@shawn posted:A err tmcc upgrade is 130.00 ? Plus shipping? I wonder what • are paying that price? That’s obsolete too? As far as Lionel is concerned. Lol! Double lol!
@shawn posted:Actually - I will either part with them at a premium price. Or, burn them in effigy! If it’s the one way I’ll let everyone here know first.
if it’s the second way. I will post a video!
I’ve just about had it with technology - phoenix missile system, ADCAP, Trident worked on all of them in my electrical Engineering days. Then off to the computer and Integration business.
I think I’ve hit technology burnout. Everything over the last 30 is sitting in a garbage dump someplace.
Time to get back to simplistic things….or at least cheaper ones
Good grief, now you're quoting your messages! Personally, I think your blood pressure must be at record levels, I suggest a long break from modern model trains. Dig out the old pre-war stuff and play with that.
@shawn posted:Yes my blood pressure is up! I should have k is better but I g all this light bright China stuff
Please just post the bonfire and you can be done with your modern train involvement. 
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Please just post the bonfire and you can be done with your modern train involvement.
Lol - it will be just like your small business - going to be finished in a jiffy for lack of parts? It was a great run for all of us boomers —— it is near the end!!!!
Long before my products go out of vogue, I'll be pushing up daisies, I'm not concerned at all.
@Norm Charbonneau posted:These are fairly easy issues to diagnose and fix. I’ve always wanted figure out why some R2LCs seem to be less responsive to commands in command mode or some seem to have a more robust serial line. I have a few duds kicking around that could probably be brought back up to snuff I suppose. These were simply swapped out and chucked into my e-scrap bin.
Weren’t there know reports of funky radio receiver chips?
@gunrunnerjohn posted:I've never seen any mysterious behavior of the PWM outputs, they're operation seems very straight-forward. Ditto for the lights, couplers, and smoke, at least for the C08 version. I've looked at the serial bitstream and can see the change with the chuff, but I never actually setup the scope to properly decode the whole bit stream. Usually, I'm just looking to see if it's getting to the serial data if I'm having a problem with chuff getting to the tender. It would be an interesting experiment, just never find the time. The bit rate is interesting, it's about 3K, a nice round number that doesn't match any standard.
I'm guessing there's a good reason for that, probably matching up to some processor capability.
Clearly, the serial data is probably the biggest documentation task.
Truthfully, I'd be happy with the hardware design documentation, even a complete schematic would be great!
I'll be a spectator for this one as well.
Are there any Lionel authorized service centers anymore . I thought everything new needed to go back to Lionel?
@shawn posted:Are there any Lionel authorized service centers anymore . I thought everything new needed to go back to Lionel?
Of course there are. I'm an Authorized Service Center.
This thread has provoked considerable emotions.
Hasn't Lionel always made an effort to make it's new products backwards compatible? (pre-war to post-war coupler adapters, new trucks, and electronic upgrades (until the recent news).
Is it possible that we will be pleasantly surprised this Christmas?
Is this just part of the worldwide supply issue?
Or am I a dreamer who has drunk the Lionel kool-aid for 50 years?
I believe even receivers need to pass fcc compliance? Been a long time - do that could be a issue ?
@shawn posted:I believe even receivers need to pass fcc compliance? Been a long time - do that could be a issue ?
The document by TI "ISM-Band and Short Range Device Regulatory Compliance Overview" here states that "Receivers do not need a certification, but the vendor has to state in a Declaration of Conformity (DOC) that each device complies with the spurious emission requirements of unintentional radiators according to section 15.209.
@Windy City posted:This thread has provoked considerable emotions.
Hasn't Lionel always made an effort to make it's new products backwards compatible? (pre-war to post-war coupler adapters, new trucks, and electronic upgrades (until the recent news).
Is it possible that we will be pleasantly surprised this Christmas?
Is this just part of the worldwide supply issue?
Or am I a dreamer who has drunk the Lionel kool-aid for 50 years?
Sadly, I think you've been drinking the Kool-Aid. 
I seriously doubt this will turn around by Christmas. I believe the parts are going to a 3rd party, and I suspect they plan on selling them retail.
You could say the new products are "backward compatible", but that doesn't solve the problem of not being able to get parts for the older models. 
