A Topic for Discussion!

[eZAK]

Here are some topics I feal should be discussed.

Of ALL the model RRs out there, How many actualy use some sort of remote control?

I think less than 10%.

How many buy an engine with a sound system other than a bell & whistle.

Again less than 10%.

Why?

Lack of knowledge?
Fear?
Money?
Trust?

"........'cause I really want to know..."

[Anonymous]

eZAK;

I think it's all of the reasons that you list plus the
fact that with the new-tech there is a lot of planned
obsolesence, so what is new today is old tomorrow
and no longer supported. Just like computer gear.
Other problems are reliablility and repairability.
The old-tech is much easier to maintain and doesn't
need repair as often. Parts for 50+ year old trains
are still available and the "average bear" can do his
own repairs. There is already availability problems
with replacement parts for a lot of the newer sound
boards and such. What will things be like 30 years
from now?

Maybe in another decade we will know for sure. Maybe
in another decade the fragility issues with the new-tech
electronics will be resolved. After all, it took awhile to
make a reliable E-Unit "back in the day". Meanwhile I
think people will tend to stay with what works in the
long run. Cost is a consideration as well. The new
technology is pricey.

[Kooljock1]

Pat,

I can't speak to the issue of remotes, except to say that everyone I know around here with a permanent layout has either TMCC, DCS, or both. Same goes for my H.O. brethren.

As far as buying engines with or without sounds, I defy anyone to find many engines without full sound packages. Sure there's Williams. And LIONEL has those two 0-6-0's coming out, and a little starter set 4-4-2, but even my kids' NYC Flyer has full-blown RailSounds, as do most every engine from both LIONEL and M-T-H.

As for me? I won't buy an engine without full sounds, TMCC, and Odyssey. I did just buy the LIRR Camelback, which doesn't have Odyssey, but only after calling T.A.S. to find out if they had a cruise up-grade coming out. It will be out this Fall, and they'll also be able to up-grade my "Baby" Hudson and K4s.

I'm not a big "Techno" kind of guy. Heck, we just bought our first CD player last Christmas! But I want my trains to have "all the bells and whistles"!!!

Jon [8D]

[nitroboy]

For me, I won't buy an engine with remote control. One reason is I don't have the money too. I love the detail, but can't afford it. Plus, my layout isn't that big, a 14x9 "L" shaped layout. Another reason is, in my opinion, they are way overpriced. There are alot of people that will pay $1500 for an engine, and God bless you, but my own personal boycott will remain in effect, even if I could afford them. And who knows, in a few years the prices may come down, hopefully because of my boycott [:D], and alot more people can enjoy these high tech engines.

As far a sound systems, if its in there, great, if not, oh well. I can enjoy my trains however they look, sound or smell. I'm not greedy. If it runs, myself and my 2 year old daughter will get plenty of joy out of them.

[3railguy]

Ezak, when you say "all model RR" are you refering to N, HO, and S gauge as well as O gauge? Or O gauge alone?

[ChiefEagles]

Right now, I'm buying about 75 % all sounds and remote operation and 25% not. Most of the 25% will be converted. I'm looking for certain road names and units. They are not all in sound and DCS or TMCC. Was going to convert some of my older [late 70's to mid 80's] Lionel engines but may not now. We'll see. Running remote sure is a lot easier. $$$ are a factor so I will go slow.

[Anonymous]

I think Ezak is a little off on his assessment of the number of people using "remote". I would put the % more around 50% to 60%. And for those not within the 50 to 60 range, I would say about 50% of them would convert given the money.

There will always be a segment of users that prefer to stick to the tradinational (old fashion) method of model railraoding. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, as long as you enjoy running trains.

[FJ and G]

I'm about where Chief is on this. Enjoying best of both worlds.

[Anonymous]

Last year, when I first got into the hobby, I had heard a statistic from Lionel quoted which put the penetration of command control into O gauge at 20%. Later in the year, around Christmas time, I had heard that Lionel had revised those numbers to 40%.

I agree, the penetration has to be in the 50 to 60% range at this point.

Granted, not everyone wants command control, and just about everyone starting out doesn't know it exists. I think that will change with time, as everything changes.

Regarding the price of command control equipped engines, not every engine with command control goes for $1500. I believe the lowest price for a command equipped engine that I saw in the latest Lionel catalog was in the $300 - $400 range. And the trend seems to be for the prices to decrease lately.

Tony

[Bob Keller]

This is a topic that we've included on our "paper" surveys going back five or more years. Our most recent paper survey has it as roughly 60% conventional and 40% command. Command growth has been very slow.

[FJ and G]

IMO slow growth partly due to non-aggressive marketing. Hobby shops could set up hands-on demos for customers. Sure it would be a hassle, but would result in ROI. Same for shows.

