0. I cant find any information on what Bluetooth the new LC+2.0 will use...
Looks like its a Bluetooth kind of world! In my train room I have Bluetooth trains, Bluetooth speakers, Bluetooth outlets, Bluetooth earbuds. And manual turnouts!!! LOL AHAHAHAHAHAH
Jim
With Bluetooth 5.0, devices can use data transfer speeds of up to 2 Mbps, which is double what Bluetooth 4.2 supports.
The data throughput is moot point, we're not transmitting nearly enough data to overload any Bluetooth connection from any version.
Devices can also communicate over distances of up to 800 feet (or 240 meters), which is four times the 200 feet (or 60 meters) allowed by Bluetooth 4.2. However, walls and other obstacles will weaken the signal, as they do with Wi-Fi.
This only applies if you deploy the proper power class of Bluetooth radio with a good 2.4 GHz antenna. I don't think anyone wants some goofy looking unidirectional mushroom antenna sticking out of the top of their engine. Unfortunately, Lionel is currently using Class 3 equipment which is rated for an absolute maximum distance of 33 feet (again with good antennas at both ends).
Consider this, Bluetooth 2.0 from 2004 had a maximum range of 328 feet when using Class 1 transceivers. This range was more than adequate compare to what is installed in the universal remote right now.
All we need it for Lionel to step it up! Although the FCC will limit them due to interference rules.
Lionel can do this if they want, the FCC really won't stop them from doing so.
Something to consider, Lionel is still shipping everything (even LC+2?) with Bluetooth 4 installed. So what you are indicating is that we are getting old technology from Lionel in products that haven't even been built yet?
My Kindle Fire HD 10 uses 4.0. But our Samsung Galaxy 8 uses 5.0. I cant find any information on what Bluetooth the new LC+2.0 will use...
I posted a thread a while ago about a new bluetooth module that Lionel filed with FCC: https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...luetooth-is-a-brewin
Perhaps this could be BT5 module, but the power output is still 1 mw and hence a class 3 device... same range as everything else.
carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:So what we've learned so far is that Bluetooth works great for smaller operators that are not serious about layout control. (Doesn't matter because many consumers may not be concerned about this)
Current Bluetooth specs only allow a maximum of 7 simultaneous connections at one time (you can pair as many as you want, but only connect to 7 of the paired devices at one time).
Systems using Bluetooth control still have yet to overcome the Master / Slave operating relationship (apparently the BlueRail app is able to overcome this but no details were given as to how).
Even though we currently have two systems available that use Bluetooth (LC & BlueRail) their apps and engines are not compatible with one another.
Reported user experiences with Bluetooth range (at least when using the LC locomotives) is workable for 10 to 20 feet (possibly more without any scenery obstructions but according to specs its max is 33 feet in optimal conditions).
TMCC is now available on the newest LC offerings but no bridge device exists yet for the last six years of LC engines to allow operation of these older engines with a Legacy or TMCC system.
While Bluerail does have an app that can control more than one engine at a time, its system is not widely available in O gauge and only by removing existing electronics and installing a BlueRail board.
LC also has an app but it is limited to controlling one engine at a time. LC does have a universal remote available that controls up to three engines but it lacks any future expansion capabilities for more engines, additional controls, or layout control unless those are added using cryptic multiple button combinations that are not documented yet.
With Bluetooth 5.0, devices can use data transfer speeds of up to 2 Mbps, which is double what Bluetooth 4.2 supports. Devices can also communicate over distances of up to 800 feet (or 240 meters), which is four times the 200 feet (or 60 meters) allowed by Bluetooth 4.2. However, walls and other obstacles will weaken the signal, as they do with Wi-Fi. All we need it for Lionel to step it up! Although the FCC will limit them due to interference rules.
My Kindle Fire HD 10 uses 4.0. But our Samsung Galaxy 8 uses 5.0. I cant find any information on what Bluetooth the new LC+2.0 will use...
Looks like its a Bluetooth kind of world! In my train room I have Bluetooth trains, Bluetooth speakers, Bluetooth outlets, Bluetooth earbuds. And manual turnouts!!! LOL AHAHAHAHAHAH
Jim
Wifi and bluetooth utilize a similar frequency range, so obstructions would affect them in the same way, except that the output power of most wifi devices are MUCH higher than that of most BT devices. (By a magnitude of 10x for devices to 1000x the power output in the case of routers) This is why my laptop is able to see wifi routers for a handful of my neighbors, despite many obstructions in between and the fact that they are hundreds of feet away from me. Even on a phone, the wifi power transmitted is in the range of .1 watts, but BT is in the range of .008 watts.
Also, with wifi, you are better able to utilize web based technology, instead of mobile app device dependent technology. Web based technology will work on any device.
MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:So what we've learned so far is that Bluetooth works great for smaller operators that are not serious about layout control. (Doesn't matter because many consumers may not be concerned about this)
Current Bluetooth specs only allow a maximum of 7 simultaneous connections at one time (you can pair as many as you want, but only connect to 7 of the paired devices at one time).
Systems using Bluetooth control still have yet to overcome the Master / Slave operating relationship (apparently the BlueRail app is able to overcome this but no details were given as to how).
Even though we currently have two systems available that use Bluetooth (LC & BlueRail) their apps and engines are not compatible with one another.
Reported user experiences with Bluetooth range (at least when using the LC locomotives) is workable for 10 to 20 feet (possibly more without any scenery obstructions but according to specs its max is 33 feet in optimal conditions).
TMCC is now available on the newest LC offerings but no bridge device exists yet for the last six years of LC engines to allow operation of these older engines with a Legacy or TMCC system.
While Bluerail does have an app that can control more than one engine at a time, its system is not widely available in O gauge and only by removing existing electronics and installing a BlueRail board.
LC also has an app but it is limited to controlling one engine at a time. LC does have a universal remote available that controls up to three engines but it lacks any future expansion capabilities for more engines, additional controls, or layout control unless those are added using cryptic multiple button combinations that are not documented yet.
With Bluetooth 5.0, devices can use data transfer speeds of up to 2 Mbps, which is double what Bluetooth 4.2 supports. Devices can also communicate over distances of up to 800 feet (or 240 meters), which is four times the 200 feet (or 60 meters) allowed by Bluetooth 4.2. However, walls and other obstacles will weaken the signal, as they do with Wi-Fi. All we need it for Lionel to step it up! Although the FCC will limit them due to interference rules.