@gunrunnerjohn posted:The document by TI "ISM-Band and Short Range Device Regulatory Compliance Overview" here states that "Receivers do not need a certification, but the vendor has to state in a Declaration of Conformity (DOC) that each device complies with the spurious emission requirements of unintentional radiators according to section 15.209.
Ok - so that didn’t change - that’s a plus! Only for certain frequency ranges? It applies?
@Windy City posted:This thread has provoked considerable emotions.
Hasn't Lionel always made an effort to make it's new products backwards compatible? (pre-war to post-war coupler adapters, new trucks, and electronic upgrades (until the recent news).
Is it possible that we will be pleasantly surprised this Christmas?
Is this just part of the worldwide supply issue?
Or am I a dreamer who has drunk the Lionel kool-aid for 50 years?
Or is the grinch visiting North Carolina?
@Joe Fermani posted:I appreciate your info Scott on the TMCC ERR products. It makes sense that TMCC products will eventually see end of life with part obsolescence. I doubt anyone is going to redesign a TMCC board using current components. Yes, I'm sure it could be done, but is there any value in doing so. With forum members like Bruk/Gunrunner John/HarmondYards etc... new options are always available to keep the fleet running. Since RCMC boards are available, engines can be converted to legacy.
It still does not make any sense to pull the old boards from stock. As others have stated, Lionel is still stocking all the mechanical parts for older locs. If someone else is buying the supply, its only good if Lionel gives them access to the code to program the boards. Odyssey boards are generic for many locs. According to Mike Reagan, the difference was the programming so the speed steps are correct. When I was fixing my TMCC GG-1, Mike had me try the motor board in another loc. He said it would work but the speed steps would be off. It helped me diagnose the problem. The same goes for the radio boards. Some accessories require specific code.
The only thing that makes sense to me is that Lionel is dumping all the old tech (boards, chip burners, etc) so they can stay focused on the current rcmc boards. By off loading the old boards to a third party, it frees up space and also time in supporting the old stuff. It would just be nice to know what Lionel's plan is. Just pulling the stock just leads to conspiracy theories on what is going on.
Space and time? Lol - you make it sound like a parts person is being kept from design work?
@shawn posted:Ok - so that didn’t change - that’s a plus! Only for certain frequency ranges? It applies?
I really don't know more details, Google will find you an answer with a little work.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:I really don't know more details, Google will find you an answer with a little work.
Lol - I forget the year - I did my last design work. Designing the phoenix missile launcher when the navy went from 4 to 6 missiles on the F series fighters. Soon switch careers after that- forgot so much stuff. Hard to believe that might be the 80’s. Lol I don’t even think tmcc was around to 91?
@Joe Fermani posted:The only thing that makes sense to me is that Lionel is dumping all the old tech (boards, chip burners, etc) so they can stay focused on the current rcmc boards. By off loading the old boards to a third party, it frees up space and also time in supporting the old stuff. It would just be nice to know what Lionel's plan is. Just pulling the stock just leads to conspiracy theories on what is going on.
Other than selling the old boards, they provided no support for old TMCC and early Legacy boards that I'm aware of. As far as freeing up space, the few boards that comprise the electronics of most engines is far dwarfed by the multitude of mechanical parts that are still available. I'm not buying either of those reasons.
It is a good thing that the rocket hit the asteroid yesterday. From some of the posts it sounds like the end of the world. Too many are willing to destroy their collection because of a poor decision or communication by Lionel. I think we need to hear what Lionel has to offer for a potential solution. If none comes along, I will find a way to make my layout work. I would hate to stop doing things with my trains. They provide me with too much enjoyment.
Marty
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Other than selling the old boards, they provided no support for old TMCC and early Legacy boards that I'm aware of. As far as freeing up space, the few boards that comprise the electronics of most engines is far dwarfed by the multitude of mechanical parts that are still available. I'm not buying either of those reasons.
Ditto!
@martind posted:It is a good thing that the rocket hit the asteroid yesterday. From some of the posts it sounds like the end of the world. Too many are willing to destroy their collection because of a poor decision or communication by Lionel. I think we need to hear what Lionel has to offer for a potential solution. If none comes along, I will find a way to make my layout work. I would hate to stop doing things with my trains. They provide me with too much enjoyment.
