TMCC designer leaves Lionel ??

[spankybird]

Incase you haven’t been surfing the other forums, there are threads that Lionel has released Lou Kovach. He is credited with TMCC as it is know today.

[nblum]

Lou Kovacs did not design TMCC. He designed the TPC300/400 and other addons that came some years later from his company IC Controls, which Lionel purchased. Anyone who has credited him with TMCC "as it is known today" is unfamiliar with the origins and history of TMCC.

[spankybird]

Nblum, you need to relax and not have your short in a wad all the time.

We not reporting what he did or didn’t do, just that he is no longer with Lionel, maybe (?). This is what is being said on the other forums. I personally don’t know if its true or not.

Maybe you with all your inside people can.

[nblum]

You as much as stated that he is credited with the design of TMCC as it exists today. That's completely false. I have no idea where you got that impression, but you seem to have a lot of sources of information that are interested in making Lionel look as bad as possible. They are misleading you. My shorts aren't in a wad, I am merely correcting a whopper of a mis-statement. Lou Kovach is no doubt a talented and accomplished guy, but had he never been born, TMCC would be exactly what it is today, pretty much.

[spankybird]

I didn't, people on other forum did. Some of them feel it is the end of future develpoment of tmcc. I don't agree with that, but you can go read ORG forum and see what they are saying.

[Anonymous]

Just to keep the record straight: TMCC was created and designed by rock singer Neil Young and his LionTech firm, in cooperation with Lionel Trains Inc. and then-owner Richard Kughn.

[nblum]

In addition to Allan's accurate and concise history, it is worth pointing out we do not know whether Lou Kovach's consulting agreement with Lionel ended or whether he was an employee or whatever. Their parting may have been perfectly amicable or because Mr. Kovach wished to pursue other paths. When Lionel bought IC Controls, they contracted for Lou's services. His presence or absence may have no bearing on the future development of TMCC or its successors. For one thing, Neil Young is still an owner at Lionel and a relatively young man :).

[nblum]

One more point. This is probably a good juncture to point out to those new to the hobby that there is a "war" going on in this industry, as evidenced by the flood of lawsuits. In this war, disinformation about the competitors spread by dealers, the company themself and their loyalists is everywhere. Unless you see something confirmed by the company involved or truly reliable, trustworthy sources, treat all such scandal mongering as suspect.

[spankybird]

I would hate to see anyone loose their job. It really cut down on the number of trains you can buy.

Here is the link to Model Train Journal
"TMCC Inventor let go by Lionel"

http://modeltrainjournal.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=532&sid=88d2b4751cc2d1547c8c393288d7f2fb

Don't blame me, I didn't write it.

I just thought some of the members here that don't surf other forum would like to know.

[ChiefEagles]

"Incase you haven’t been surfing the other forums, there are threads that Lionel has released Lou Kovach. He is credited with TMCC as it is know today."

That was Spanky's post. He did not say he was saying that. Neil, he sucked you in. [:D]

[nblum]

Here's some facts, at least as I know them.

Lou Kovach was not a partner or investor in Lionel, as Neil Young has been since 1995 and *** Kughn since 1986. Wellsprings, a capital investment firm is the majority owner since 1995. Mr. Kovach owned his own third party train electronics firm IC Controls, which was purchased by Lionel a few years back. My guess is his leaving is part of the expected outcome when a CEO joins an acquiring firm during a technology acquisition transition. His consulting/employment agreement that was arranged during the acquisition has probably expired.

Lionel has almost certainly spent millions on lawsuits (as has MTH) since 2000 which doesn't exactly help the budget for R&D, which is always the first to suffer. There also apparently hasn't been a landslide of demand for command control beyond the initial adopters, which probably dictates the pace of development of TMCC enhancements.

Right now in TMCC Lionel's got a command control system that literally costs less than $100 to implement, compared with several hundred dollars more for the competition. Despite the fact that it was developed 5-7 years before DCS it's still got better sound quality, is easier to implement and trouble shoot, and more reliable. And simpler and cheaper. Adding features and capabilities adds cost and raises reliability issues, and Lionel may well have chosen to taken a more deliberate path to enhancements for that reason as well.

Remember these are tiny companies with $50-100 million per year in revenue. At most their R&D budget for electronics (as opposed to trains and accessories) is probably in the 1 million or less range, maybe much less. And that covers salaries, materials and all the overhead of that department.

[ChiefEagles]

Neil, thanks for the facts. Now we know.