My Kindle Fire HD 10 uses 4.0. But our Samsung Galaxy 8 uses 5.0. I cant find any information on what Bluetooth the new LC+2.0 will use...
Looks like its a Bluetooth kind of world! In my train room I have Bluetooth trains, Bluetooth speakers, Bluetooth outlets, Bluetooth earbuds. And manual turnouts!!! LOL AHAHAHAHAHAH
Jim
Wifi and bluetooth utilize a similar frequency range, so obstructions would affect them in the same way, except that the output power of most wifi devices are MUCH higher than that of most BT devices. (By a magnitude of 10x for devices to 1000x the power output in the case of routers) This is why my laptop is able to see wifi routers for a handful of my neighbors, despite many obstructions in between and the fact that they are hundreds of feet away from me. Even on a phone, the wifi power transmitted is in the range of .1 watts, but BT is in the range of .008 watts.
Also, with wifi, you are better able to utilize web based technology, instead of mobile app device dependent technology. Web based technology will work on any device.
Also you have to buy a WIU to use it with DCC. I dont know of another available system for model trains that uses WIFI.
H1000 yes if it is 4 it is old. I wonder what the Samsung Galaxy 9 has in it? I will look! 5 is getting older since the Galaxy 8 has been around a while. And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power? : ) I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
Jim
S9 has 5 also
carsntrains posted:Also you have to buy a WIU to use it with DCC. I dont know of another available system for model trains that uses WIFI.
H1000 yes if it is 4 it is old. I wonder what the Samsung Galaxy 9 has in it? I will look! 5 is getting older since the Galaxy 8 has been around a while. And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power? : ) I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
Jim
And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power?
The test results on the new module have already been published, they didn't add any power.
I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
For most part this is true, getting much older devices from the 1.1 and 1.2 days may not work, even some of the devices built in the 2.0 era have trouble connecting to newer 4 generation equipment.
So when Bluetooth evolves to version 9 or 10, will 4.x and 5.x device still work associating to those newer versions?... only time will tell.
WiFi has been around as long as Bluetooth and backwards compatible with everything according to the 802.11 standards. Last thanksgiving for kicks, I pulled out my first ever WiFi dongle that was introduced before the 802.11b standard was official. It was still able to connect to my new 802.11ac router.
H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:Also you have to buy a WIU to use it with DCC. I dont know of another available system for model trains that uses WIFI.
H1000 yes if it is 4 it is old. I wonder what the Samsung Galaxy 9 has in it? I will look! 5 is getting older since the Galaxy 8 has been around a while. And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power? : ) I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
Jim
And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power?
The test results on the new module have already been published, they didn't add any power.
I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
For most part this is true, getting much older devices from the 1.1 and 1.2 days may not work, even some of the devices built in the 2.0 era have trouble connecting to newer 4 generation equipment.
So when Bluetooth evolves to version 9 or 10, will 4.x and 5.x device still work associating to those newer versions?... only time will tell.
WiFi has been around as long as Bluetooth and backwards compatible with everything according to the 802.11 standards. Last thanksgiving for kicks, I pulled out my first ever WiFi dongle that was introduced before the 802.11b standard was official. It was still able to connect to my new 802.11ac router.
Do you know what BT the first engines/controllers had in them??
And what does the newest universal remote have in it?
Jim
Wifi Devices for operating Model Trains:
MTH WIU
MTH DCS Explorer
Lionel LCS Wifi Module
Digitrax Loconet Wifi Device
Wifi integration Through JMRI Software
MRC Wifi Module
Locofi
ESU Wifi DCC System
Piko Wifi DCC System
and the list goes on and on. Bluetooth is only used by 3 companies. Bachmann (HO only using Bluerail), Bluerail (which has zero offering for O gauge with smoke and sound as we all are used to), and Lionel (which offers no upgrade path)
carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:carsntrains posted:Also you have to buy a WIU to use it with DCC. I dont know of another available system for model trains that uses WIFI.
H1000 yes if it is 4 it is old. I wonder what the Samsung Galaxy 9 has in it? I will look! 5 is getting older since the Galaxy 8 has been around a while. And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power? : ) I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
Jim
And since you say the interference laws of the FCC mean nothing then maybe they will add a bit of power?
The test results on the new module have already been published, they didn't add any power.
I reckon the fact the Bluetooth has been backwards engineered is good. So 5 will still work 4 and 4.2
For most part this is true, getting much older devices from the 1.1 and 1.2 days may not work, even some of the devices built in the 2.0 era have trouble connecting to newer 4 generation equipment.
So when Bluetooth evolves to version 9 or 10, will 4.x and 5.x device still work associating to those newer versions?... only time will tell.
WiFi has been around as long as Bluetooth and backwards compatible with everything according to the 802.11 standards. Last thanksgiving for kicks, I pulled out my first ever WiFi dongle that was introduced before the 802.11b standard was official. It was still able to connect to my new 802.11ac router.
Do you know what BT the first engines/controllers had in them??
And what does the newest universal remote have in it?
Jim
As Lionel hasn't filed anything with the FCC to indicate that the engines nor the remote are using anything other than was initially propose, we can assume that everything is still using the same Bluetooth 4.
This new filing might be something, but there is no associated documentation to indicate what products it will be used in.
I may succumb and get into BlueToot in 3 or 4 (or 5 or 6?) years, when the current leftover cream of the BlueToot crop is put on sale at bargain-basement prices in order to make room for the next latest & greatest techno-whiz-bang technology breakthrough and new craze at that time.
But until then, this frugal model railroader doesn't care one way or another.
