Goodbye to conventional?

Well, for a while there, it looked like electronics loaded engines cost a lot more

than conventional, AND were a lot less reliable.  I immediately determined to avoid

such, and with a point to point layout running only one or two trains (maybe a third

switching on a siding or branch), figured I didn't need fragile electronics.  While CTT's current issue, as did OGR, raves about the Williams 4-6-0 (I glombed one), the word from a Williams rep in one of the national shows was that the Mikado or Consolidation is cancelled due to lack of orders.... so how is Williams going to fill the gap for conventional?  Lack of orders means not enough demand.  Sure short lines existed

that had one tea kettle that did all the jobs, made the runs and then came back

and switched their weed grown three track yard and shoved cars out to the junction for the Class 1 to pick up, but in this packrat hobby, who wants to have just one

Williams 4-6-0?

And what was great about this loco was that it wasn't a reproduction of something

done over and over again, but was a new model of a realistic prototype, a trend

away from many recent Williams efforts. I do want "scale-plate", models, not

caricatures.  Those are "collectibles", to sit on the shelves.  The modern stuff I

will run, because they will make more of it if it wears out, but it better be durable

or I won't buy it.

I don't want to pay for stuff I don't use, even if they will run conventionally, when

they have a really rotten reputation of failing, as I have heard and some of the

posts above imply.

CTT also had an article on a conventional layout, so conventional ain't dead yet...

The layout I am building now is conventional. I chose that for several reasons.

 

Conventional is the only standardized control system. Any make engine from any era can be run with it. TMCC and DCS and Legacy can be made to work together but it is tedious at best. All my locos about 100 of them from various makers and eras will run on this system so there will be no shelf queens. I will not have to go to the expense to upgrade all these engines to electronics that will again be obsolete in the future.

 

Command can not be automated easily due to the proprietary of the codes and lack of engineering. Automatic collision control is not easily done since the systems are dumb as there is no positioning system. The trains do not "know" where one is in relation to the other. This could have been incorporated in the original designs but it was neglected. In fact both systems look through the wrong end of the telescope as far as design criteria. The design has computers installed in each engine. This approach is OK for a simple loop or 2. But for a more complex layout one computer instead could run the entire layout designed as an integrated system. This would have been a cheaper and better approach and standardization would have been easy.  The only thing required in each engine would have been a slave board run by a common CPU.

 

The only thing needed to accomplish this would have been a reliable positioning system perhaps established in the track ties but there are a lot of other ways. Once position and an identity system is established for engines and rolling stock, with a communication system a computer could manage the entire layout with simple radio control. The computer would know the speed, acceleration, position and lenght of each train and could simulate weight and momentum. Each engine would not need a computer ,tach strip etc,only a slave board,motors,smoke unit and lights. A much better sound system could be made with speakers mounted under the layout and even driven by a home stereo or quad system. The computer positioning system would allow for simulated direction of sound. A sound library could supply prototype of engine and would be easily changeable. Instead of a tinny 2 watt system the train could be made to sound like a real train is going right through your living room if that was what was desired.

 

However we are stuck with what we have, 2 petty companies making rather antiquated proprietary systems. Conventional is the best choice for me,but that does not mean my layout is void of sound. This is a common misconception by some. Conventional only means train speed is controlled by track voltage. RS4 is a stand alone sound system,not an operating system and sounds as good as most newer locos I have heard. And if I really want a new loco they do run fine in conventional also and I am not limited to one manufacturer..

 

Dale H 

Basically there is nothing wrong with posting what a member of the forum likes or dislikes as long as they respect the other members preferences also.

 

This hobby has grown and changed considerably since smoke pellets and air whistles.  Advancement in electronics has brought to life new way of operating our miniature train worlds whether large or small.  I run both old and new, command and conventional and enjoy both.  I believe the example of the automobile transition is a great example of what is happening to model railroading, the hobby is just moving along with the technology of the times.

 

There is enough out there to make everyone enjoy their own preferences of the hobby.  Conventional has limited new Lionel, MPC, post war, Williams, MTH and others to choose from.  Remote control operators can revel in what is being released by manufacturers in the new catalogs.  There is enough for everyone.

 

TEX

Steve

I run all conventional. But as another person mentioned in this thread that it would be nice to have simple bell, whistle, and direction functions that it was I hope for too. To solve this i use an MTH infared remote with a Z-750. It is simpler than the powermaster because you simply plug the power suply in to the lock on reciever and you have remote control cnventional. You can run virtually any mth/Lionel/Williams/marx etc. locomotive no matter how new or how old. This also allows williams engines to run very slow. At the first speet step they will crawl with no series wiring needed. You can also run air whistles and any horn, whistle, or bell. The only thing you need to by seperate is two AA batteries. I have had mine for eleven years and no problem has ever occured.

Just my 2 cents

At least my 2245A-C will run in 2145!

Seeing as the world ends on December 21st of this year, what difference does that make

I have quite a few early 1990's command locomotives by Lionel and they all run like new after 20 years.  I have stocked up on spare (new) replacement boards I found cheap on the bay so I believe my command engines will be running for just as long as your post war. 

