Clyde Tantalizes Us With a TMCC II Sneak Peek!!!

[Kooljock1]

Dangeroo Boys! You Bet Yer Bippy!

http://coilcouplers.com/hirail/hirail00.shtml

Jon

[Buckeye Riveter]

Dangeroo....Is that a word? 

Oh, well I will believe it when I see it. 

[trigtrax]

So far all I've found out is 200 speed steps and some kind of remote volume control for the Big Boy ( seems like a multi channel sound system)

I've heard endless speculation and claims from Clyde on how this will totally revolutionize toy train operation but aside from these two items no facts.

Oh, well I will believe it when I see it. 

I think we're done with the when, now it's down to the what.

 

[brianel027]

Guess it all depends on how you want to define "revolutionize?"

Maybe Clyde could give us a sneak peek at some of the new upcoming RMT products. C'mon Clyde - even you've said this is supposed to be a great affordable "family hobby." The BEEP is affordable, decent quality at its' price point, perfect for kid or an adult, runs on any diameter track, has dual motors, is available in a rainbow of roadnames and is easily upgradeable to digital control for those who desire.

Hmmm, these days that sounds pretty revolutional. Maybe the revolution happened already while Clyde was out in the mountains trying to hunt down a wolf.

Something that is revolutional, at least to me, effects everyone. The latest so-called advances in TMCC will obvously make some happy. Probably the only way these so-called advances will effect everyone is that Lionel will once again have to raise list prices on all products (regardless of whether you use TMCC or not) to help pay for these so-called technological advances (or glitches).

My anticipation is now a reserved table with seating for RMT and Atlas Industrial Rail.

[chuck]

Thans for the head's up, Jon.  Nice to see/hear Lou is actively involved again, always liked the former IC Controls stuff .  Maybe we'll finaly find out what that extra teminal on the TPC is for!

2nd article posted regarding the new memory module upgrades that will work with the CAB-2.

[nblum]

The one thing we know for  certain is that Neil Young and Lou Kovach have proven themselves the most creative and innovative minds in toy train electronics in the last ten years, bar none.  The fact that their company has contracted with Lionel to provide this system means that over time they have the best available talent in the industry working for them.  The products will no doubt reflect this as did TMCC in 1996 and ICC's a year or so later.  ICC pioneered the action recorder function about five years before MTH introduced it to their TIU :). Speaking personally, I'm in no rush as TMCC I is working just fine for me, simple, functional, robust, trouble free.  I'm happy to let others be the early adopters for the first year or so, and see what Neil and Lou have come up with.  I'm reasonably confident it will have some neat, simple yet extremely whizzy and novel features.

[fwright]

Maybe we should take a poll of who is the better shill or groupie for their favorite manufacturer - nblum or mthrules?

Fred W

- one who prefers facts and real user reviews of actual products to spin and press releases, regardless of manufacturer

- feeling particularly grumpy this morning about drivel on the forums

[nblum]

" feeling particularly grumpy this morning about drivel on the forums"

No kidding?  No one would ever know :).

My statements about Lou Kovach's and Neil Young's abilities and contributions are readily supportable by products and accomplishments.  If you disagree, might I suggest you address the content of my post, rather than your opinion of me.  Thanks!

[fwright]

You're on, I'll bite.  It's the use of unsupported adjectives and praise that rubs me wrong and still does.  (Warning) I'm known for being blunt.

The one thing we know for  certain is that Neil Young and Lou Kovach have proven themselves the most creative and innovative minds in toy train electronics in the last ten years, bar none.

How do we know that Young and Kovach have proven themselves the most creative and innovative minds in toy train electronics in the past 10 years?  I know nothing of the sort for certain.  I don't dispute that they and inviduals working for them developed TMCC.  Nor do I dispute that developing TMCC took some talent and innovative thinking.  But does that make them superior to Allen Keller and his work in command control?  How about the folks that developed the PFM sound system?  The folks at Lenz and Digitrax that developed DCC?  And their direct competitors at MTH (who had the advantage of seeing TMCC as they were working on DCS)?  What about the early experiments in command control and sound (Lionel's 1949 radio freq control and Herb Chaudiere's HOn3 sound system in 1966)?  Who rank ordered all these folks and declared Young and Kovach the most creative and innovative?  And based on what criteria?