TexasSP posted:Wifi Devices for operating Model Trains:
MTH WIU
MTH DCS Explorer
Lionel LCS Wifi Module
Digitrax Loconet Wifi Device
Wifi integration Through JMRI Software
MRC Wifi Module
Locofi
ESU Wifi DCC System
Piko Wifi DCC System
and the list goes on and on. Bluetooth is only used by 3 companies. Bachmann (HO only using Bluerail), Bluerail (which has zero offering for O gauge with smoke and sound as we all are used to), and Lionel (which offers no upgrade path)
Take away everything that isnt O gauge : )
Jim
carsntrains posted:TexasSP posted:Wifi Devices for operating Model Trains:
MTH WIU
MTH DCS Explorer
Lionel LCS Wifi Module
Digitrax Loconet Wifi Device
Wifi integration Through JMRI Software
MRC Wifi Module
Locofi
ESU Wifi DCC System
Piko Wifi DCC System
and the list goes on and on. Bluetooth is only used by 3 companies. Bachmann (HO only using Bluerail), Bluerail (which has zero offering for O gauge with smoke and sound as we all are used to), and Lionel (which offers no upgrade path)
Take away everything that isnt O gauge : )
Jim
Wether they are o gauge or not really doesn't matter. Most of those units use DCC as control system. If everyone would put DCC decoders in there engines of any gauge, you can pick and choose between any of those systems listed above to run your engines of any gauge. Bluetooth & WiFi do the simple job of moving data, the control system (TMCC, DCS, LEGACY, DCC, LC) is where the real magic lies.
If I take any MTH PS3 engine and flip the DCS switch to DCC all of the above systems that use DCC can effectively apply to o gauge.
If one company wanted to they could build a Bluetooth DCC encoder and you could use Bluetooth to send DCC commands to engines.
Why, O Gauge can run on DCC, Can be upgraded to DCC, all O 2 Rail in command is DCC, DCC is fully backwards compatible, all MTH PS3 Locos can run on DCC
3 Rail O is the outlier in the rest of model railroading in more ways than one.
I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgeneralizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsoleting any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
carsntrains posted:MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:H1000 posted:So what we've learned so far is that Bluetooth works great for smaller operators that are not serious about layout control. (Doesn't matter because many consumers may not be concerned about this)
Current Bluetooth specs only allow a maximum of 7 simultaneous connections at one time (you can pair as many as you want, but only connect to 7 of the paired devices at one time).
Systems using Bluetooth control still have yet to overcome the Master / Slave operating relationship (apparently the BlueRail app is able to overcome this but no details were given as to how).
Even though we currently have two systems available that use Bluetooth (LC & BlueRail) their apps and engines are not compatible with one another.
Reported user experiences with Bluetooth range (at least when using the LC locomotives) is workable for 10 to 20 feet (possibly more without any scenery obstructions but according to specs its max is 33 feet in optimal conditions).
TMCC is now available on the newest LC offerings but no bridge device exists yet for the last six years of LC engines to allow operation of these older engines with a Legacy or TMCC system.
While Bluerail does have an app that can control more than one engine at a time, its system is not widely available in O gauge and only by removing existing electronics and installing a BlueRail board.
LC also has an app but it is limited to controlling one engine at a time. LC does have a universal remote available that controls up to three engines but it lacks any future expansion capabilities for more engines, additional controls, or layout control unless those are added using cryptic multiple button combinations that are not documented yet.
With Bluetooth 5.0, devices can use data transfer speeds of up to 2 Mbps, which is double what Bluetooth 4.2 supports. Devices can also communicate over distances of up to 800 feet (or 240 meters), which is four times the 200 feet (or 60 meters) allowed by Bluetooth 4.2. However, walls and other obstacles will weaken the signal, as they do with Wi-Fi. All we need it for Lionel to step it up! Although the FCC will limit them due to interference rules.
My Kindle Fire HD 10 uses 4.0. But our Samsung Galaxy 8 uses 5.0. I cant find any information on what Bluetooth the new LC+2.0 will use...
Looks like its a Bluetooth kind of world! In my train room I have Bluetooth trains, Bluetooth speakers, Bluetooth outlets, Bluetooth earbuds. And manual turnouts!!! LOL AHAHAHAHAHAH
Jim
Wifi and bluetooth utilize a similar frequency range, so obstructions would affect them in the same way, except that the output power of most wifi devices are MUCH higher than that of most BT devices. (By a magnitude of 10x for devices to 1000x the power output in the case of routers) This is why my laptop is able to see wifi routers for a handful of my neighbors, despite many obstructions in between and the fact that they are hundreds of feet away from me. Even on a phone, the wifi power transmitted is in the range of .1 watts, but BT is in the range of .008 watts.
Also, with wifi, you are better able to utilize web based technology, instead of mobile app device dependent technology. Web based technology will work on any device.
Also you have to buy a WIU to use it with DCC. I dont know of another available system for model trains that uses WIFI.
Jim
S9 has 5 also
For DCC? Wifi is simple, and available on most dcc systems. For my NCE, I simply need the USB interface ($40-$50) . The JMRI software is free, as is the throttle app for the phone. And it works with all of my engines that run under my current control system. Not just those "equipped" with a specific communication device.
And with this setup, I can also start to program my own software automation for control. And I'm using a protocol standard that a vast majority in model railroading are using. I'm not tied to a specific vendor for my control system, which is nice because I have a lot of options with my control system that I wouldnt have with proprietary control systems.
pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
NCE is HO stuff isnt it? The stuff Ken Patterson uses and advertises on "Whats Neat This Week"...Do not attempt to run any O-scale or G-scale equipment with the Power Cab. These larger locos require more voltage and current than the Power Cab can deliver.
OH and I see they do have a O gauge setup!! 1000.00 !! no mention of WIFI on it.
And thats what Im trying to get at that nobody wants to hear. Lionels BT app is FREE!!! No systems needed. AGAIN no AIU, TIU, WIU , DCC, LEGACY, TMCC, nothing. But you can add a 49.99 universal controller.
Jim
I saw something strange today. A Lionel Bluetooth antenna ?? Disguised as an AM radio station? Is that for use with the TMCC/LEGACY stuff or what??
fact
Dictionary result for fact
noun
plural noun: facts
- a thing that is known or proved to be true."he ignores some historical and economic facts"
synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty, factuality, certitude; More antonyms: lie, fiction
TexasSP posted:factDictionary result for fact
nounplural noun: facts
synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty, factuality, certitude; More
antonyms: lie, fiction
Yes I know my statements ARE factual ..
And here is the antenna I saw. 
Says it is a plug and play bluetooth antenna, after I found somewhere to read about it .. It is a speaker lol Pretty cool though! I may have to get one!
Jim
pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
OH so I am a troll because I believe something that you don't? And I haven't poked much fun at longtime users of AC, TMCC, Legacy or Visionline. Seems quite the opposite.
Jim : )
carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
NCE is HO stuff isnt it? The stuff Ken Patterson uses and advertises on "Whats Neat This Week"...Do not attempt to run any O-scale or G-scale equipment with the Power Cab. These larger locos require more voltage and current than the Power Cab can deliver.