 

TEX

Steve

Conventional only for me. Luckily there are still many postwar engines to be had and I will be looking for some more at York next month. Thankfully we also have Williams and Weaver.

I am also happy to see the technology of this hobby evolve into TMCC, DCS and Legacy. I believe that these innovations are the future of this hobby.

I don't even see any point to this thread. We've been running conventional since the turn of the last century ,over a hundred years of trains without command control,so it's not like you can't find something out there that will float your boat.
For me I wouldn't be in model railroading without command but I do own a bunch of conventional engines.
I do wish there was just one system although both are easy to wire and easy to operate , but this is O scale 3 rail the most expensive and the scale with the most controversy .
There are other offerings for conventional operators like Atlas,Sunset 3rd Rail and as always Williams so it's not like Lionel is the only place to go for an engine .
As for the old man in the article if he needed to do all that to run command sounds like he was trying to bolster a boring article or maybe he needed his head examined before he put a hard hat on it.

David

Thats funny,
My son pointed out to me the other day that going by the Mayan calender the world ends December 21st but Julius Caesar came up with leap year so you should have been dead about 15 years ago

David 

Dropping conventional would be like stopping published paper books because e-books have become popular.  Newspapers are going the way of the past, but I'll be surprised if print books cease to exist.

I agree with you, but all is not lost.  You can always put low tech drive controls in a mental case command engine.

Alan

Thinking that you don't have to worry about the high electronics in the new engines that still allow for conventional control has a bit of a caveat to it. You do pay for the advanced electronics in any case, and if they fail you still can't run conventionally.  So, conventional running of command trains probably has the same running life as in command.

Sure you could, if that ever happens you have the option to gut the failed electronics, replace with a basic Williams or equivalent DCRU, or you don't care about controlling direction you could just install a bridge rectifier to convert track AC to DC for the motors and away you go.

Hey John, you could even gut everything but the DC motor and leads going to the wipers and run 2 wires from the center rail and outside rail to a DC power supply.  Change direction using the switch on the DC power supply.  What a concept!

I think Lionel wanted to enhance profits by stressing legacy and down-grading conventional. Profit is not a dirty word. By making a profit, Lionel keeps us in trains. I also believe Lionel wanted to capture the post-war enthusiasts by upgrading some PW item to scale and legcacy, e.g., the 600 Katy diesel. Again, nothing wrong with that. Lionel's gain is also our gain. And, if I want the 600 Katy in conventional, there are plenty out there.

As I said three posts above: "You can always put low tech drive controls in a mental case command engine".

The point being, you still paid for the high end electronics to begin with.  I'm not taking any sides.  I run both and enjoy both.

Alan

Just out of curiosity, can you even buy an engine (except for Lionel Corp. (MTH) Tinplate) with an old fashioned, drum type E-Unit?

Am i missing something what is the (POSTWAR INSPIRED) part of the catalog? 

 

Just cause it doesnt say conventionall? Quote from the union pacific alco set pullmotor magnetraction traction tires orignal style boxes...

I run trains with three friends switching from each one's home layout. Two are conventional only and two, myself included are set up for both conventional and command control. On my layout I have a Z4000 with one tap set up command control through a TPC400 and the other tap set up for conventional control. To run conventional I simply plug in the power/common jacks into track 2 of the transformer and go. The TPC and track 1 handle are off so no power issues arise. Personal preference I find this much easier to set up rather than 're-programming' the TPC for conventional operation. I also find the transformer handle much easier to use than the cab remote. With companies like Williams/Atlas O/Weaver along with the price differences between command and conventional locomotives I believe there will always be conventional layouts.

Joe

Page 97 mentions the GP7 being in the convential classics line...

Forumites, I remember back years ago when everyone was asking when is lionel going to update there years old postwar tooling to better scale tooling?Then We asked for tmcc to run our trains more prototipicaly . We then asked for better fan driven smoke with output more like the prototype.ironicaly now we have the best slow speed and operating systems in the buisness not to mention better smoke. We now even have whistle and blowdown effects. Thanks jon z! Clubs,modular groups and people like norm charbonneau and rich batista have the best looking most prototipical layouts too witch I assume they try to operate like the real thing. Now all I hear from most posters about the new offerings in the catalog is where is the postwar stuff in convetional or scale with less electronics?As one poster commented too wich I feel he is right bachmann has filled this role. Plus with the vast amount of postwar,MPC,early LTI and used stuff for sale why not look there for your needs.the team at lionel should be thanked for the inovations they have pioneered in our model trains IMHO!! I remember the old marxs set I played with as a kid. It was just chasing its tail on that oval of 027 track. If I still had that as my only offering I know I would be in a different hobby! I personaly want odyssey 2 (no lurch better than odyssey 1) a quillable whistle and I also love the coal and water being loaded sounds. Yes these models are high In cost. I belive a scale hudson back in the early fifties was also high for the wages back then. so just review our history in o gauge and you will see why those at lionel and MTH are now taking us into the next century with all the imagination and innovation only dreamt of buy joshua cowen,ac gilbert,and marx. Personaly I can't wait to see what is in store for us in the next ten years!!! Now I am off to the train room to run my new legacy mikado!