[Anonymous]

I found the information on the OGR FORUM and passed
it on to MTJ. The Internet is a big fence and we are all just
standing around gossiping. I don't see the harm, and am
in no way in favor of the demise of Lionel or any other train
company! NO HARM NO FOUL!

nblum;

I'm sorry that I don't know everything in the world like you do!
I, like others here, actually HAVE A LIFE and just look at the
trains AS A HOBBY! Some times even ADULTS like to guess,
wonder and speculate. It's outbursts like yours that get others
angry and disgusted. Take a deep breath, take five and CHILL
OUT!

rant over.............sorry all.

[3railguy]

Spankybirdy, Neil is not the one with his panties in a wad. When you post false statements on forums, stand to be corrected. What is it written in the MTJ that you find so offensive?

[Anonymous]

Has anyone else noticed how aggressive this forum has become lately? Model trains are just a hobby - for fun and relaxation. I think it's time for all of us to calm down and just get back to the basics. Who really cares if Lionel made a corprate move. I'm sure Lou Kovach will be fine. Apparently he is a pretty intellegent individual. Lionel laid off how may factory workers when they began to import trains from overseas - personally I feel bad for those people instead. Hey chief - perhaps it's time to switch the coffee pot to decaf?

[nblum]

Some of the misinformation that is widespread in this hobby is obviously innocent. However, this industry is very polarized and partisan at present. There is some intentional disinformation from dealers, manufacturers and hobbiests who have a vested interest in proving their own products or tastes superior and running down the competition. It's just the way the world is right now.

I didn't intend to criticize anyone for repeating erroneous information from elsewhere, I merely set the record straight. No offense intended.

[Buckeye Riveter]

"Here's some facts, at least as I know them."

"My guess is his leaving is part of the expected outcome when a CEO joins an acquiring firm during a technology acquisition transition. His consulting/employment agreement that was arranged during the acquisition has probably expired. "

A guess is now a fact.....I learn something everyday.

[spankybird]

3railguy,

I sorry, you are wrong. I don’t have my pants in a wad, others do. I didn’t make any false statements, I pointed out what was being said other places. It wasn’t my words. And I have now pointed that out twice. I made that clear in the beginning.

I don’t find anything offensive in MTJ, except for some of the language that is sometimes used (but was not used in this thread).

My point of MTJ was the Title of the thread “TMCC Inventor let go by Lionel". If nblum has a problem of what I said, he should really be upset with ‘Lou being the inventor’.

[spankybird]

Nblum, I have to ask you, from your posting of May 9, 2004 “TMCC Development” that your friend is doing, Why is he going to change the “Sounds in the engines will be improved, more like MTH” if you fell that TMCC sounds are better than PS2 sound?


And yes you are correct that TMCC is around $100.00 and DCS can be purchased for around $250.00 (list is $300.00) but on the other hand PS2 engines can be purchased for as little as $179.00. You pay a little more up front and a lot less latter. Also DCS can run both systems.

[3railguy]

Spankybird, I now see your point on the MTJ tittle. Other than that, I don't recall reading on other forums such as OGR that Kovak designed TMCC. All Neil did was set the record straight as to the info you got and you attacked him. So have others.

This quote by Neil was not aimed specifically at you.

QUOTE: Anyone who has credited him with TMCC "as it is known today" is unfamiliar with the origins and history of TMCC.

[nblum]

Spankybird, I was referring to the quality of the sounds of Railsounds, particularly the horns, whistles and bells. This has more to do with speaker enclosure design than electronics, admittedly. There are those who like the additional variety of sounds (passenger and freight announcements, etc.) that PS2 offers, and expanding the memory capabilities of Railsounds to include these is what I was referring to. There is no question that PS2 has more features and variety of sounds than Railsounds and TMCC. The acoustic quality of Railsounds are, in most cases, still notably superior and this is most important to me. Your mileage may vary :).

As far as cost, DCS is only $150 to $200 more expensive to begin with, but for larger layouts one requires additional TIUs, not necessary with TMCC. Also, additional DCS handhelds, with most people wanting more than one, are $75 more expensive. Finally, a whole lot more wire and terminals are used in any medium to large size layout, and other items like lightbulbs, soldered connections are sometimes required with DCS but not TMCC. While it is true you can use the DCS handheld to control a TMCC loco and cannot do so with a PS2 locos and cab-1, this is because Lionel has made the codes for TMCC publicly available, something MTH has refused to do. In any case, you need a command base and cab-1 to really use TMCC with DCS, just like you need a TIU and DCS handheld to really use PS2 if you have TMCC. It's true that it's alot cheaper to add TMCC capability to DCS than vice versa. The one strength of the MTH line is that PS2 is present, as you say, in a wider range of cost niches than TMCC. That is a weakness Lionel should fix, I agree. That's the cost issue to me in a nutshell.