The fact that their company has contracted with Lionel to provide this system means that over time they have the best available talent in the industry working for them.

How does the fact of the contract guarantee the best available talent?  Based on what criteria?

ICC pioneered the action recorder function about five years before MTH introduced it to their TIU :). Speaking personally, I'm in no rush as TMCC I is working just fine for me, simple, functional, robust, trouble free.  I'm happy to let others be the early adopters for the first year or so, and see what Neil and Lou have come up with.

No problems with this portion of the post - has facts and some supported conclusions.

I'm reasonably confident it will have some neat, simple yet extremely whizzy and novel features.

The only basis in your post for this conclusion is your judgment that Young and Kovach are "the most creative and innovative minds in toy train electronics".  Since that judgement is without support, your follow-on conclusion about the characteristics of TMCC 2 has no support either.

Minus the gushing, the essentials of your post boil down to this:

- you think Young and Kovach are great developers of toy train electronics because you have had a very good experience with TMCC.

- you think TMCC 2 will be even better because Young and Kovach are contracted to do the development

I would hope TMCC 2 would be a significant improvement on TMCC, while remaining totally backward compatible.  It's going to be a hard sell if it's not.  But unless prices drop down into DCC territory ($15-$30 per locomotive, $150 for a complete control system), my personal opinion is that TMCC 2 will quickly level off at a percentage of the current number of TMCC users.  There will be very few converts from DCS or conventional AC unless the price of admission into the world of TMCC2 becomes more reasonable.

My thoughts; I welcome reasoned disagreement.

Fred W 

[nblum]

Reasonable people will differ, and I hold to my initial comments, which were intended in the spirit of "wait and see what they come up with before bashing and hashing," as some have done (not yourself necessarily).  If one reads the comments on some internet forums, based upon fragmentary information from Clyde Coil,  and amusing misinterpretations thereof, one would think that valid opinions could be generated about the system at this point.  It hasn't even been described in full on paper, much less demonstrated.  I am confident, based upon the original innovations of TMCC and Railsounds, ditto for ICC's products, that Lou and Neil are going to come up with neat stuff.  Will it be cheap? No.  Then again have you priced out wireless DCC systems capable of handling several amperes?  The separation of power and signal is the most brilliant part of TMCC, IMO, because it enables great simplicity and reliability, words I will use again.

My comments applied to toy trains (i.e., three rail O and perhaps large scale) and recent (n=10)years, not the long decades of history of toy train control.  I think TMCC and Railsounds were arguably more innovative and superior products than what MTH ultimately came up with six years later and what LGB has done, for examples. To me that's ample evidence that Neil and Lou are head and shoulders above the others working on these problems, until proven otherwise. I've worked with TMCC and DCS, and seen the LGB system in action enough to see the simplicity, reliability and cleverness of TMCC's implementation relative to the other systems. 

DCC is an entirely different beast that represents the work of many, many folks over decades, whereas TMCC represents a few years work by one team.  As someone who works in a high tech world (medicine), I know how reliability and simplicity, sheer functionality if you will,  are more important than gimmicks.  Neil and Lou's designs and implementations have met those standards, IMO.  DCS does not.  The LGB system has not, nor has Marklin's. Your mileage may well vary :).

[nblum]

"But unless prices drop down into DCC territory ($15-$30 per locomotive, $150 for a complete control system), my personal opinion is that TMCC 2 will quickly level off at a percentage of the current number of TMCC users.  There will be very few converts from DCS or conventional AC unless the price of admission into the world of TMCC2 becomes more reasonable."

I agree.  The price won't drop down to that level, ever.  I don't think there will be any converts from DCS to speak of, because they are off in their own  little MTH proprietary world, which is the way MTH wants it.  I also agree the number of converts from conventional AC will likely be small because any command system is more complicated than none, and many conventional users don't have and/or want to spend the money for TMCC I, much less II.  The target audience is the slowly shrinking three rail O gauge market of serious hobbiests who are technically inclined and spending thousands or tens of thousands of dollars on their hobby.  Most of these folks are Lionel customers to some extent. 