They need to bring back TMCC, I think.  Then there would be something for everybody: something for the one who runs only conventional, something for the highest-tech rich person, and something in between that's just right.  Reminds me of the three bears with the oatmeal.

I have legacy,old cab one and command base,DCS, 2 80 watt lionel starter set transformers. I hooked all this up to my layout in less than 10 mins. I run lionel tmcc,legacy and mth locos simutaniously without any problems on my 11 foot by 6 foot wide modest all fasttrack layout with no problems whatsoever! The layout is in two haves and each table is powered( they are isolated from each other). This makes two power districs. I used Mth terminal blocks on each table with star wiring. I use cheap 9 foot exstention cords( i cut the male end off leaving enough wire to hook to one side of TIU. The other long length I put banana plugs on one end with female end on the other. I hook the banana plugs up to the terminal strip and plug the other female end into to male part of exstention cord attached to the TIU( I mark both pieces so as to know they are plug in the correct way everytime ).I used the supplyed Y cable that came with legacy and the MTH legacy TIU cable. All remotes work. My DCS remote controls all my lcocs even legacy( not all legacy features are acessable though). But It all works flawlessly and was so easy to set up.I don't see why people say hooking up command control is hard. When I some day replace all my switches to CC fasttrack switches the only thing that will be a chore will be unscrewing the track to remove the old switches and replace with the new ones.If i want to run a conventional loco( too which I own a few) I grabe the two exstention cord femal plugs, unhook them from TIU and hook both to a male exstention cord piece I attached to one of my 80 watt transformers.( this takes all of two seconds) and I now am in conventionl mode. Switching back is just as easy. All is modular and easy to move from place to place. Never will I teardown another big layout and start all over. If I ever move from my apartment to a house the layout will come with me. Layout,controls, buildings and accesorys,all these can be hooked up and entire layout ready to run again in less than 30 min. No electrical enginering degree reqiured! Just followed instrution manuels and got exstention cord idea from local modular club in town!

I re-read this continuing thread with my morning coffee and I enjoyed all the perspectives both pro and con on this trend and managed to learn a few things in the process ( believe it or not) and this may sound counter-intuitive, but I enjoy all the divergent opinions in O scale, otherwise it would be a pretty cut and dried hobby. I was thinking it's a perfect time capsule of a transition period in the hobby and a decade from now, it will be interesting to compare these comments with how this trend  will actually play out in the future.

If the internet was around way back in the day, for me it would be fun to read all the divergent opinions of Lionel's Electronic Set, or AF opting out of O gauge to creating S. I remember when HO popped up in force and O scalers were called "black smiths" because of the "crudity"of the trains and HO was called the scale of "rivet counters". How things have changed.

What struck me as well, was that in a decade for now, all of the systems we are talking about could be reasonably expected to be obsolete as the rate of change in state of the art accelerates as with everything and so the conventional in our time becomes less of a standard, so will what we think is the new standard will be as modern as pendulum reverse units.

I remember when simulation software came out and some wags predicted we would all be sitting at computer screens running our virtual trains, or remember the fad of cameras in the noses of some Lionel engines with those little TV sets with the grainy pictures? Now they seem sort of quaint like the old Atari games. Or slot cars being seen as dooming the model railroad hobby in the 60's? 

Remember when horn hook couplers were the latest fad, the new standard and state of the art in HO before Kadee arrived? That saying the only thing that is consistent is change seems to apply.

 

I think with today's technology, why doesn't Lionel build an upgrade path into the engines? Buy a Starter set with a conventional equipped engine. As time and interest in the hobby increases for the person, and money, buy the optional programming or even new boards to install into the conventional engine to go to TMCC and or Legacy?

 

quote:

I think with today's technology, why doesn't Lionel build an upgrade path into the engines? Buy a Starter set with a conventional equipped engine. As time and interest in the hobby increases for the person, and money, buy the optional programming or even new boards to install into the conventional engine to go to TMCC and or Legacy?

 

They did try this back in 1998/1999.  Units came with basic electronic reverse unit board and a horn/whistle sound board.  You swapped out the reverse board for a CC board and then you could swap out the sound board for RailSounds.  You could also swap out the couplers for remote control coil couplers.  It didn't sell/work.  People complained about how the cost of the upgrade boards were more than the cost of the original fully equipped loco.  This was true but you a) got to use/play with the loco at the original lower price and you b) had the option to only upgrade the parts you wanted to at a later date.

 

There is a fair amount of conventional control equipment in the catalog.  There are small "switcher" style steam engines and a large number of traditional style diesel equipment.  The only thing missing is MODERN era SCALE diesel items with conventional control.  Those type of units cataloged do run fine in conventional mode.  I understand that some do not see why they should have to pay for stuff they feel they don't want/need but the command control boards are only a small part of the total electronics package and therefore only a small part of the increased cost.  If you yank out the lighting, smoke effects, speed control, couplers, (aka everything else) the cost will come down and then no one will buy the item because it doesn't have all of that other stuff.

.