OH and I see they do have a O gauge setup!! 1000.00 !! no mention of WIFI on it.
And thats what Im trying to get at that nobody wants to hear. Lionels BT app is FREE!!! No systems needed. AGAIN no AIU, TIU, WIU , DCC, LEGACY, TMCC, nothing. But you can add a 49.99 universal controller.
Jim
I saw something strange today. A Lionel Bluetooth antenna ?? Disguised as an AM radio station? Is that for use with the TMCC/LEGACY stuff or what??
DCC systems are not gauge specific.
I have a NEC 10 amp system. Its powered by a $30 dc power supply. And it was nowhere near $1000.
This is the issue with this thread. There is too much "opinion" injected as fact. Some of us are trying to tell you guys the "fact" about BT. Its not that BT is bad. Bluetooth was designed to be a "near proximity" communication protocol. As in a few inches to a few feet away. Does it have a place in the starter sets? Perhaps. Does it belong in every loco? No. If you want something in every loco, it should be a control system standard such as DCC.
VOX II
carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
OH so I am a troll because I believe something that you don't? And I haven't poked much fun at longtime users of AC, TMCC, Legacy or Visionline. Seems quite the opposite.
Jim : )
No I don't think that's why you are a troll. I don't know why your are a troll. I think its a dunning kruger situtation.
Jim,
it may be time to site some of your sources for your "facts" and we'll need a better answer than:
"I will not discuss the MULTIPLE folks there that I have discussed this with. But they are more than popular people."
If what they told you is true & factual, then they should have no problem associating their name with it.
MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
NCE is HO stuff isnt it? The stuff Ken Patterson uses and advertises on "Whats Neat This Week"...Do not attempt to run any O-scale or G-scale equipment with the Power Cab. These larger locos require more voltage and current than the Power Cab can deliver.
OH and I see they do have a O gauge setup!! 1000.00 !! no mention of WIFI on it.
And thats what Im trying to get at that nobody wants to hear. Lionels BT app is FREE!!! No systems needed. AGAIN no AIU, TIU, WIU , DCC, LEGACY, TMCC, nothing. But you can add a 49.99 universal controller.
Jim
I saw something strange today. A Lionel Bluetooth antenna ?? Disguised as an AM radio station? Is that for use with the TMCC/LEGACY stuff or what??
DCC systems are not gauge specific.
I have a NEC 10 amp system. Its powered by a $30 dc power supply. And it was nowhere near $1000.
This is the issue with this thread. There is too much "opinion" injected as fact. Some of us are trying to tell you guys the "fact" about BT. Its not that BT is bad. Bluetooth was designed to be a "near proximity" communication protocol. As in a few inches to a few feet away. Does it have a place in the starter sets? Perhaps. Does it belong in every loco? No. If you want something in every loco, it should be a control system standard such as DCC.
The DCE is gauge specific. I just looked at their site! If you go to their site they have a 10 amp system for O gauge for 1000.00. So you are using a DCE cab and another companies power supply. DC power supply? And your running O gauge? Probably similar to the one Ive been looking at from Mean Well out of China. They have a 5.6A for 24.99. Someone I know just ordered one. Going to see how it works.
Jim
Facts are provable, your statem
carsntrains posted:TexasSP posted:factDictionary result for fact
nounplural noun: facts
synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty, factuality, certitude; More
antonyms: lie, fiction
Yes I know my statements ARE factual ..
And here is the antenna I saw.
Says it is a plug and play bluetooth antenna, after I found somewhere to read about it .. It is a speaker lol Pretty cool though! I may have to get one!
Jim
By definition, facts or provable, your statements are not. Whether they are a reality or not is irrelevant. Not Provable = Not Facts. Your information at best is hearsay. Not only that, but it's just not believable.
As for your comments about DCC and Ken's equipment, that has nothing to due with anything other than the power supply. I can run O off the cheapest DCC system with an adequate power supply. Also, you don't even need a Wifi module for DCC Wifi, just have your system connected through JMRI.
There is a reason the largest manufacturers in the MRR marketplace utilize DCC protocol. This could have been done with O and still could as DCC runs on AC. It works with 3 Rail, 2 Rail, whatever.
The problem is you ignore the multitude of people on here with knowledge in all these different areas and make statements as facts which are not provable and ill informed.
Many of us model or have modeled in multiple scales and know the market and capabilities thoroughly. DCC us the only system fully backwards and forwards compatible, fully upgradeable, and universal.
carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
Wonder why Lionel chooses to tell only you these things and no one else or mention it in their user manuals, catalogs, or any other public facing forum...
Nope, doesn't pass the sniff test at all.
Time to end the trolling and bring enjoyment back to the ogrfourms.
Attachments
Images (1)
My statements are well informed and factual. Just not well received .. And thats ok. Nobody likes change. The DC lobby is growing. The Bluetooth lobby is growing. Its all in fun anyway. Or its supposed to be. See some folks cant just disagree . They have to go overboard and try to insult you. Block you because your opinion is not like theirs.
Jim
Jim. I for one visit the forum to gain knowledge. This thread is an example of that. I have a couple LC sets, DCS, Legacy, and I run conventional. I pop in on this thread now and then because people like Gunrunnerjohn are offering really interesting information and useful insight based on their knowledge and experience.
You have apparently gotten it in your head that this is some sort of Ford/Chevy thing and that there's some huge upheaval about to happen and that people are somehow afraid of that. In my opinion, you are misreading the entire situation and your comments are therefore coming across as trolling.
It seems that you have caused Gunnrunnerjohn to over and out on this thread. His is the kind of informed opinion I, and I believe others, are reading this thread to learn, not your fantasies. So basically you blew up the thread with some half baked "DC lobby" nonsense.
Bye.
carsntrains posted:MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
NCE is HO stuff isnt it? The stuff Ken Patterson uses and advertises on "Whats Neat This Week"...Do not attempt to run any O-scale or G-scale equipment with the Power Cab. These larger locos require more voltage and current than the Power Cab can deliver.
OH and I see they do have a O gauge setup!! 1000.00 !! no mention of WIFI on it.
And thats what Im trying to get at that nobody wants to hear. Lionels BT app is FREE!!! No systems needed. AGAIN no AIU, TIU, WIU , DCC, LEGACY, TMCC, nothing. But you can add a 49.99 universal controller.