Marty
Marty - Non - if this stuff is reliable enough - You can throw MTH into that mix - A draw full of defective boards!!! Of a certain vintage. Why have paper weights.
@shawn posted:Marty - Non - if this stuff is reliable enough - You can throw MTH into that mix - A draw full of defective boards!!! Of a certain vintage. Why have paper weights. When, I can recoup some if my investment. I do agree with the enjoyment factor. Running and REPAIR is a big thing to some of us. So, much for the repair end lol….
I always worried about the circuit boards…..going away….I should have stayed out of the newer stuff. Even, the rcmc stuff is total bs. lionel needs to program…lol. There goes a used replacement from another engine? I sort of knew we were imho on a path to getting screwed with the first announcement.
john was right! My blood pressure is through the roof! A big barn fire might be coming ! Like I said - video might follow! I haven’t watched the Yankees since the kneeling BS.
My Lionel days are over until the head of Lionel is history! Quiet as a mouse out in the woods…….that I base on Lionel’s recent business decisions.
@shawn posted:Or is the grinch visiting North Carolina?
Na, I think the Grinch is running Lionel.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Long before my products go out of vogue, I'll be pushing up daisies, I'm not concerned at all.
Love ya bro - wishing for a long life…longer then legacy hybrid boards lol.
The overreaction here is ridiculous. Just because exact replacement electronics aren't available doesn't mean that your locomotives, equipped with those electronics, are going to stop working tomorrow. They could last 10 years or longer from now. Just run your trains. If they break then worry about fixing them. Most people probably don't even run their stuff long enough to actually get it to a point of failure, so their equipment will probably outlast them.
@Lou1985 posted:The overreaction here is ridiculous. Just because exact replacement electronics aren't available doesn't mean that your locomotives, equipped with those electronics, are going to stop working tomorrow. They could last 10 years or longer from now. Just run your trains. If they break then worry about fixing them. Most people probably don't even run their stuff long enough to actually get it to a point of failure, so their equipment will probably outlast them.
I beg to differ in most cases……the QA has been dismal. Check some of the (review sites) Things can fail even repairing a smoke unit.. pinching wires etc. I will keep everything - I think will be reliable. All the rest will be disposed of one way or another. New purchases from Lionel are over.
I will pick and choose what to keep using OGR as my guide in some cases. Reading stories of stripped gears and other horrors will help in determining things to keep. I’ll buy parts online when people are selling them. Instead of buying anything new. If I don’t have that part in my vast parts inventory.
This way I can play with what I keep,. Until, I’m pushing up the daisies like John said..
@Lou1985 posted:The overreaction here is ridiculous.......Just run your trains.
Agree. The knee-jerk reaction to sound the doom and gloom sirens seems waaay premature. Perhaps partially human nature, although some on this Forum seem particularly prone to it, deriving a certain amount of satisfaction in sounding alarms and running up the surrender flag. It's likely this issue will resolve itself in some way, but it will take a little time for things to get sorted out.
@breezinup posted:Agree. The knee-jerk reaction to sound the doom and gloom sirens seems waaay premature. Perhaps partially human nature, although some on this Forum seem particularly prone to it, deriving a certain amount of satisfaction in sounding alarms and running up the surrender flag. It's likely this issue will resolve itself in some way, but it will take a little time for things to get sorted out.
Well some of us have a lot of money invested in this stuff. Overreaction maybe but I'm getting on in years and a little time is precious to me. I do hope this gets resolved, maybe Legacy upgrade kits.
@feet posted:Well some of us have a lot of money invested in this stuff. Overreaction maybe but I'm getting on in years and a little time is precious to me. I do hope this gets resolved, maybe Legacy upgrade kits.
Well, concern and overreaction are two different things. Concern is understandable. But in most respects, this situation fits the old adage of crossing a bridge before you get there. In this case, before there is ever going to be a problem, there's a requirement that a person's engine first has to break and the breakage has to be due specifically to failure of a particular board. For most folks, this initial requirement will never be met.
A person may be worried that a tornado will hit his house, but that doesn't mean he should worry himself silly about it, and maybe get rid of his house. It's probably not going to happen.
