@Mike D posted:Interesting. So basically we have MTH full product line again from two different companies. Makes me wonder if at some point in the future that MTH will try to reacquire their old tooling.
More likely that Atlas O acquires the remaining MTH tooling because Rich Foster and co are getting up there in age and may want to retire.
@Paul Graf posted:You'll have to wait 2 more weeks.
Paul,
The question I have is: how many more years will we have to wait for the Weaver line poles (designed by Neal Schorr)? Atlas acquired that tooling 8 years ago when Weaver folded their tent. They are the best line poles produced EVER and it would be great to have them available again.
Thanks,
George
@rplst8 posted:While the ERR components are great for upgrading older non-cruise and non-command locomotives, the offerings are a bit long in the tooth for new locomotives. Especially so for diesels that are often run in MUs (lash-ups).
Lionel needs to wake up and start licensing Legacy. They can’t hold on to nearly 20 year old tech for eternity.
And MTH needs to release its codes, like Lionel did years ago, so Lionel TMCC and Legacy controls can operate DCS like MTH DCS controls can operate TMCC and Legacy.
@Homey B posted:Seems strange that if Atlas makes it, and it goes with an MTH engine, it's branded MTH. And the reverse, too - MTH manufactured pieces will be branded Atlas if they go with an Atlas engine.
Kinda leaves two tiers: MTH by MTH and MTH by Atlas, as well as Atlas by Atlas and Atlas by MTH.
Wonder if there will be some way to tell the difference...
What about warranty processes? AFAIK, and I could be mistaken or not up-to-date, Atlas will do warranty repairs while the only option with MTH is to return an item for replacement or refund.
Same stuff but different box = different warranty? Seems nonsensical to me.
@G3750 posted:Paul,
The question I have is: how many more years will we have to wait for the Weaver line poles (designed by Neal Schorr)? Atlas acquired that tooling 8 years ago when Weaver folded their tent. They are the best line poles produced EVER and it would be great to have them available again.
Thanks,
George
We are working on that. The tooling wasn't all in one place, now it is. I would hope to have these available in 2024.
@Mallard4468 posted:What about warranty processes? AFAIK, and I could be mistaken or not up-to-date, Atlas will do warranty repairs while the only option with MTH is to return an item for replacement or refund.
Same stuff but different box = different warranty? Seems nonsensical to me.
MTH is going to handle their production per their policies, I cannot speak for them. Atlas will honor the Atlas warranty for items sold by Atlas.
@jdstucks posted:Paul - I cannot give Atlas enough praise for their innovative tooling, especially when it comes to modern rolling stock. Your intermodal and auto rack offerings have knocked it out of the park! I will be picking up several of the new well cars delivering this week.
If I may suggest, I believe a modern spine car set would be a home run for Atlas. And there are many of us begging for JB Hunt intermodal containers.
That will end my shameless plea. I look forward to heading straight to the Atlas booth at York!
- Jason
Thanks, I will let the Product Development guys know.
I'm excited for this announcement. I think changes create some opportunity and that's a good thing.
@Paul Graf I just wanted to say you guys make awesome stuff. I'm a big fan! Keep up the good work!
@Paul Graf I have been a collector of Atlas steam era stuff for sometime now. Any chance of offering newly tooled steam era cars, such as Watermelon Cars or Dry ice cars?
@breezinup posted:And MTH needs to release its codes, like Lionel did years ago, so Lionel TMCC and Legacy controls can operate DCS like MTH DCS controls can operate TMCC and Legacy.
Why? The DCS patents have expired. It would be trivial for someone with an oscilloscope to reverse engineer the signal.
Not only that, but every PS3 locomotive works on DCC, so if Lionel really wanted to control MTH locomotives, they totally could. Maybe the Base3 will enable that.
And remember, anyone can buy complete PS3 upgrade kits with all of the wiring included. That gets you not only near feature parity with Legacy, but also full Positive Train Control with discrete speed step selection.
While the ERR products that Lionel licenses are great and will continue to be something I purchase, they don’t perform as well as Legacy electronics in MU consists (lash-ups).
