I want to move up to command and control but am very scared

Bill:

I hope the comments of other FORUM-ites has calmed your anxiety about TMCC and DCS. Here's my experience ...

I installed TMCC products on my 15x19 L-shaped layout, including:
   Powerhouse - 135 watts
   Command Base
   PowerMaster  (for operating non-TMCC locos, but I rarely use it)
   CAB-1 controller.

The system works great on my modest layout. I own several Lionel Legacy-equipped locos that require larger curvatures, but I can't run them on the layout because its curves are O42. I didn't buy a CAB-1L. Those "shelf queen" locos rest on display shelves in the train room.  I also have several LionChief locos, each with their own matched controller.

I also installed the cheapest form of MTH's DCS for use with the two MTH locos in my collection.  I can select either TMCC or DCS  to the tracks with a knife switch; but not both systems simultaneously. which is OK by me.

The MTH Remote Commander is admittedly low-tech, and its controller must have an uninterrupted line-of-sight path to the track sensor. That might be a problem for owners of larger layouts.

Like other commentators, I prefer Lionel's TMCC. I realize there are MTH DCS fans too.

Mike Mottler           LCCA 12394

Just take the plunge. Like you, I read all the scary posts back when I took the plunge and regret that I didn’t do it earlier. Command control is a blast.  I had a desire to purchase more MTH engines, particularly subways, so I went with DCS. I just hooked it up to my tracks with no major adjustments and never had a hiccup. It’s worked fantastic and still does.

Happy Independence Day everyone. I’m camping with the family this weekend and am re-reading your posts. It is amazing when a good thread gets going how one can go back to it several times to learn more and more.

@Railride I missed your comment on the Track Power Controller. Thanks!

Ok, checking to see if I am absorbing this correctly…if I want to run conventional (i. e. postwar) and TMCC et al at the same time, I’d have to run slowly to manage the conventional loco so it doesn’t run off the rails. Is that correct?

Thanks, Bill

@Bill Barlowe posted:

Ok, checking to see if I am absorbing this correctly…if I want to run conventional (i. e. postwar) and TMCC et al at the same time, I’d have to run slowly to manage the conventional loco so it doesn’t run off the rails. Is that correct?

Thanks, Bill

Yes and no.

Most command engines are designed to run at 18v, way to high to run a conventional loco. I have been able to run some conventional locos at a manageable voltage and still keep command engines running. You also couldn't stop and start the conventional loco (power interruption) without stopping the command loco (but the command loco could be stopped/ started) and keep the conventional running.

Safer to have separate loops, run conventional on one, command on the other. Or go with the powermaster as mentioned previously.

Bob

Bill, I agree with Bob.  (it seems I agree with Bob a lot)    I run my conventional engines on separate loops, whether it is my Ceiling Central RR one loop in the next room, something I setup for Christmas, or one of my two loops that are connected by two ramps on the permanent layout.  Occasionally do the last option, but usually I just run either-or; conventional, command.

Thanks Mark and Bob. Will go with running them separately for the near term. I’ll use the idea of designing separate loops for conventional and command and control for my next project. It will challenge me to grow with SCARM. With this conversation and one I have in another thread, my weekends and evenings are totally full for the rest of the year. AWESOME!!!!

OGR Rocks! (But you already knew that 😎 )

We already knew that! 😄😎