Remote Commander question

If you already have the complete DCS system, why not just use that? Sounds like it would be a lot simpler.

I don't need the complete system for this small a layout. I only have enough room now to run one train on each loop with a few cars on each.

The remote commander will only control an engine that has been factory reset to it's default address (this can only be done with full DCS system) which limits what can be run. I believe the infrared receivers will pick up signals from either remote, so you could be controlling both loops at the same time whether you want to or not. You are limiting access to the full functions of your engines with the Remote Commanders.

There is possibly more to add to the list, but all I can think of right now.

 

Not trying to tell you what to do here, just suggestions. It's your railroad and you should run it in what ever way makes you the happiest. Just sounded like you were giving up a lot you already had. Another idea would be to keep the full DCS, try the Remote commanders and see how you like it and go from there.    

I had the remote commander for quite a while when I first got into it. Honestly I didn't use that many more functions on the full DCS system than I did in the remote commander. I have already reset my engines and checked them on a test track with the remote commander to make sure the reset took. I know I have to separate the two control boxes or I'll be sending signals to both tracks at once. I can get quite a bit of money back for the other 2 items and buy a new locomotive or buildings/scenery to better fit the new smaller layout.

When I had my remote commander, it was connected to a 12 port terminal with 5 separate feeds connecting to the track.  The loop consisted of 4 turnouts, and I had no problems at all.  I was using a Z-1000 brick for power.

Thanks drelo, I was hoping to hear from someone that had tried it before.  Glad to know it works.

Well at least you know what you are getting into. If your wiring and Z-4000 worked with your DCS system, I don't see why it would not work with your new setup with the Z-1000's.

 

I only used a Remote commander for a very short time with an MTH set I got and the track included with it. I went the opposite way you are going here, within a just couple of weeks, after getting the initial set.

 

 

Even when I used the full system I didn't use nearly half of the features so I'm not really giving up much by going back to the Remote Commander. I liked it and its a little easier for my kids to use. 

If you connect one receiver at the end of one loop and the other receiver to the end of the other loop, and stay positioned at the center of the loops and only point one handheld at the receiver for the train you want to control, it should work.

 

Like they said in Ghostbusters...DON'T CROSS THE STREAMS!!!

I hear where the OP is coming from. Right now I have a 5x10 layout running two separate loops. I have a Remote Commander for the one PS3 engine I have and it does everything I'd want a controller to do. My other loop is conventional since I have a PS1 locomotive. I want a layout my kids can run and the current full featured DCS remote is overkill. Eventually I'll upgrade my PS1 locomotive to PS3 and there is also a couple of Williams engines I'm looking that could also be upgraded to PS3. I'm debating between a second Remote Commander or waiting for the MTH wifi module and iOS app. Hoping the MTH wifi module won't be as insanely expensive as the Lionel module. Since you already have a TIU that could be a perfect solution. MTH said they will be offering an Android app which means even if you don't have a smartphone you could pick one up dirt cheap to use as a dedicafed controller (cheap Android phones/tablets are pretty abundant, not so much for iPhones)

 

I've played with the Lionel LCS app and it's pretty nice. About the simplest way you can run a train - yes, simpler than conventional. It's interesting that trains started out as toys for children but O gauge trains are now so ghastly expensive and complex that they're out of reach for most younger kids. 

Remember that you can only practically run one Remote Commander on the layout at any given time.  There are no "channels" or locomotive ID's, so the IR from any remote will drive any Remote Commander module it hits.

 

Thanks for confirming that, I was afraid that would be the case given that it's IR. 

I hooked the 2 loops up last night, with a Remote Commander running each loop. It's fairly simple to avoid the IR signal being picked up by both receivers by simply placing them on opposite sides of the table. I placed them on the side of the table not on the top. The remote for the most part has to be pointed directly at the receiver for it to accept the command. As long as the 2 receivers aren't in line with one another I don't see where it would be a problem.

You can partially block reflections (when controlling the other base unit) by adding a piece of cardboard or whatever around the back of the red lens on the base receiver.  Note that the red lens is symmetrical.  On a previous MTH infrared lock-on, the lens was not symmetrical as shown in the photo.  That lens could be rotated to face the preferred direction to get better line of sight.  I believe the tendency is to aim the remote at the engine (rather than at the base) which the current design might handle better.  As an aside, there was another thread about making it less directional and the "solution" was to add infrared LED(s) in the handheld to send the beam in multiple directions.