@breezinup posted:Well, concern and overreaction are two different things. Concern is understandable. But in most respects, this situation fits the old adage of crossing a bridge before you get there. In this case, before there is ever going to be a problem, there's a requirement that a person's engine first has to break, and the breakage has to be due specifically to failure of a particular board. For most folks, this initial requirement will never be met.
Of course planning ahead for repair folks is more immediate, I'm sure within a very short time I'll have a requirement for at least one of the boards that disappeared. Wait... I already have an engine here needing a Legacy DCDS, OOPS!
Just one note on the reaction to this, it may be because people have a lot of experience with this kind of thing with modern appliances. You buy a washer, refrigerator, whatever, 5 years down the road it stops working, and then you find out that the board that failed or whatever is not available. When you have expensive items that to replace would be even more expensive to buy new, and it isn't a good feeling...and I suspect this has something to do with this. I will add that at the very least it is pretty bad from a customer service perspective to have something like this and not explain what is going on.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Of course planning ahead for repair folks is more immediate, I'm sure within a very short time I'll have a requirement for at least one of the boards that disappeared. Wait... I already have an engine here needing a Legacy DCDS, OOPS!
I'm sure that's true, but of course a repair person with a constant flow of large numbers of engines is in a completely different situation from an individual operator with a limited number of engines that theoretically may be affected. A car dealership or repair garage is going to see a lot more cars needing repair than an individual who owns two cars. 
I was addressing the position of individual operators.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Of course planning ahead for repair folks is more immediate, I'm sure within a very short time I'll have a requirement for at least one of the boards that disappeared. Wait... I already have an engine here needing a Legacy DCDS, OOPS!
AND - You have to have the proper code in the DCDS-J, which you can't load yourself. So as a repair person, you can't just stock a few and configure them properly. We've had to order as needed.
Jim
As far as I am concerned TMCC DCDS boards are a non issue. Just use a Cruise M. Only a concern for early Legacy engines.
Pete
@Norton posted:As far as I am concerned TMCC DCDS boards are a non issue. Just use a Cruise M. Only a concern for early Legacy engines.
Exactly the issue I currently face!
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Exactly the issue I currently face!
Have you tried a Legacy DCDE? I know they are NLA now.
Pete
@Norton posted:Have you tried a Legacy DCDE? I know they are NLA now.
Pete
Pete,
Do you know if the motor could be modified on the early Legacy/Vision Line locomotives so one could use the currently available Legacy control boards?
Right now, that is what I hope to do with my 1st issue 2-10-10-2, 6-11155 that needs a new DCDS-J. I really would like to keep the scope of repair focused and not replace everything electronic in the engine.
@DaveGG posted:Pete,
Do you know if the motor could be modified on the early Legacy/Vision Line locomotives so one could use the currently available Legacy control boards?
Right now, that is what I hope to do with my 1st issue 2-10-10-2, 6-11155 that needs a new DCDS-J. I really would like to keep the scope of repair focused and not replace everything electronic in the engine.
I haven’t tried one yet Dave but I would think a BEMC board would work. They are a newer Back EMF board like a Cruise M. The downside is because they don’t use the tach sensor they don’t run with other Legacy engines that do. As long as you don’t doublehead that should not be a problem. RCMC might work too but you have to know which one to get based on gear ratio plus rewiring would be very time consuming.
If I were you you I would just hold tight until the next vendor is announced. No idea why it hasn’t been done yet.
Pete
@shawn posted:Because there is not going to be?
Man, cmon. That's enough. You're not helping. People are actually trying to do useful things.
Do the new acronyms I'm seeing matter? @Norton @gunrunnerjohn I know what EMF is but BEMC and DCDS got me beat. Also RCMC haha I'll ignore them if they don't matter. I'm gathering they have to do with speed control.
@BillYo414 posted:Man, cmon. That's enough. You're not helping. People are actually trying to do useful things.
Do the new acronyms I'm seeing matter? @Norton @gunrunnerjohn I know what EMF is but BEMC and DCDS got me beat. Also RCMC haha I'll ignore them if they don't matter. I'm gathering they have to do with speed control.
Bill - You know what’s great about this Country! Capitalism - My parts of my trains might soon be worth more then the train….besides - why give anyone false hope…we will see what happens..