[Anonymous]

I am too afraid that I would probably burn them out. The boards are very delicate. I think someone said in a topic a while ago it is nice until the novelty of the thing wore off. I am not sure who it was but he said he only uses it when he wants to show off to visitors. I bought a new set but I probably won't make use of all the technology it can offer me. I agree that all of the four that ezak mentioned are resons why my trains will remain simple.

[ChiefEagles]

Well, I got a late start and believe it or not, I got two NS SD90's PS2 one for $225 [including shipping] and the other for $200 [including shipping]. I did the locator on MTH and they gave me the hobby shops that had the units. Two had sold out and two had one each [1 in NY and 1 in AL]. Mighty cheap for PS2. Look and shop. There are some bargins sitting on the shelf. I saw one in an add in CTT for NS PS2 diesel for $219. Mighty tempting.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NYCentralPA

I am too afraid that I would probably burn them out. The boards are very delicate. I think someone said in a topic a while ago it is nice until the novelty of the thing wore off. I am not sure who it was but he said he only uses it when he wants to show off to visitors. I bought a new set but I probably won't make use of all the technology it can offer me. I agree that all of the four that ezak mentioned are resons why my trains will remain simple.

NYCentralPA:

The electronics in command engines are, in my opinion, no more delicate than the electronics in any other electronic appliance. The difference is that trains run in an environment where it's possible for them to be subjected to currents flowing through the circuits in a manner not intended by the circuit's designer.

This also happens with all kinds of home electronics that are hit by voltage spikes caused by lightning strikes on the nearby power lines. The solution to this problem is the surge suppressor. The solution to this same command equipped engine problem is also surge suppression.

In this case, the suprressor goes between the track & transformer & is activated in the case where a train derails. I don't have any statics for you, but I've read many anecdotes on the OGR TMCC forum of people who were having boards fry out implementing surge suprression & no longer having engines fry.

The theory behind these devices is sound. You can get ready made supressors from Scotts Odds & Ends for reasonable prices, especially considering the cost of the locos that are often command equipped.

At any rate, I've gone the TMCC route and I enjoy it.

Tony

[choochin3]

AC Motors & Eunits FOREVER!!!!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NYCentralPA

I am not sure who it was but he said he only uses it when he wants to show off to visitors.

I posted a very similar comment on a thread reguarding digital F3's vs postwar F3's a few weeks ago. It seems as if this might become a often discussed topic for quite some time.

Basiclly, the end result that we all look for is a locomotive pulling cars down the track. There are some of us who pruchase and operate big buget models that involve a number of interconnected electrical boxes and handheld units that eventually end up as two wires connected to 3 rail track providing signals and power from which the model uses to operate. Then there are those of us who purchase and operate modest budget models that involve one or two electrical boxes that make a two wire connection to 3 rail track that provide signals and power from which the model uses to operate. The end result is the same, just the process is quite different. Personally, as a proud BLET member, I can honsetly say that I prefer to see a locomotive operated hands on instead of by a remote control box. (Both in real ife and on plywood!!)

I do belive that durability is an issue that should be taken more seriously by the model railroad community as a whole. Modern electronics have yet to prove themselves over the test of time. The oldest railsounds eqipped locomotive is only 14 tears old, compared to my oldest locomotive which is 58 years old (and would put most any new locomotive to shame!) From pesonal experience, my first "modern" model no longer works, and it is very frustrating to think that a manufactuer would produce a product that could not last 5 years of irregular use yet charge $400.00 as a retail price. Very sad.

The manufactuers can help out the remote control situation considerably though, just by focusing a little attention on two words: standardization and cost. I do applaud most of the manufacuers for making an effort to offer TMCC as the remote operating system of choice. And I especially applaud Atlas O for recognizing their mistake early on with the "locomatic" system of the ALP 44/ AEM 7 and installing TMCC on future releases. MTH on the other hand, needs a little smack for stubbornly producing non TMCC compatable models and then charging such a high price ($250) for their DCS system. The argument that DCS can operate TMCC locomotives is a bunch of crap as well because the critical word is standardization. Incompatability is just that. Cost is the other issue. How much does it really cost to produce each model? Ceartainly nowhere close to the prices printed in the catalogs. Remember when model trains used to be considered toys? How many products offered today would any middle class father have no problem giving to his 8 year old son to play with in the floor? Price is a serious issue that must be taken seriously to preserve the hobby. K Line is on the right path with $50 diesels. My 5 year old son will be happy to have one for christmas this year ( allthough he is not old enough to remember Conrail let alone the PRR, but that is another issue for another day).

Slowly the model railroad community is beginning to polarize to "command" group and a "traditional" group, similar to the "operators" and "collectors" catagorized themselves in years past. When will everything settle? Who knows? Unfortunately lawyers will have a direct and major influence on our hobby in the near future. The blueprint trial and the logo infringement trial being two of the major current examples. Pity.