Anyway, I think the complaining here about the lack of TMCC in Atlas and MTH products is just sour grapes.
@Paul Graf posted:We are working on that. The tooling wasn't all in one place, now it is. I would hope to have these available in 2024.
Thank you very much for that! I believe there is a market for that product.
George
@rplst8 posted:Why? The DCS patents have expired. It would be trivial for someone with an oscilloscope to reverse engineer the signal.
Not only that, but every PS3 locomotive works on DCC, so if Lionel really wanted to control MTH locomotives, they totally could. Maybe the Base3 will enable that.
And remember, anyone can buy complete PS3 upgrade kits with all of the wiring included. That gets you not only near feature parity with Legacy, but also full Positive Train Control with discrete speed step selection.
While the ERR products that Lionel licenses are great and will continue to be something I purchase, they don’t perform as well as Legacy electronics in MU consists (lash-ups).
Anyway, I think the complaining here about the lack of TMCC in Atlas and MTH products is just sour grapes.
I have to disagree, the Lionel command system is the O gauge standard. As for dcs my dislike is simple. It is just to finicky period. I do not want to hear about add a light bulb, more connections, or raise my hand over my head…lmao Give me 1 ONE wire hook up and never an engine not found…………no sour grapes just ease of operation !
Atlas could just go to Blunami. One system for both its two and three rail engines and no proprietary hardware required, Just a free app on your smart device. Also capable of more features by an order magnitude more sounds sets than Legacy or DCS.
Pete
@rplst8 posted:While the ERR components are great for upgrading older non-cruise and non-command locomotives, the offerings are a bit long in the tooth for new locomotives. Especially so for diesels that are often run in MUs (lash-ups).
Lionel needs to wake up and start licensing Legacy. They can’t hold on to nearly 20 year old tech for eternity.
And how does it benefit Lionel to give Legacy to Atlas O and 3rd Rail, and thereby give them the ability to then build engines that directly compete with Lionel's? (And often the same engines that Lionel builds.) I'm sure that's the major factor at work here.
@Paul Graf posted:Within the past year we have released all new tooling of the Mulitmax auto rack, and we have just received and are in the process of shipping out the 40' and 53' rebuilt well cars, also all new tooling. There are other projects in various stages of development, including an all new locomotive project, something that has never been produced in O (2 rail or 3 rail). We did not want to announce locomotives, new or rerun, when we weren't able to get a firm production date from any of our factories. We have gotten into a better position with that now, so we are able to move ahead on some things.
Since that “all new locomotive” has never been produced in “O” before, let’s hope you can do as many different roads as possible !!! The response Should Be Really Good for something NEW !!!!
Cheers 😉
@Texas Eagle 77 posted:I have always looked to Atlas for great motive power and rolling stock for the 1970's and 1980's. I guess I have been spoiled over the years but they have delivered great stuff in MKT and MoPac routinely.
I would love to see the following in the future.
- Early style centerbeam flats for lumber with the oval shapped cutouts.
- Thrall steel bathtub hopper / gons in SATX and FPPX. They've NOT been in O scale at all.
- 4427 grain hoppers in MKT green.
- MKT GP40's in Katy Red and MKT Green. No company has done Red Katy Geeps except Weaver 20 years ago. MTH did MKT Green and Bicentennial GP40's and they're as rare as hens teeth.
- SD40-2's in MKT green. MTH did them in almost 15 years go and they're hard to find as well.
- Rerun the MKT and MoPac U23b's. They're even harder to find than the Geeps.
- Rapid Discharge ortner hoppers in GRR, WRRC, and Gifford Hill.
- 53' gons in GRR.
Thank you to Atlas for all your amazing products and enabling my addiction to 70's & 80's Texas railroading.
Great comments / wants TE 77 !!!!!!!! I’d REALLY Like to see those MKT and MP U23b’s show up again !!!!! 😜 Man it’s been 14 ish years since they’ve been done !!!! They NEVER Show Up in the secondary market !!! 😵💫🫢
Cheers 😉
@Norton posted:Atlas could just go to Blunami. One system for both its two and three rail engines and no proprietary hardware required, Just a free app on your smart device. Also capable of more features by an order magnitude more sounds sets than Legacy or DCS.
