Legacy PowerMaster Features

Could be either they're talking about the CAB1-L and Legacy CAB2, or they may be receiving TMCC signals like a locomotive and stuff like the SC-2, and thus will run with any TMCC base.  It is a totally new design, so they might not have stayed with the remote direct to the PM model of operation.

Hmm. I think you're right John. I just assumed it would pickup the Cab-2 signal directly and no command base would be required but I think getting the actual command signal from the track common would be the way to go. That would require the command base to be hooked up but that isn't a problem.

Ron

Since they're calling it a "Legacy" PowerMaster, makes me think they expect you to have the Legacy system to use it.  And, I think it would have been very short-sighted of them to make it incompatible with all the TMCC systems around.

I'm sure we'll know the truth at some point, obviously this is just speculation on my part.

My understanding, based upon what we have heard from Lionel to date, is that the Legacy Powermaster will accept commands from either TMCC or Legacy systems. (CAB-1, CAB-1L or CAB-2 remotes.)  I believe that as it is a receiver, and not a transmitter, that being able to function with multiple frequency ranges is not overly complicated.

Actually, it's far easier to just receive the TMCC signal like many other TMCC devices, no dual receivers required.

not being very familiar with the Cab1 and the original powermaster, this point my be incorrect but thought I would share...

With the cab1 and powermaster you did not need a base to control conventional trains correct?

If the legacy powermaster requires a base then you giving up the option to remotely control conventional trains with only 2 peices of hardware. 

I know there are some people very happy to stay conventional but still like the remote.

I'm not sure that is a big deal, but thought I would make mention.

That's how the old PM works, we're just "speculating" how the Legacy PowerMaster works.

According to the features list on Lionel's website, it receives commands wirelessly, and works with any Lionel remote. This leads me to believe that it is capable of dual frequency range operation. 

Well, my SC-1 and SC-2 "receive commands wirelessly" as well, so I'm not convinced yet.

I agree with John, Nicole. The ZW-C and ZC-L recieve commands by the neutral wire but my thought would be that it would be considered wirelessly as the neutral wire passes through the powermaster anyway. It doesn't state "no command base needed" but as John says were all just speculating anyway. It seems to me that the powermaster circuitry is already in the ZW-L and it receives the signal from the neutral that this would be the most economical way of designing the Legacy Powermaster; just copy what's in the transformer and put it in an old powermaster box.

Ron

Ron

When you say ZW-C are you referring to the newer ZW's  that comes with 2 180 or 135 bricks?

Yep, the ZW-C is just four PowerMaster equivalent devices in a single box that receive commands via standard TMCC signals and not directly from the remote.

If it can talk to the original PowerMasters (as implied by the catalog language), it has to have the 27mhz transmitter.  Since it can also talk to a Legacy base (also stated in the catalog language) it has to have a wifi transmitter.  They don't state or imply that you need the bridge box which would mean it has dual transmitter capability.

Interesting point, I can't wait to see what's really in the box.   Truthfully, I'll be somewhat disappointed if they try to do dual frequency transmission, I sure don't want that big antenna sticking out!

The Legacy Power Master receives the 455Khz track signal like the SC-2.  This will allow operation with Base-1, Base1-L, and Legacy 990/993 products.  The 27mhz product lines of years back are no longer viable for any sort of production, too many obsolete parts.  When we design new technology we are using 2.4Ghz or 455Khz as  applicable.

Thanks for the clarification Jon, that's the method that seemed to make the most sense to me, glad it went that way.

So the only way the new remote can talk to the original PowerMaster is by way of a bridge box?  Also, the only way the new PowerMaster can be used with the older CAB-1 is by the same mechanism/means.  

I understand the need/desire to move on from the older 27 mhz domain but the catalog descriptions don't mention/cover these important details and actually imply the opposite.

John we got 1 of the 24 that came in to the country.

 It is huge all I can say it is cool.

It has all the bell and whisles.

Chuck, we are discussing the NEW Legacy Power Master.  The original power master is not in the catalog.  The Cab-1 simply needs the original command base (Base-1) and the new Legacy Power Master works, no bridge needed.  Does this help?

You really need greater catalog editors. It specifically says "OPERATES WITH ANY LIONEL REMOTE".

You people need to get your act together. The right hand simply does not know what the left hand is doing.

Trainman your not reading this correctly. It DOES operate with any remote just like the ZW-C does. It will operate with a cab1/command base, A cab2/legacy base or a cab1L/command L base or a combination of the 3 just like the ZW-C does.

Ron

Chuck Yes to use an original powermaster with Legacy you need a bridge box but to talk to the new Legacy powermaster with a cab1 all you need is you current setup (cab1/command base) no bridge needed.

Ron

John, Ron & others, you were right and I shall drop a  curtsy to your greater wisdom here. 