Three years after the introduction of DCS, when surveys have been performed on the OGRR Forum, the number of TMCC users still outnumbered the DCS users by 2:1.  Given that the OGRR Forum is a heavily pro-MTH locale, this is quite telling.   Both are probably still outnumbered by conventional only people is my guess. Lionel has a large audience (compared with, say, MTH, Atlas, or, *chuckle* Williams) for these three rail locomotive products.  Those who adopted TMCC in 1996, like myself, will eventually incorporate TMCC II in many cases because it will add operating play value if I'm correct about my predictions.

But on balance, you're likely going to turn out to be right on these points ;). Which may be why the brain trust at Lionel dragged their feet about moving forward with TMCC II all this time.  It needs to be done, but it isn't going to be a big revenue producer itself.

[fwright]

nblum

Thanks for the well thought-out responses.  I think we're in pretty close agreement on the subject of TMCC 2. 

I am not a command system user in either my 3 rail O or my HO/HOn3 at present.  I'm an electrical engineer and systems implementation project manager that has been interested in sound and control systems in model railroading and toy trains since I was a kid.

Since almost all my 3 rail equipment is pre-1993 (mostly MPC and PW, some 1990-era, and a couple of Rail King items), TMCC would be the most likely upgrade path. Since for whatever reasons - I have my suspicions but not facts - DCS is not available for other than MTH products, DCS doesn't make much sense in my situation, no matter the pros or cons in comparison to TMCC.

In HO/HOn3, until/unless I start having more than 1 operator, there is no real reason for DCC.  Since I model 1900 era short line and narrow gauge, the locomotives are pretty small for a speaker system.  But if that hurdle can be overcome, current state of the art in HO is that sound systems do much better with DCC control than with DC.

Again, appreciate the thoughts and tone of your last 2 posts.  I learned from them.

yours in training

Fred W

[DennisB-1]

I really appreciate intelligent discussions. Thanks guys.

[dbaker48]

I really appreciate intelligent discussions. Thanks guys.

[mitchelr]

I really appreciate intelligent discussions. Thanks guys.

Amen!!!

[Andrew Falconer]

Brian,

This is an affordable family hobby, if you are Tom Hanks, Ron Howard, and Robert Zemeckis.

You might mean this hobby needs more available for the average family.

Andrew

[PaulEFudd]

" I'm an electrical engineer and systems implementation project manager that has been interested in sound and control systems in model railroading and toy trains since I was a kid."

If you really like sound systems (I am a sound junkie) in toy trains, do yourself a favor and listen, better yet - operate via a Cab-1 controller, to a Lionel steam engine with Railsounds 5.0 (or even 4.0).  If you don't agree its state of the art and like having a real steam engine in your basement then I would be very surprised.  Neil Young and crew must have of had a lot to do with this technology, and they get my vote for best (and funnest) feature in toy trains ever (and I have other manufacturers products to compare against).

As for TMCCII, if Jerry Calebrase was sincere in his interview with OGR, it should add some interesting operating characteristics to running trains.  I honestly don't know how it can get better; I can only surmise it will feature some sort of load/momentum feature whereby engines will respond to load/track conditions.

Paul

[Bucksco]

oooooh, You almost got me - but I'm not biting!

[brianel027]

I re-read the Jerry Calabrese interview tonight along with some past statements from former Lionel CEO's. So I do find all this "dangeroo" over the latest flavor of TMCC a real contradiction and rather humorous. By Lionel's own admission, usage of TMCC is a "disappointment" with at last count only 25% of the market utilizing it. This figure is over the course of a decade. So maybe... maybe the figure is now a whopping 30% of the market.