Pete
Just what we need another OS…….please we need unification not more …that’s why HO works so well one system for all. The new system may seem the latest and greatest but it ads nothing to the hobby but more expense with little overall benefit
My point exactly it’s time for one and it’s up too the big dog to lead the pack, TMCC/Legacy could operate all and do it well.
@ThatGuy posted:Just what we need another OS…….please we need unification not more …that’s why HO works so well one system for all. The new system may seem the latest and greatest but it ads nothing to the hobby but more expense with little overall benefit
Blunami is DCC, the standard used in HO and every other scale. It can be run via Bluetooth or a DCC controller.
@Jim R. posted:Proprietary control systems have split the O gauge market. It’s time for one, and only, to emerge, ala DCC.
I'm sure MTH and Lionel have long since looked at this, and splitting the O gauge market is exactly what they have determined is in their economic self interest. And besides, they've each spent millions of dollars designing their own operating systems, engines, accessories etc. all custom fitted to their own operating systems. In some respects, maybe it's good to give people a choice. There are lots of comparisons. Like saying eliminate PCs and Android etc. and have all manufacturers just use Apple electronics in their computers and phones. Eliminate competition.
@ThatGuy posted:My point exactly it’s time for one and it’s up too the big dog to lead the pack, TMCC/Legacy could operate all and do it well.
Or just, you know, make DCC standard like every other scale and not have to rely on manufactures proprietary command systems.
@Lou1985 posted:Blunami is DCC, the standard used in HO and every other scale. It can be run via Bluetooth or a DCC controller.
We are not talking HO this is O gauge and it is not standard or needed. We need TMCC to operate all O gauge as it is the big dog system.
tell me will you by a Lionel engine for 2 grand to rip out the electronics?
"Or just, you know, make DCC standard like every other scale and not have to rely on manufactures proprietary command systems."
I'm sure this would please at least 0.5% of Lionel and MTH/Atlas's customers immensely 
. The other 99% or so are just fine with how things are going is my guess. Most folks probably still use conventional operation, for one thing.
@ThatGuy posted:Just what we need another OS…….please we need unification not more …that’s why HO works so well one system for all. The new system may seem the latest and greatest but it ads nothing to the hobby but more expense with little overall benefit
Actually its far less expensive and works with all the other three rail command systems simultaneously. Atlas is already long familiar with DCC, they just haven’t had that option before for three rail. Now they do. Buy what you like.
Pete
@Norton posted:Actually its far less expensive and works with all the other three rail command systems simultaneously. Atlas is already long familiar with DCC, they just haven’t had that option before for three rail. Now they do. Buy what you like.
Pete
Your beating a dead horse, it’s not inexpensive to rip out electronics from new engines. Nor would I want too.
you missed the point because you have issues with command. Lionel and 3rd rail engines are approaching 3 grand so by your logic by the engine rip out the electronics because it’s the latest and greatest. This is the same argument I would hear dcs against TMCC. No matter what you may think Lionel is the big dog, and unless they decide to dump the cab-1-2-3 there will be no change.
@ThatGuy posted:We are not talking HO this is O gauge and it is not standard or needed. We need TMCC to operate all O gauge as it is the big dog system.
tell me will you by a Lionel engine for 2 grand to rip out the electronics?
I'm just pointing out that Blunami isn't something new. It's just DCC that can either be run with a DCC system or via a Bluetooth app.
If Lionel made Legacy DCC compatible in O gauge (like PS3) one could buy a Digitrax system and run any Legacy or PS3 locomotive with it. It's not impossible. Lionel put DCC compatibility in the Legacy electronics used in American Flyer locomotives. Then one wouldn't have to rely on MTH or Lionel to make a control system to operate the other manufacture's locomotives. Instead they could just buy any manufactures DCC control system (NEC, Digitrax, etc.) and be on their way. No having to wait three or four years for a Base 3 or WTIU.