In the meantime, i'll be content with what I currently own. Now where is my track cleaning rag................?

[brianel027]

Actually Notch (and I agree with you on many things) I don't think the polarization is any worse today... there have always been differences between train guys. Being a "collector" was the BIG thing 15 years ago. Today, operators get much more respect not only from the companies, but from the collectors as well.

I think some of the polarization we witness in the hobby is due to this right here... the internet, and the fact we can so freely communicate our feelings on the hobby with others. As with anything in this human life, there is good and bad. Most of us would agree, we learn much, can promote and share the hobby through these train forums. BUT we can also get pretty vocal and opinionated on our wishes and wants... and like many other internet chat places, it's anonymous... meaning it's a little easier to hurl an insult or two at someone you don't know at all. As it is likewise as easy to get hurt over something someone else said that wasn't meant to be hurtful.

All that said, (even if money wasn't tight for me) I prefer traditional control. It's more affordable and more reliable as far as I'm concerned. I can fix the stuff myself and I still have fun with it. But that's me. And I respect guys like Jon and the Chief for having as much fun with their trains as I do, albeit in a different manner.

On the issue of "control" though, I've also read that where the appearance of "command" sales looks strong is with engines. I've been told most folks are seeking locos that have the option of being command operated, even though they may not be using a command system to run them. I guess they just want the option to be there for them in the future.

NO matter how you run the trains, it suppose to be about fun. And if folks are having fun running trains, I'm in no position to judge them on how they "control" that fun.

[FJ and G]

One other quick idea for advancing sales of TMCC and DCS. (perhaps this already is being done?):

On the LIonel and MTH websites, make available a simulation that users can run with their key and/or mouse. Not the real thing, but a small taste, perhaps?

Seems like the biggest thing holding back increase in CC is lack of testing the stuff. Generally speaking, when users try CC out, many, if not most, become hooked. The key, then, like the auto salesmen, is to get them to the show room and get them to do some test drives.

Basically that simple.

Dave V

[ben10ben]

Coil Couplers ( www.coilcouplers.com ) has such a TMCC simulation as David mentioned above, as well as a number of tutorials.

I use TMCC mainly, and have no intentions of going back. My roster still leans toward conventional, with 6 of my 10 engines being conventional, and my most recently purchased engine a conventional engine(Lionel 675). My command engines, overall, though, get more run time, and I am currently planning to buy another command engine in the next few weeks(K-line Allegheny).

I have yet to have any sort of catastrophic failure of any of my command engines. In fact, I've only had to replace two parts in them. One was a mechanical switch tied in with the Railsounds system, and the other from a bad batch of boards from the factory. Both of these were in the same K-line engine, and both were replaced by K-line at no cost, even outside the warranty period.

I have been running command control since December of 2002. My first TMCC engine was a conversion of one the following February. My next three were aquired in March of 2003, December of 2003, and February of 2004.

[FJ and G]

As well, the latest additions to my roster have been conventional, primarily Williams, due to the high price of CC. For example, I picked up a beautiful 2-motored Williams U-boat for about the price of an MTH dummy U-boat.

[jmpmap]

Ever since TMCC arrived, I made the committment to buy only TMCC equipped engines. I like the flexibility of having no set control panel. To me, it is nice to walk around the layout and see it from different angles rather than sitting in one spot. Sound adds another dimension to trains. This transformed me from a collector into an operator. I still have the postwar displayed and enjoy it.

[Anonymous]

There ain't no wrong way to enjoy trains.

The current penetration of command control in O gauge and the polarization of the community reminds me of something I read about the TCA. I think Allan Miller said this same thing on another thread somewhere.

Twenty years ago, postwar trains were considered junk by most of the TCA membership. Then, only prewar trains were collectible. This attitude reflected what the predominant collectors of the time cherished, which were the trains that they grew up with. As I remember reading, postwar was just plastic junk to them. The (then) younger folks who grew up with postwar & wanted to collect those trains were derided.

It's the same thing now. Many of the prewar dudes from 20 years ago have gone on to the big roundhouse in the sky & the postwar colelctors have taken their place. To them, "real trains" are operated by a handle from a fixed control station. None of this newfangled computerized command control stuff for them, if you please.

In 20 years, you won't be able to buy anything without command control. Those of us who are embracing command control now will be the predominant collectors, and we'll probably be deriding those newfangled thought controlled engines.

Tony

[GregM]

Same as others have stated, I am one of those people who won't purchase engines without TMCC and after having it in a few engines, they must have speed control. I have a few conventional engines that I have no desire to upgrade and will probably put up for sale.