Calabrese seems to have an understanding by his own words, on how foolish both Lionel and the market in general have been over the past decade. And yet, so it seems, they continue to head full-tilt ahead down a dead-end siding that leads off a cliff. It almost seems like Lionel is enjoy trying to come up with some angle that will allow TMCC to control DCS stuff. And of course, MTH has spent millions to make sure TMCC can't control DSC locos. Childish? Foolish? The lawsuits are only the tip of the iceburg on how these 2 companies feel about each other.

Once again, by Lionel's own admission, starter related low end products account for the true bulk and majority of Lionel's overall sales. Maybe they figure since this is already good, they can ignore the true majority of buyers by continuing to re-issue the same old same old products in the same old worn-out postwar road names. Hey, seems to work.

But here is Lionel (along with MTH and the defunct K-Line) pouring millions of dollars into product development for the true minority of buyers. How about a simple version of TMCC that would give wireless control using absolutely any Lionel transformer? How about wireless control receiver single boxes to control track blocks? There are two products that would really change things and that the majority of buyers could actually use.

Calabrese knows what needs to be done. But whether he can convince the boys at the Bonanza Ranch to lay off the "hoss" and take a look at reality is another issue. Or whether he has the courage to face the vocal gang at OGR (who want Lionel to pour millions into products so they can buy them as blowouts like they did with K-Line's scale products), or the mob-mentality of the YORK gang, I sincerely doubt it. It's hard work to reach the untapped market. It's easy to respond to a guy who's breathing like an angry snorting bull, in front of your face telling you his long list of products Lionel needs to tool up from scratch... the same ones the others have already made, but he won't buy unless Lionel makes them. Look out hobby shops, here comes a new bunch of high end products... unfortunately they couldn't sell the last bunch. Well, until they become blowouts, then everyone buys.

Whatever advances the "Bonnie and Clyde" gang come up with for TMCC will hardly be revolutionary because the vast majority of modelers will never use them, and in part because they can't afford them. It ain't the 1950's anymore, and though Lionel certainly has name recognition, they do not have the esteemed position they once had in the toy industry. They can't even afford to advertise in the train magazines! Of course, maybe if they weren't spending so much money in the wrong places.....

Sounds to me, despite the talk, that Calabrese is content to run Lionel into oblivion by continuing to patronize the smallest segment (ever aging and ever getting smaller) of the hobby because they don't have the "dangeroo" to stand up to the minority and say, "you've had it good for years... now we're going to focus of the products that made Lionel a household name... toy trains and affordable, reasonable quality replicas." NASCAR trains might make some sales, but won't make any new lifetime customers.

But I can already hear the cries of disdain: "If Lionel won't make scale proportioned trains, we'll have to buy MTH." Well good! By MTH's own words, they're not making any money on these scale products either, hence the lawsuit where they stated margins on high end products are thin. It begs the question, if marins are so thin on all this high end stuff, why do they all continue to churn out more of it than anyone can buy? Maybe they're thinking they can't possibly go the way of K-Line. Hmmmm...

So the train forums will probably be full of yammer over these new control developments. Meanwhile in the latest CTT, there's a nice photo of the pre-production RMT BEEF loco. Anyone care to bet a zillion dollars, which will sell better: the new flavor of TMCC or the BEEF! C'mon. I'd like to be filthy rich and this bet isn't even a contest, cause RMT has it won hands down.

[nblum]

CCA answer recent OGR Board questions...

by Clyde Coil
July 28, 2006

Are the rechargeable batteries built in or replaceable?
Yer CAB2 batteries are replaceable and are charged whenever yer CAB2 rests in its charger-base. There is only one command base needed per layout and yer first base will be a charger-command base. All other remotes only require a charger base. You can tell the difference in yer new catalog by looking at the monitor lights on the LEGACY base. That is yer command-charger base. The LIONEL base is a charger only and has no extra command lights.

Do all Legacy locs travel at the same speed at the same speed step?
Yesiree Hoss!