Jim
I saw something strange today. A Lionel Bluetooth antenna ?? Disguised as an AM radio station? Is that for use with the TMCC/LEGACY stuff or what??
DCC systems are not gauge specific.
I have a NEC 10 amp system. Its powered by a $30 dc power supply. And it was nowhere near $1000.
This is the issue with this thread. There is too much "opinion" injected as fact. Some of us are trying to tell you guys the "fact" about BT. Its not that BT is bad. Bluetooth was designed to be a "near proximity" communication protocol. As in a few inches to a few feet away. Does it have a place in the starter sets? Perhaps. Does it belong in every loco? No. If you want something in every loco, it should be a control system standard such as DCC.
The DCE is gauge specific. I just looked at their site! If you go to their site they have a 10 amp system for O gauge for 1000.00. So you are using a DCE cab and another companies power supply. DC power supply? And your running O gauge? Probably similar to the one Ive been looking at from Mean Well out of China. They have a 5.6A for 24.99. Someone I know just ordered one. Going to see how it works.
Jim
Wrong.
It is POWER specific. They use "gauge" to help inform you which system you need as far as power requirements. But the system has no idea what gauge loco(s) its dealing with, nor does it care.
You do realize that you got standard retail pricing for the WIRELESS system, correct? Probably not, because you are desperately trying to do ad-hoc research to prove your point. And thats dangerous, because thats how BAD INFO gets out.
"This could have been done with O "
Not according to Neil Young and Richard Kughn, who felt a need to develop TMCC 25 years or so ago. DCC equipment at that time was not wireless, insufficient power, incompatible with AC standard track power, and very expensive. The incompatibility with the previous 90+ years of AC trains was a deal breaker. You needed boosters all along the layout. Lionel did this not to develop a proprietary system, but because the DCC marketplace was designed primarily for HO and was both expensive and unsuited to three rail O gauge. While DCC looks like AC, it is incompatible with traditional open frame motors that work fine with AC power. As I understand it, DCC uses modulation of the current to create its signal, which is something quite different from ordinary 60 cycle AC.
If DCC was easily adaptable and cost effective for three rail O gauge, someone would have come to market with equipment. Hasn't really happened. Perhaps that's because everyone has adopted TMCC/Legacy or DCS or both and there is no market. But the outcome is inarguable, almost no one has provided equipment or adopted DCC in three rail O gauge. DCC's original limitations led to TMCC which led MTH to develop DCS. That's history.
What happens now we will find out, but it will take a decade or so. Clearly Bluetooth has potential, is a readily available communications technology/protocol that won't get anyone sued. MTH could use it if they want to. No third parties are going to be making DCS/PS3 equipment because MTH hasn't shown any willingness to license their technology. It will be interesting to see if Lionel will make public and/or will license their Bluetooth/LC/LC +2.0 technology as they did with TMCC and Legacy. But I doubt we will see DCC as a future major player in three rail O due to established bases of other technology and perhaps other issues.
That's false about DCC not being suitable for O. 2 Rail O command is all DCC. I have run my MTH PS3 Locos on DCC. G Gauge also runs on DCC which arguably requires more power than O.
As to why Neil and Richard chose the route they did I don't know, but your comments are also false. DCC is a communication protocol, that's it, they could have used this for O, made it wireless, and given the required power just as they did with TMCC. It could have still been Lionel DCC. MTH could have done the same. However they have figured part of that out since PS3 is DCC compatible.
MTH using BT wouldn't make them Lionel compatible, you have a fundamental lack of understanding of what BT is, does, and is capable of.
Something that was lost in all the bantering back and forth was the fact that I never said BT wouldn't be a player in O-gauge, and perhaps even a major player. However, the current products don't show the potential to allow that to actually take place. So, "if" it happens, it'll be years from now, because products just coming to market still don't have the range or flexibility to make BT a prime-time player in this arena. I am curious why WiFi wasn't considered, given that even basic WiFi products have much greater range than the current BT offerings. I don't see people complaining about the range of the WiFi link to either MTH or Lionel WiFi products.
"That's false about DCC not being suitable for O. "
I said it is incompatible with traditional three rail O gauge. That is because motors set up for 60 cycle AC will not operate with DCC on the rails. That's a fact. And a main reason LionTech developed TMCC which is compatible with AC power. There were zero DCC power supplies that could supply the 5+ amperes of current needed for O gauge three rail locos back then. So saying that Lionel could have have adopted DCC in 1995 instead of developing TMCC is clearly contrary to everything I've heard from people like Mike Reagan, Lou Kovach, and other knowledgeable folks.
Try operating your MTH DCS loco with its switch in the DCS setting on a DCC layout and you'll see what I mean. Apparently nothing will happen (see H1000's note below). MTH's DCC setting uses a DCC receiver to operate in DCC mode. You cannot operate the DCC receiver using a TIU/WIU for that reason. That system doesn't output a DCC signal. The DCC board is only intended for two rail DCC control of dual system equipped PS3 locos. DCC and PS2/PS3 would not play nice together. Don't try operating your PS3 loco on a three rail layout using the DCC switch setting. Most DCC locos can function on a DC conventional layout, but that wasn't true back in 1995. DCC in 1995 was an entirely different animal in many ways than it is today.
Landsteiner posted:. Try operating your MTH DCS loco with the switch in the DCS setting on a DCC layout and you'll see what I mean. But please don't do it, because it will probably cause damage to the loco's board.
NOPE!
Directly from an MTH user manual.
Attachments
Images (1)
Point taken. Thanks. It won't harm anything, but of course, it won't work. Glad they didn't set us up for serious failure 
.
The issue most have ignored is we have about 115+ years of AC powered locos out there that people want to be able to run on their layouts. TMCC/Legacy and DCS allow for that. DCC does not. Bluetooth/LC/LC+/LC 2.0+ do allow for that. This incompatibility is the major reason DCC isn't suitable for O gauge three rail for many consumers. You cannot operate a conventional AC loco, whether with an open frame motor or can motor on a DCC layout. That's not an issue for some with only newer equipment, but it is for many. DCC is a system that never envisioned using an AC power source, which is needed for conventional locos in O gauge three rail. The reason, indeed the only reason MTH made their locos with DCC installed was to allow operation on 2-rail O gauge layouts.