DCC is the standard. Just make Legacy DCC compatible. Done.
What about the costs/inconvenience/time required for a manufacturer to re-engineer their locos (and accessories) to accept a new system (Blunami), assuming the cottage industry size Blunami could gear up to supply a Lionel? Not a knock on Blunami at all, but it's likely to remain a small part of the hobby for those with the skill and motivation to use it. The number of tinkerers is tiny compared with those who want off the shelf, ready to run stuff. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Indeed, it's great to have folks who want to innovate and expand the envelope overall.
@Lou1985 posted:I'm just pointing out that Blunami isn't something new. It's just DCC that can either be run with a DCC system or via a Bluetooth app.
If Lionel made Legacy DCC compatible in O gauge (like PS3) one could buy a Digitrax system and run any Legacy or PS3 locomotive with it. It's not impossible. Lionel put DCC compatibility in the Legacy electronics used in American Flyer locomotives. Then one wouldn't have to rely on MTH or Lionel to make a control system to operate the other manufacture's locomotives. Instead they could just buy any manufactures DCC control system (NEC, Digitrax, etc.) and be on their way. No having to wait three or four years for a Base 3 or WTIU.
DCC is the standard. Just make Legacy DCC compatible. Done.
It is not standard in O gauge period
"Just make Legacy DCC compatible. Done."
In theory yes. In practice, Lionel probably has only 2-3 people working on Legacy and command control, and doing this would compete with existing projects, and perhaps increase their sales volume by 0.1-0.5%. Cost benefit, return on investment may be wildly unfavorable from their standpoint is my guess.
@Landsteiner posted:What about the costs/inconvenience/time required for a manufacturer to re-engineer their locos (and accessories) to accept a new system (Blunami), assuming the cottage industry size Blunami could gear up to supply a Lionel? Not a knock on Blunami at all, but it's likely to remain a small part of the hobby for those with the skill and motivation to use it. The number of tinkerers is tiny compared with those who want off the shelf, ready to run stuff. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Indeed, it's great to have folks who want to innovate and expand the envelope overall.
Yes very true and who wants to spend thousands of bucks to rip it out? I love to build and tinker but Lionel is the big dog and they are as the box states “standard railroad of the world”
@ThatGuy posted:Your beating a dead horse, it’s not inexpensive to rip out electronics from new engines. Nor would I want too.
You obviously don’t get it. No one said existing electronics have to be replaced. They all run on the same track at the same time. The point is going forward Atlas would be better off with a single command system used my dozens of manufacturers rather than depending on two whose ability to keep up with technology is questionable.
Pete
@Landsteiner posted:"Just make Legacy DCC compatible. Done."
In theory yes. In practice, Lionel probably has only 2-3 people working on Legacy and command control, and doing this would compete with existing projects, and perhaps increase their sales volume by 0.1-0.5%. Cost benefit, return on investment may be wildly unfavorable from their standpoint is my guess.
As I noted in my reply Lionel already makes Legacy DCC compatible in American Flyer S gauge.
Union Pacific LEGACY 2-8-8-2 #3672 (lionel.com)
No need to engineer anything. Just add it to the O gauge boards. Done.
@Lou1985 posted:As I noted in my reply Lionel already makes Legacy DCC compatible in American Flyer S gauge.
Union Pacific LEGACY 2-8-8-2 #3672 (lionel.com)
No need to engineer anything. Just add it to the O gauge boards. Done.
Sure it is……it is done……as it is
@Landsteiner posted:What about the costs/inconvenience/time required for a manufacturer to re-engineer their locos (and accessories) to accept a new system (Blunami), assuming the cottage industry size Blunami could gear up to supply a Lionel? Not a knock on Blunami at all, but it's likely to remain a small part of the hobby for those with the skill and motivation to use it. The number of tinkerers is tiny compared with those who want off the shelf, ready to run stuff. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Indeed, it's great to have folks who want to innovate and expand the envelope overall.
As a FYI Blunami is made by Soundtraxx, a major player in DCC:
Blunami Digital Sound Decoders (soundtraxx.com)
They probably produce more boards for all other scales in a year than Lionel does for O gauge in the same period.