Are TMCC locs compatible with Legacy locs in a lash-up?
They can be. Since TMCC1 locs have varying speed tables. Yer gonna have to user pre-set the 5 railroad standard speeds on yer TMCC 1 locs to match pre-programmed railroad standard speeds on yer TMCC2 Legacy locs. Once that is done, there are 5 official railroad standard speeds that yer TMCC1 and TMCC2 engines can be run in lash-ups. These speeds are accessed by pushing the speed button on yer remote and using the 5 speeds available on yer touchscreen. These speeds are based on prototypical mph speeds used by American Railroads.

What about SMPH?
SMPH is patented, however LIONEL TMCC2 LEGACY locs run at twice the resolution or 1/2 smph speeds. Whether those speeds can be monitored in SMPH is a legal issue for LIONEL lawyers to decide. The speed graph can be set to read numbers 1 - 200 or numbers 1 - 100. No SMPH labeling is anticipated for legal reasons. DANG! How 'bout that Hoss? Lawyers are gonna decide what you can look at in yer screen! Who can we thank for that? DANG!

Do we need the old plastic overlays anymore for TMCC1 locs?
No. Never again Hoss! The LEGACY Touch-screen is alive and changes to the exact command icons yer old TMCC1 loc needs to see! That is DANG cool!!

We will watch yer OGR board for more questions.....

---

Lou Kovach of LIONEL/CTC plays PT Barnun...

by D. Railer
July 28, 2006

Mr. Kovach selected a series of helpers to demonstrate TMCCII Legacy to a friendly crowd of over 600 at the LIONEL Collector's Club of America annual meeting in Denver CO tonight.

He started with a giant CAB2 and had one of his helpers act as Vana White as he ably demonstrated how the hand held operates. At the same time Lou pick two young ones from the audience to show the first two LEGACY CAB2 hand-held remotes to each and every person in the hall.

Lou then took us through the functions of the handheld and showed us that you can use it in the same way as a CAB1. What this meant is if you have worked a CAB1 you could use the new CAB2 without any pilot training at all!

Then a very animated Lou Kovach took us through the cool new features of the CAB2. He started off by showing us a revolutionary way of controlling the speed of our trains. The top screen in very large and is mostly devoted to speed control graphing.

Lou showed us with the giant CABII the concept of how to set a target speed and how the actual speed of the loco would follow and match it. We then learned that the familiar red knob has has been inproved with incremental clicks and how you can go really fast with one turn of the dial, or you can be much more precise to take up to 5 turns of the dial to operate the loco through all 200 speed steps, with every move illustrated precisely on the speed graph.

Lou demonstrated that the lower touch-screen has many different looks based upon function. First an engine was selected with numbers, then engine icons or symbols appeared automatically to operate all engine functions!

He then took us through the slider Train Brake and slider Horn/Whistle controls located on both the left and right sides of the remote and introduced the concept of an effects generator. He said that all remotes up to this point were event generators, and that event generators make one event based on an input. An effect generator, like the CAB2, sends more than one command and lets you act out a series of events planned not by the engine but by the operator of the remote.

He then showed how this new concept by controlling the whistle in a completely new way. He was able to control how it operated with the movement of his thumb by pulling the sprung-slider down farther and farther, increasing the intensity of the horn and making it down-right fun to play with.

On the left side there is another slider for the train brake. This also controls engines in a whole new way. This controls how the train responded to the operators input controlling the effects of the complete train including speed, sound and smoke. Lou talked about some of the other controls on the CAB2 but I knew it was time to run some trains and that's what Mr. Kovach did.

The big CAB 2 was put way and then Lou introduced a whole new cast of characters to help him show how the train runs. He picked four people from the audience to come join him. He began by appointing management to take care of the power control.

He then assigned two engineers to run the train and the fourth guy was the maintenance operator.

Each played a role but the task of power management proved to be vital because the demonstration track was over 20 feet long of fast-track that ended with a tremendous drop at both ends. This turned out to be vital because he made his demonstrations work with 2 $1800.00 Allegheny engines. You could see the tension build from the crowd as at any moment these engines could have hit the floor. While Lou talked up the system, two helpers that had never used a CAB2 before operated these $1800 locomotives.