[spankybird]

3rialguy,

I have no problem with nblum setting the facts straight on who did what. In fact I am thankful for the history lesson.

As for whom was attacking whom, first remember I didn’t make the statement that he first attacked me.

Second he continued with a false statement

QUOTE: but you seem to have a lot of sources of information that are interested in making Lionel look as bad as possible. They are misleading you…

. I didn’t say anything bad about Lionel.

[nblum]

My comments refer to the fact that in the past you have posted any number of disparaging comments about Lionel and quoted as a source the dealers you knew in your home area. I was cautioning that these folks are either misinformed or have an axe to grind (i.e., they want to sell MTH trains rather than Lionel trains). A not uncommon problem . There are certainly Lionel dealers who will do the same sort of thing. That's the world we live in.

[Anonymous]

It's not the information...It's the attitude! No one on either forum claimed to know it all or have any inside information. All people were doing is talking. NBlum decided that the rest of us were utrterly ignorant and decided to come on as an autority on this subject as he does on other subjects. It's a shame that grown adults can't get along and just talk without having everything interpreted for them. That's why the world is in the condition it is today. Maybe I don't want my future children to be in this hobby after all. I'll just leave everything to the rich know it alls. Maybe they'l be happy then.

[nblum]

I'm not crazy about your attitude either. Don't expect me to apologize for intruding into what you seem to consider "your" forum. :)

The reality is that when you put your opinions here on a public forum they have the potential to affect other people's livelihoods and happiness, so if you're woefully mistaken about something, don't expect it to go uncorrected. Some of us consider the truth an important issue, not just an optional part of a conversation. This isn't just a few friends talking in private, it's an international public space. I have as much right to my opinions, goals and attitudes as you do. If you don't like my approach or tone, I'm sorry to hear that, but just don't read what I have to say. Nobody is forcing you to do so.

[spankybird]

Nblum, you make is sound as if you need many TUI to run a layout. I have two layouts, one is 10 x 20 and the other is 5 x 8 and both are run on one TIU. You would need a really large layout to require more than one TIU.

Here are the track plans for both of my layouts, with only one TIU.

and


When I installed DCS, I did not have to rewire anything. It was just add the TIU between the transformer and the track leads. Oh, and add a circuit breaker box because of using a ZW.

[3railguy]

Well, spanky, I guess accusing a guy of getting his shorts in a wad is not an attack but more of a thanks.

Pease, posting on a forum is different than people talking to each other. You're talking to everybody when you post. I know Neil's writing. He doesn't come off as an authority (at least to me). He just has a habit of bringing overzealous brand loyalists down to earth.

[ChiefEagles]

Not going to argue which is best. I plan on running both but DCS is more forgiving than some say. I am running it in a spare room on carpet. It shows a track signal of 10 on three loops [connected by various swtiches]. No fancy lockons and no fancy wiring. Ran conventional on it the other day and those engines would slow in spots where the PS2's did not and performed great. Had to add lockons to get the conventionals to run good. My point: DCS is more forgiving than conventional. I'm sure when I add TMCC, it will be too. [it is easier to add TMCC to DCS than "vise a versa"]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: I know Neil's writing. He doesn't come off as an authority (at least to me). He just has a habit of bringing overzealous brand loyalists down to earth.

To me, Neil comes off as just "another" overzealous brand loyalist needing to get his two cents worth in, when it comes to defending Lionel. Not that I care, it's just how it appears to me.

[nblum]

Not that I care, but you're wrong.

My loyalty and passion in life extend to myself and my family, my community, my country, my species and the hobby, in that order. I often prefer Lionel trains for sentimental and technologic reasons, but I own equipment from literally every current manufacturer and enjoy them all.

On the other hand, perhaps when I seem to you and some others like a zealous brand loyalist it is usually, in my view, because I am responding to equally zealous opinions or misinformation generated by those who have different preferences and seek to denigrate my own.

There are also those who wi***o reshape the hobby and industry as it now exists, and there are those who zealously support them. These changes would not serve my best interests, or, in my opinion, the hobby's. Thus I'm merely sticking up for my own interests and those who share my opinions.