"he point is going forward Atlas would be better off with a single command system used my dozens of manufacturers"
Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure Lionel (and Atlas) are doing the math as to whether it would be better to include another command system in their locos. If it becomes desirable due to inability to keep up with technology, or cost or related issues, I'm sure they'll do it.
Right now, the vast majority of three railers use TMCC/Legacy, DCS or conventional only, or some combination. Addition of DCC might only increase their market by tiny amounts. Two railers are a different story, of course. DCC is the only thing that makes sense for command, although most two-railers probably still use conventional. Broadway Limited just reverted to offering locos with DC and no DCC/sounds as it saves these people $100-150 per loco in HO and N.
Atlas knows that their locos have to be operable by the majority of hobbyists, who still have Lionel based systems, either conventional or TMCC/Legacy and I'm sure that will figure into their choices going forward. Currently they are offering both PS3 and TMCC equipped three rail locos. At some point they may well decide to go with only one of those systems, and PS3 might make sense as they can include DCC for the two railers.
@ThatGuy posted:Sure it is……it is done……as it is
The main reason Lionel hasn't is probably twofold:
1. Most 3 rail operators don't use DCC, so no need for the extra step in their eyes.
2. If I don't need a Base 3 to run a 3 rail Legacy locomotive I can just buy a DCC system to run it. That equals lost sales.
"As a FYI Blunami is made by Soundtraxx, a major player in DCC:"
Did not know that. Nonetheless, the practical issues of incorporating Blunami (or Soundtraxx) into their locos, including time, money, staff and making it compatible with the last 30 years of command control (TMCC/Legacy) remain. DCC per se might be simpler as you note, but there are still the issues of what does Lionel gain in consumer acceptance/sales if they do that? The answer to that question will determine what they do going forward. Lionel is a lot like Märklin and LGB in that their market is fairly unique and unaffected by other forces in the hobby. Both Märklin and LGB, as you may know, have their own proprietary command systems, as does Lionel.
@Paul Graf posted:Thanks, I will let the Product Development guys know.
Paul, maybe get the new autoracks delivered with opening doors and 3 levels as advertised? It was a real let down when they were delivered without the advertised features.
@Landsteiner posted:"he point is going forward Atlas would be better off with a single command system used my dozens of manufacturers"
Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure Lionel (and Atlas) are doing the math as to whether it would be better to include another command system in their locos. If it becomes desirable due to inability to keep up with technology, or cost or related issues, I'm sure they'll do it.
Just my opinion Neal based on extensive experience with all of the three rail command systems out there. One wonders what might have been if bluetooth was widely available 20 years ago especially with Atlas, 3rd Rail, and Weaver.
For the record I have one Blunami engine and about 75 TMCC/Legacy engines so my opinions are based on that.
Pete
@Landsteiner posted:"As a FYI Blunami is made by Soundtraxx, a major player in DCC:"
Did not know that. Nonetheless, the practical issues of incorporating Blunami (or Soundtraxx) into their locos, including time, money, staff and making it compatible with the last 30 years of command control (TMCC/Legacy) remain. DCC per se might be simpler as you note, but there are still the issues of what does Lionel gain in consumer acceptance/sales if they do that? The answer to that question will determine what they do going forward. Lionel is a lot like Märklin and LGB in that their market is fairly unique and unaffected by other forces in the hobby. Both Märklin and LGB, as you may know, have their own proprietary command systems, as does Lionel.
Lionel doesn't have to change over to another manufactures boards. Really they could just add DCC capability to O gauge Legacy locomotives (like they have with S gauge American Flyer locomotives) and then the purchaser could decide to either run the locomotive with Lionel's proprietary system or DCC. I doubt Lionel would loose many sales of Base 3s by adding DCC capability to it's O gauge Legacy products.
Going forward, if Legacy in 3 rail had DCC capability added, a hobbyist could purchase a DCC system and run Legacy and PS3 locomotives with it no problem. One system that runs everything.
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