Lou twice asked Jerry C. if it was OK to trash these locos if necessary. Jerry's smile of ascent was just a little bit fixed at this point all of which added to the fun. Needless to say the engines operated flawlessly with super crawling starts and stops. Very very smooth!

Lou was also able to easily show that the new system could operate the original TMCC with no problems at all. He was even able to show that a TMCC2 locomotive could be operated by an old command base, but the real difference came when he operated both TMCCI and TMCCII engines with the new Legacy base! The difference was amazing! The level of operation increased many fold.

The crowd was completely convinced that all was well in LIONELVILLE and that no train would be left behind. Two BIG things struck me when the Legacy engine was run with CABII. The first was the great increase in the precision that the locomotive was operated with. This was in all aspects, speed, sound and smoke. The second thing that was outstanding was the whistle control. Once Lou's helpers demonstrated the whistle control, I started to understand what he meant by calling the new CABII an effects generator. The whistle sounds were made in real time.... This put the operator in control of the sounds, not a preset sequence in the software like all previous LIONEL or other electric trains!

All through the demo Lou appeared to have a wonderful time. He continued to tell us his purpose was not just to show off the new electronics but show that TMCC LEGACY was created so we would have more fun with our trains! Over and over he showed us that people of no experience with the system could easily understand and enjoy running new TMCC LEGACY. More than once we had cliff hangers with the two giant steamers. At the end of the Demo Lou asked if we wanted to see one more thing. The crowd cheered and resounding YES.

Earlier Lou had asked a volunteer to come on up and dismantle a command control FM with pullmor motors, TMCC and RS4. He replaced just one component. The old radio board was replaced with the new radio board. Then he put in on the track. The first run was totally unexpected! It looked like a yellow and blue rocket ship! The crowd went silent. Thank god Lou managed cut off the power in time with the CAB2! After an investigation, one of the new volunteer engineers had just discovered the velocity knob control and "power management" over-reacted by turning the knob really fast like he used to with the CAB1. Everyone learned that when the CAB2 red knob was turned quickly the train really moved quickly! It had been a case of operator error! Lou then explained it to "power management" and power was quickly restored and the trains were running again.

All of a sudden this Pullmor powered FM had far more precise speed steps and was running down the track as never before!! Lou ended the demo to long bursts of applause and thanks. I could not believe this engineering type that I thought I knew could be a stand in for P.T. Barnum as a showman!!! He raised his hand in thanks to all that had listened to the first introduction to TMCC LEGACY. After the demo Lou was mobbed with questions. More developments and details later.....

[Bucksco]

Will it run Proto 2  locos?

[nblum]

" Will it run Proto 2  locos?"

I dunno.  It will if you want the three rail O gauge legal attack dogs let loose :).

Anyhow.....Not an issue for me.  Nor for Clyde I'd guess :).  They're primarily addressing the 65% of the market that uses TMCC, not the 35% that uses DCS.

 If you want to run PS2, you need DCS.  If you want to run TMCC, you need TMCC.  It's quite simple.

Just a refresher,  that DCS doesn't run TMCC, it talks to the Lionel command base.  Try running your TMCC locos with DCS in command mode without the Lionel command base,  and you'll have the same results as running your PS2 locos with TMCC without DCS.

[Bucksco]

If TMCC II talks to my TIU I might buy it.

[nblum]

Jack, do you have TMCC I?  If not, I don't think you'll be interested in TMCC II.

There's a small proportion of command users who use only DCS.  I believe the percentage quoted in CTT polls by Bob Keller is around 10-20% of all command users.  I suspect Lionel is not aiming for that part of the market, but for the 80-90% who use TMCC I or TMCC I  + DCS.  Even I, a TMCC user for 10 years, plan to wait a while before thinking about acquiring TMCC II.  TMCC I is that good :).

[Bucksco]

Neil,

I've got TMCC I and DCS. I like the way they operate together. I am impressed with the new TMCC II controller but unfortunately the majority of my "O" locos are proto 2. I will be interested to see how it all shakes out. I only bring the O scale stuff out at Christmas these days so it's not really "life threatening" (I've been a bit pre-occupied with bigger toys as of late).