[eZAK]

Great responces! Keep 'em coming.

Well it seems I might have been a bit off with my 10% estimate.
I arrived at that feeling that about 50% of forum members use CC.
I also felt or heard that only about 20% of toy train owners use the forums.
That left me with the 10%.

Now, since we don't have any sale figures from our beloved importers how can we estimate the penatration of CC?
Maybe those of you with hobby stores can help us out?

Given a conservative estimate of 40%, including all scales from 'N' thru 'G', It would seem prudent to incorporate some of the other 60% (of those that are willing) into CC.
Even if it were just a hand held with speed control & two buttons, one for horn and one for bell.

Just an observation, But I've seen many layouts with nothing more than an on/off switch connected to a pre-set transformer (primarily in 'G', 'S', & 'N' scales, & a few 'HO' &'O'). Garden, museum & store layouts come to mind.

The idea of hands on is a good one. It can be done in any setting given certain parameters are set.

With all that being said, would anyone buy a no frills CC packaged with a starter set?
Provided one were in the market for a starter set.

My point here is that to promote the techno aspects of our hobby would only serve to ensure the future!

[Anonymous]

I suppose remote control is a good thing, but I don't seem to own any remote compatable engines, and I'm not going to spend any extra money on a controller anyway. I imagine many of the conventional people must be like me; small layout, inexpensive loco's, no computer control, and no desire (or money) to get that deep in the hobby. I guess there must be lots of wealthy people buying those thousand Dollar computerized engines.... I can't even imagine. Fortunately for me, the regular affordable ones work great.

[tschmidt]

I have been at this for little over a year now and I will probably stay with TMCC engines from Lionel. The new crane car works great wiith it also. I can control everything with one controller by assigning different numbers to each engine or other cars operated by TMCC. I am guessing that if Lionel is successful with their new crane cars they will keep introducing new things with TMCC. I even control my switches and routes with it. I had one engine I bought upgraded to railsounds, etc. I think it's great that I can be anywhere in the room and operate/watch the trains. There is a train shop that is great in helping learn how to use TMCC and even offers workshops to customers. I think (hope) prices will come down as time goes on.

Tom

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Santafekent

I suppose remote control is a good thing, but I don't seem to own any remote compatable engines, and I'm not going to spend any extra money on a controller anyway. I imagine many of the conventional people must be like me; small layout, inexpensive loco's, no computer control, and no desire (or money) to get that deep in the hobby. I guess there must be lots of wealthy people buying those thousand Dollar computerized engines.... I can't even imagine. Fortunately for me, the regular affordable ones work great.

I believe I've said this in another thread, or maybe in this one earlier.

Not all command equipped engines have prices in the $1k range. Lionel's last catalog has the cheapest CC equipped engines in the $300 range.

The $1k+ engines cost that much not because of CC but because of the level of scale detailing applied to the engine. When you're spending that much for an engine, it might as well have CC in it, too.

Tony

[Back2Trains]

I am, at age 59, building my first layout using Lionel Postwar equipment. I am thoroughly enjoying all the accessories, operating cars and big engines that I drooled over 50+ years ago. At this time, I don't have any engines with command control, but only because I haven't yet bought any. I probably will because my two grandsons will love operating them and will be better at it from the gitgo than most of us who grew up on Postwar products.
I know I would have loved CC when I was a kid.

Jim

[ben10ben]

I probably have less disposable income than at least 90% of the people on this board, yet I find command control affordable.

How do I find it this way?

I upgrade existing engines. A simple command control(no Railsounds) upgrade costs under $100, plus a couple of hours of time, and usually runs great.

I buy K-line. K-line's engines are fairly inexpensive to begin with, and many are blown out at rock-bottom prices.

Finally, I watch for blowouts. For example, K-line's RS-3 is very, very, very, well detailed, with brass add-on details and see through vent screens, has dual motors, smoke, engineer figures, and full Trainmaster Command Control and Railsouds. Select RS-3s are available from Western Depot now for $150. Yes, that's right, $150. That's about the same as you will pay for many Williams diesels from the larger mail order houses, and you're getting an engine with many more features.

If one watches for the deals, the excuse that command control costs too much just doesn't hold water at all. Sure, the selection may not be as plentiful, but they're out there.

[FJ and G]

I purchased an SW-9 (which perhaps is scale size) and 2-8-0, both RKs, for just over $200 each and they came CC equipped (PS-2), about the same price as for many Williams engines w/o CC (not to say they are not good buys as well).

In the big picture, CC isn't really that much more expensive, unless you are just running 2 or 3 locomotives around the Christmas tree and that's it.

Also, I find it particularly amusing that some who complain about complex electronics parts in modern trains just happen to own a computer, several TV remotes, and a car controlled by a computer chip.

dav