Landsteiner posted:Point taken. Thanks. It won't harm anything, but of course, it won't work. Glad they didn't set us up for serious failure
Newer MTH locos dont even have a switch. It auto senses DCS, DCC, or conventional.
MJCAT posted:Landsteiner posted:Point taken. Thanks. It won't harm anything, but of course, it won't work. Glad they didn't set us up for serious failure
Newer MTH locos dont even have a switch. It auto senses DCS, DCC, or conventional.
I'm not sure about the auto sense between DCS & DCC. Many Railking PS3 engine don't have the switch because people would get confused when it was in the wrong position and the engine wouldn't run. Also, they figure that most of lower budget railking engines are less likely to run on a DCC system. The switch can be installed if one would so choose.
They don't autosense, you have to remove the jumper to run DCC with the RK engines. Premier engines still have the switch and the very troublesome 2-rail/3-rail switch.
H1000 posted:MJCAT posted:Landsteiner posted:Point taken. Thanks. It won't harm anything, but of course, it won't work. Glad they didn't set us up for serious failure
Newer MTH locos dont even have a switch. It auto senses DCS, DCC, or conventional.
I'm not sure about the auto sense between DCS & DCC. Many Railking PS3 engine don't have the switch because people would get confused when it was in the wrong position and the engine wouldn't run. Also, they figure that most of lower budget railking engines are less likely to run on a DCC system. The switch can be installed if one would so choose.
It auto-senses, at least on my RailKing without the switch. I've only run in DCC mode. (Well, I did see conventional kick in once, and saw the jack rabbit mode engage.)
From the manual: "When the locomotive is placed on the track and power applied to the track the locomotive will detect the control system being used and respond accordingly."
MJCAT posted:H1000 posted:MJCAT posted:Landsteiner posted:Point taken. Thanks. It won't harm anything, but of course, it won't work. Glad they didn't set us up for serious failure
Newer MTH locos dont even have a switch. It auto senses DCS, DCC, or conventional.
I'm not sure about the auto sense between DCS & DCC. Many Railking PS3 engine don't have the switch because people would get confused when it was in the wrong position and the engine wouldn't run. Also, they figure that most of lower budget railking engines are less likely to run on a DCC system. The switch can be installed if one would so choose.
It auto-senses, at least on my RailKing without the switch. I've only run in DCC mode. (Well, I did see conventional kick in once, and saw the jack rabbit mode engage.)
From the manual: "When the locomotive is placed on the track and power applied to the track the locomotive will detect the control system being used and respond accordingly."
MMM... Good to know, my manual reference must have been cited from older PS3 (Railking) model where there is a switch, or you can install a switch. (no 2/3 rail switch because railking conversions to 2 rail don't exist).
gunrunnerjohn posted:They don't autosense, you have to remove the jumper to run DCC with the RK engines. Premier engines still have the switch and the very troublesome 2-rail/3-rail switch.
There was a time when MTH first removed the switch, that you had to either remove the jumper, or install your own switch which toggled the jumper setting. (From what I heard, they were dealing with quite a few service calls where the only issue was that someone flipped the switch to the incorrect control setting, so they removed the switch and the few who were running DCC had to open it up and remove the jumper or install their own switch.) The newer, newer railkings (not sure about premiers) now auto-sense. Not sure the year they started doing this; maybe within the past two years?
H1000 posted:MJCAT posted:H1000 posted:MJCAT posted:Landsteiner posted:Point taken. Thanks. It won't harm anything, but of course, it won't work. Glad they didn't set us up for serious failure
Newer MTH locos dont even have a switch. It auto senses DCS, DCC, or conventional.
I'm not sure about the auto sense between DCS & DCC. Many Railking PS3 engine don't have the switch because people would get confused when it was in the wrong position and the engine wouldn't run. Also, they figure that most of lower budget railking engines are less likely to run on a DCC system. The switch can be installed if one would so choose.
It auto-senses, at least on my RailKing without the switch. I've only run in DCC mode. (Well, I did see conventional kick in once, and saw the jack rabbit mode engage.)
From the manual: "When the locomotive is placed on the track and power applied to the track the locomotive will detect the control system being used and respond accordingly."
MMM... Good to know, my manual reference must have been cited from older PS3 (Railking) model where there is a switch, or you can install a switch. (no 2/3 rail switch because railking conversions to 2 rail don't exist).
yep, that was the "in-between" the switch and auto-sense models. In fact, when I ordered my rail king and researched what I needed to do to it, I thought I was going to have to install a switch or pull a jumper. When it came in, like a big dummy, I went ahead and opened it up to locate the jumper. Couldnt find it. After a couple of hours of going between google pictures and the internals of the engine, I actually read the manual. And there it was, top of page 3 under Modes of operation.
MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
NCE is HO stuff isnt it? The stuff Ken Patterson uses and advertises on "Whats Neat This Week"...Do not attempt to run any O-scale or G-scale equipment with the Power Cab. These larger locos require more voltage and current than the Power Cab can deliver.
OH and I see they do have a O gauge setup!! 1000.00 !! no mention of WIFI on it.
And thats what Im trying to get at that nobody wants to hear. Lionels BT app is FREE!!! No systems needed. AGAIN no AIU, TIU, WIU , DCC, LEGACY, TMCC, nothing. But you can add a 49.99 universal controller.
Jim
I saw something strange today. A Lionel Bluetooth antenna ?? Disguised as an AM radio station? Is that for use with the TMCC/LEGACY stuff or what??
DCC systems are not gauge specific.
I have a NEC 10 amp system. Its powered by a $30 dc power supply. And it was nowhere near $1000.
This is the issue with this thread. There is too much "opinion" injected as fact. Some of us are trying to tell you guys the "fact" about BT. Its not that BT is bad. Bluetooth was designed to be a "near proximity" communication protocol. As in a few inches to a few feet away. Does it have a place in the starter sets? Perhaps. Does it belong in every loco? No. If you want something in every loco, it should be a control system standard such as DCC.
The DCE is gauge specific. I just looked at their site! If you go to their site they have a 10 amp system for O gauge for 1000.00. So you are using a DCE cab and another companies power supply. DC power supply? And your running O gauge? Probably similar to the one Ive been looking at from Mean Well out of China. They have a 5.6A for 24.99. Someone I know just ordered one. Going to see how it works.
Jim
Wrong.
It is POWER specific. They use "gauge" to help inform you which system you need as far as power requirements. But the system has no idea what gauge loco(s) its dealing with, nor does it care.