Jon, thanks for the clarification, but I do have one further question. Does the Legacy Powermaster receive Legacy signals directly from a Legacy remote via the airwaves, or does it require a wired/track connection in all cases? I was hoping to be able to use one to control accessory power without any wired/track connections.

I believe he answered that in his first post, see the quote above, track signal being the operative words here.

It uses the 455khz track signal, so you'll have to have a wire from the outside tracks to one side of the accessory power supply. 

Don't we already have this capability with a TPC unit?

Well, yes and no.  While it's true the TPC offers similar functionality, you need the serial data stream from the command base for it to function.  This new PowerMaster can be placed in a distant location and operate like the SC-1 or SC-2 from the track signal.

It's a fine distinction, and the TPC has capabilities that the older PowerMasters don't have, so for many situations it would be more desirable.  Don't know about the new PowerMaster capabilities yet.

I think part of what is still missing is that you didn't need a command base to use an original PowerMaster.  It could communicate directly with the CAB-1.  There may have been some people that would have bought a new Legacy PowerMaster thinking it would behave in a similar fashion, aka I don't need a Command Base, I can run it with the CAB-1.  You absolutely need a command base for the newer units to work. 

There are a fair number of users that only ran the CAB-1/PM combination as a remote throttle system.  They weren't that interested in full Command Control.  The new system potentially makes for a nice replacement of this (price point for the product will be the real deciding factor) BUT they will have to get additional parts if they want to mix/match the older/original equipment with the new stuff.  

The new equipment using the track signal will also make it problematic in trying to run Command loco's in conventional mode.  TPC allows this since it uses the serial line to talk to the device (don't attach the track wire to the command base antenna terminal).  Since the Legacy controller/CAB-2 could generate true TMCC commands and not just CAB-1 this has become a none issue to me.  Others may feel differently.

So, as I read this in order to use the Legacy Powermaster with any Lionel remote you need the following:

CAB-1 and Command Base

Legacy 990 system

Cab-L and Cab-L Base

Plus how does the Legacy Powermaster receive the signal. Is it via a cable or directly like the original Powermaster. If not it is redundant. It would be much better to just go with a Lionel TPC 300/400.

I'm guessing that some individuals are going to buy the Legacy Powermaster in the belief that they can control it with "ANY LIONEL REMOTE" as stated in the catalog. They are sure to be disappointed.

The Legacy PowerMaster receives the signal just as a locomotive or the SC-1, SC-2 controllers do, using the 455khz track and earth ground signal.  You must have a command base of some type to use it.

Jon,

You better look again. Lionel 2012 Vol 2 page 129 top left hand corner TMCC  Powermaster item # 6-24130 $78.99

Just re-read the description of the Legacy PowerMaster item # 6-37146 in the 2012 Vol 2 Lionel Catalog on page 127.

There is no mention of needing anything other than "ANY LIONEL REMOTE". This is in the very second sentence of the description.

Again, people are going to buy one of these and think all they need is a CAB-1 since that item qualifys as one of the "ANY LIONEL REMOTES"

It doesn't really matter what the catalog says, or what we speculate it might work like, I believe Jon from Lionel told us what it actually is.  We can gnash or teeth and say how we hate it, but that's unlikely to change what it is. 

If you want to do something constructive, suggest to Lionel they clarify the catalog pages.

How exactly does this work?  Don't you have to be in the proximity of the tracks to receive that part of the signal?  I realize that TMCC usually works even though you're a few feet from the tracks, but what are the limitations of this new product?

I updated my original post, so as not to add confusion.  The TMCC signal is fairly prolific, and there is a limit to the range without "U" terminal connection on the Legacy Power Master - which ties to the base.  In this configuration, the limits will vary based on the actual configuration of the layout, location of the LPM, etc.

Here is a post I made on another topic and I didn't receive a reply. It sounds like the electronic protection is improved on the Legacy Powermaster. I mentioned in my original post that the Direct Lock On works well at higher voltages, but not so well when using a TPC at lower track voltages. If the Legacy Powermaster has improved protection equal to or better than the direct lockon, but it works at lower track voltages, than that is an advantage to using a Legacy Powermaster instead of a TPC 300 or TPC 400.

Originally Posted by trestrainfan:

There is another topic about the Lionel TMCC Lock On and a TPC. I like the Lock On, but it has always been a problem when using it with the TPC at lower voltages.

It sounds like if we use the new Legacy PM when it becomes available, then the TMCC Lock On is going to be superfluous as the Legacy PM is going to provide equal or better protection?

Not that I plan to switch from the TPC300's on my layout but can the new Legacy PowerMaster also address the features in MTH engines? If not then even if the TPC is outdated it still might be a better option.

Yes.