You do realize that you got standard retail pricing for the WIRELESS system, correct? Probably not, because you are desperately trying to do ad-hoc research to prove your point. And thats dangerous, because thats how BAD INFO gets out.
They have a chart with gauges listed N HO On30 O and Z . With recommended sets for each. I would call that gauge specific and you would also if you werent looking to argue.
So you are saying the set they have listed for 1000.00 is ?????? And bad information. When folks here constantly complain about the MSRP that Lionel has on their stuff? It that set lists for 1000.00 how much is it? I thought using the Manufacturers suggested retail price was a fairly accurate way to do things. 
In cart 1001.94 on their website. Thank you !
Jim
I have that set but I didn't pay $1K for it. I got it for under $600 about 3 years ago. That set will allow you to run any DCC loco in any scale, you just have to use the appropriate booster. A 10 amp booster will fry an N scale or HO scale decoder.
https://www.modeltrainstuff.co...e-pro-10-amp-system/
584 on modeltrainstuff, however you can run with a lower power system. It's all modular, and there are many other systems to choose from. Someone can get into the base MRC system for 250.
catnap posted:I have that set but I didn't pay $1K for it. I got it for under $600 about 3 years ago. That set will allow you to run any DCC loco in any scale, you just have to use the appropriate booster. A 10 amp booster will fry an N scale or HO scale decoder.
Not sure how, it doesn't force 10 amps into the loco, that's just it's max ratings. The voltage is the key factor and guys run N and HO layouts with that system. An HO MRR club locally uses that exact one with additional boosters.
CARSNTRAINS,
To say that it is power specific is correct. The right question is how many amps are you going to use on your railroad. That will determine what setup to use. For some people the lower amp system will work just fine in 0.
I do think you can use a 10 amp booster with H0 decoders. As long as you are not drawing more than the decoder is rated for. At least, I know 0 scalers who have done it, anyway. It is cheaper. The risk for using 10 amp booster in the smaller scales would be more attributable to inadequate (too small) wiring as a general practice in those scales. If your wiring is solid, no problem.
carsntrains posted:MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:MJCAT posted:carsntrains posted:pennsy484 posted:I think some people are hearing what they want to hear, overreacting to what they are hearing, oversimplifying, overgernalizing and/or just not really grasping the situation or what is being said.
Of course Bluetooth and other new technologies need to be explored and implemented. But the idea that anyone at Lionel would say don't buy the ZW or that AC power is going to be completely eliminated from new Lionel offerings is absolutely ridiculous. Also obvious is that Lionel is doing a good job in adding new technologies without obsolete eating any of their older Technologies and wouldn't all of a sudden decide to make all the developed technology obsolete.
My guess is that if I called Lionel and said hey I am only ever going to run starter sets and I'm really never going to run anything AC, maybe, maybe, some person at Lionel might suggest that I don't buy a $800 ZW, and they would be mortified if they thought I as a beginner set only runner was going to go trolling on a forum and somehow suggest that Lionel is completely shifting gears to DC only and poke fun at the long time users of AC, TMCC, Legacy, Visionline, etc.
OGR has been relatively troll free for the past year or so, I hope we don't have a new Vox.
That facts are the facts. Reckon I should have recorded the many conversations I had with Lionel and others. Then folks would just say it was fake lol : )
NCE is HO stuff isnt it? The stuff Ken Patterson uses and advertises on "Whats Neat This Week"...Do not attempt to run any O-scale or G-scale equipment with the Power Cab. These larger locos require more voltage and current than the Power Cab can deliver.
OH and I see they do have a O gauge setup!! 1000.00 !! no mention of WIFI on it.
And thats what Im trying to get at that nobody wants to hear. Lionels BT app is FREE!!! No systems needed. AGAIN no AIU, TIU, WIU , DCC, LEGACY, TMCC, nothing. But you can add a 49.99 universal controller.
Jim
I saw something strange today. A Lionel Bluetooth antenna ?? Disguised as an AM radio station? Is that for use with the TMCC/LEGACY stuff or what??
DCC systems are not gauge specific.
I have a NEC 10 amp system. Its powered by a $30 dc power supply. And it was nowhere near $1000.
This is the issue with this thread. There is too much "opinion" injected as fact. Some of us are trying to tell you guys the "fact" about BT. Its not that BT is bad. Bluetooth was designed to be a "near proximity" communication protocol. As in a few inches to a few feet away. Does it have a place in the starter sets? Perhaps. Does it belong in every loco? No. If you want something in every loco, it should be a control system standard such as DCC.
The DCE is gauge specific. I just looked at their site! If you go to their site they have a 10 amp system for O gauge for 1000.00. So you are using a DCE cab and another companies power supply. DC power supply? And your running O gauge? Probably similar to the one Ive been looking at from Mean Well out of China. They have a 5.6A for 24.99. Someone I know just ordered one. Going to see how it works.
Jim
Wrong.
It is POWER specific. They use "gauge" to help inform you which system you need as far as power requirements. But the system has no idea what gauge loco(s) its dealing with, nor does it care.
You do realize that you got standard retail pricing for the WIRELESS system, correct? Probably not, because you are desperately trying to do ad-hoc research to prove your point. And thats dangerous, because thats how BAD INFO gets out.
They have a chart with gauges listed N HO On30 O and Z . With recommended sets for each. I would call that gauge specific and you would also if you werent looking to argue.
So you are saying the set they have listed for 1000.00 is ?????? And bad information. When folks here constantly complain about the MSRP that Lionel has on their stuff? It that set lists for 1000.00 how much is it? I thought using the Manufacturers suggested retail price was a fairly accurate way to do things.
In cart 1001.94 on their website. Thank you !
Jim
A PH-10, which is what I have, is half that price.
You would have known that, had you:
A) Listened to someone who actually owns the system
B) Wasnt on a mission to do 5 second google searches to try to (incorrectly) prove their point
btw, should you get a PH-PRO, you would own one of the top of the line control systems available, and would likely giggle at someone who talks about bluetooth.
Landsteiner posted:The reason, indeed the only reason MTH made their locos with DCC installed was to allow operation on 2-rail O gauge layouts.
You can run DCC on 3-rail layouts. Look above, others are already doing just that. Railking engines can run on DCC, the third rail isn't an automatic disqualification. If you have PS3, 2 or 3 rail doesn't matter, you can run it on DCC.
What was the question? 
I just started at the beginning of this thread and there’s plenty of Yeas and many Nays, it reminds me when Lionel introduced TMCC, so many folks had issues with the newer technology, then, it caught on, and when Legacy came out, especially free with the purchase of a JLC Big Boy Steamer, we were hooked...Yes, the hand held Cab 1, Cab 2 controllers are nice, but so is Blue Tooth via our smart phones....Our cars have BT, we connect with our phones, we Navigate with our smartphones, we text with our phones, it’s all good. We read these post on our phones, so, I think it’s a good thing...I run several of my engines with my phone, and I ‘m learning....It just takes time... Great post David, very interesting...The Future looks promising with all the neat electronics making their way to our great hobby. Happy Railroading.
My two cents opinion: NO, I am very happy with TMCC/Legacy and DCS, Why do we need bluetooth?
Churu posted:My two cents opinion: NO, I am very happy with TMCC/Legacy and DCS, Why do we need bluetooth?
To further confuse Lionel newcomers.
So last night as nifty little experiment I wanted to see if it was possible to run the MTH app and WIU on Bluetooth instead of WiFi. To do this I had to borrow some hardware that we use at the farm to allow a two machines in close proximity to match speed while they operate in the field using the GPS speed from only one source.
Here is a link to the box we use: https://www.portsmitheurope.com/bluetooth/
It Converts Bluetooth to a wired Ethernet (cat5) connection using Bluetooth PAN (Personal Area Network) protocol which in short lets you use BLuetooth as network connection similar to WiFi.
I wired the Bluetooth adapter to the WIU Ethernet port and configured a static IP address. On the tablet, I turned off the WiFi, turned on Bluetooth and paired it to the Bluetooth adapter using the PAN protocol. IT WORKED! As the DCS app discover the PAN network it was able to connect to the WIU via Bluetooth. everything worked as it should, a few times there was a slight bit of lag but nothing to serious. The range was solid to just under 30 feet. I ran like this for about 20 minutes, no problems, it didn't work any better than WiFi excluding the limited range.
Naturally and much to the lack of my surprise, the LC app nor the bluerail app was able to control the MTH WIU, nor was the DCS app able to run an LC+ Bluetooth engine even though I was using the "Universal Standard". Looks like the control systems used by all these manufactures are not compatible even when you connect with Bluetooth clear across the board and more than just Bluetooth connectivity alone is required to get a universal system that will run all engines.
Bluetooth may have some potential but it will need to rely on a more powerful control system than what is currently being used. Also, there are just too many deficiencies and limitations with the implementation of Bluetooth itself and it's associated control systems to even consider that it can fully replace the higher end Legacy, TMCC, DCS and DCC systems that are available now.
Ford is better than Chevy!
What, is that like the tenth anniversary of me posting that? Pretty sure I posted it on the old forum
For the record, there are two classes of engine control systems. Class I is the track signal systems including TMCC/Legacy, DCS and DCC. Class II is the direct to loco wireless systems which include 915MHZ, 2.4GHZ and bluetooth. Both system classes are technically capable of virtually identical operating features, so the future will be determined by the long range intent of the manufacturers.
BOB WALKER posted:For the record, there are two classes of engine control systems. Class I is the track signal systems including TMCC/Legacy, DCS and DCC. Class II is the direct to loco wireless systems which include 915MHZ, 2.4GHZ and bluetooth. Both system classes are technically capable of virtually identical operating features, so the future will be determined by the long range intent of the manufacturers.
Bob, Where is this information published? So many people jumped on this thread touting inaccurate information and couldn't or wouldn't site a source.
It's conflicting because technically DCS is Class I & II as its remote uses frequencies in the 900MHz spectrum. Also Legacy would be both Class I & II because its remote runs in the 2.4 GHZ spectrum.
What class is the 27MHz stuff where the earliest LC engines & CAB1 runs?
What class is WiFi in as it operates in the 2.4 GHz spectrum (the same license free spectrum that ALL 2.4 GHz stuff operates in, including Bluetooth)?
Who defined these classes?
I am not aware of any place that this info is specifically published. I defined the classes in order to illustrate the fundamental technical differences between the two classes. The major confusion seems to be understanding that the TMCC style controller talks to the track interface unit wirelessly and then the track interface unit talks to the loco at a low RF frequency via the track. The direct to loco wireless systems (including the bluetooth variations) have the controller talking directly to the engines. Again, when properly implemented, both classes have the same basic operational capabilities.
BOB WALKER posted:Again, when properly implemented, both classes have the same basic operational capabilities.
And therein lies the rub. Anything's possible, but what is actually happening.
Here's a scary thought that may get some responses. "Alexa, start engine 1"
Yardmaster96 posted:Here's a scary thought that may get some responses. "Alexa, start engine 1"
We're closer to this type of operation vs. a universal control system that operates via Bluetooth.
All the app makers would need to do is integrate the necessary API into their app to allow alternate control via Google home, Alexi, Siri, a game pad or other HID type devices. Here's a fun one, You can already use a Bluetooth mouse connected to an android device and fully run the DCS app with a mouse cursor similar to how you interact with a program on a PC or MAC computer.
I run a small operation with 18 switch track. That coupled with 5 locomotives means A LOT of scrambling when it comes to "John forgot to close a certain switch and now the 'train wreck' feature of DCS is looming big." You also have two or three going at the same time and if you've used the ALL feature of DCS you know that all 3 or 4 locomotives currently running respond to whatever few commands you have available in that mode. I may be lacking in my ALL features, but speed setting, horn, and bell are about it. I don't see the soft keys when I'm using ALL engines so I guess using them is not possible.
Anyway, I digress as usual. Being able to say "close switch 12!" in an emergency is faster than scrambling with a remote trying to go from engine to switch mode and find switch 12 then press the straight arrow soft key. "Stop engine 2" is faster than trying to switch engines with the remote and hit the DIR button. I know, E stop, not the point.
So let's see, thanks to me we have gone from Bluetooth to voice activated. I brought this up once before in a past thread.
Yardmaster96 posted:Here's a scary thought that may get some responses. "Alexa, start engine 1"
I don't view it as scary.
I view it as lazy.
If one doesn't want to be physically involved with running their trains, why bother?
"Alexa, please run and enjoy my trains while I go off and do something interesting..."
Rusty
