GM Aerotrain anyone? Or even the Baldwin RP-210?
The GP30 diesel-electric locomotives are next.
The LIONEL 3-rail Chessie System C&O GP30's were only produced once. This is the only way to get more.
Andrew
Ok, well I am going to make this post that I am sure I will either get a ton of comments in disagreement or get no comments because, well, many will write it off as fluff. We will see.
Anyway, I have been going through this post, and I have seen many people post about locomotives that they was 3rd Rail to produce. I am going to take a different stand and say that 3rd Rail’s next innovation needs to be in control systems. Personally, I would like to see them strike a deal with Lionel or MTH and use a full version of Legacy or Proto3. But there are other options.
A newer and enhanced version of the ERR that add Bluetooth maybe. The addition of the Blunami DCC system is also an option. Make a Blunami system as an option for those who are looking for DCC but don’t want to buy a full DCC system.
Why? Because that is where the tech is going. I know 3rd Rail makes some of the best looking and most accurate O Scale out there, and that appeals to the older, more experienced crowd. Some of the new comers might want some newer tech offered as an option. I would love to see the new new Chargers being offered with something like the Blunami.
Thats my 2 cents.
I think until one of the main manufacturers in HO, N and O start offering Blunami as standard equipment, it's unlikely that a boutique company like 3rd Rail is going to offer the option. Also doubt Lionel will make Legacy available to 3rd Rail, or anyone else, but Bluetooth/LionChief + 2.0 might be a possibility that would meet some people's needs. I suppose MTH/Atlas could offer DCS/PS3 to them, but if I'm Scott Mann I'd want to see that those systems are secure for the future before making such a commitment. From a cost and logistics standpoint, continuing with ERR/TMCC seems the most likely approach.
@Carl Peduzzi posted:Ok, well I am going to make this post that I am sure I will either get a ton of comments in disagreement or get no comments because, well, many will write it off as fluff. We will see.
Anyway, I have been going through this post, and I have seen many people post about locomotives that they was 3rd Rail to produce. I am going to take a different stand and say that 3rd Rail’s next innovation needs to be in control systems. Personally, I would like to see them strike a deal with Lionel or MTH and use a full version of Legacy or Proto3. But there are other options.
A newer and enhanced version of the ERR that add Bluetooth maybe. The addition of the Blunami DCC system is also an option. Make a Blunami system as an option for those who are looking for DCC but don’t want to buy a full DCC system.
Why? Because that is where the tech is going. I know 3rd Rail makes some of the best looking and most accurate O Scale out there, and that appeals to the older, more experienced crowd. Some of the new comers might want some newer tech offered as an option. I would love to see the new new Chargers being offered with something like the Blunami.
Thats my 2 cents.
Would be great to see Bluetooth added to the lineup. I control most of my layout solely off of Bluetooth. Only exception is the 3 Rail, but they're too nice not to run.
Interesting philosophical discussion on control systems. Developing a new system seems unrealistic as it would just be another system that no one wants or needs. Blunami or Bluetooth certainly could be viable. If 3rd Rail could get more than licensing rights to TMCC maybe there is a possibility of finding a new vendor to expand its capabilities and reduce the size of the components. At least then, it could be compatible with the 3rd Rail and other brands that already have TMCC installed (the true "legacy" systems) 
and offer new features that current ERR technology limits. I'm not a software / hardware engineer so I can't speak to the viability of the business model of that effort. The beauty of 2 rail is that DCC is constantly evolving and has surpassed the capabilities of the 3 rail systems with all the CVs available for addressing now.
No one can say that this thread is completely homogenized into “Group Think”.
It appears that achieving minimum cost-effective build quantity for 1:48 scale models authentic to the prototype is 3rd Rail / Sunset’s enabling capability. That’s hard enough. It makes sense to build these models on industry standard control systems. When standards change, that’s when it gets interesting.
Most importantly, Lionel owns ERR's underlying technology and licenses it to 3rd Rail and others. If (when?) Lionel decides to end ERR like they've ended hardware controllers and disposed of large quantities of perfectly fine service parts in the past, there's nothing that anyone can do about it. There is risk here, both for manufacturers like Atlas and 3rd Rail as well as individuals doing their own upgrades. That's the downside of buying into a closed control system.
ERR works, but it's old, basic, and won't be further developed. You can't load your own sounds into it and it lacks many of the advanced features that both Legacy and DCC provide.
Once / if there is no more ERR, the only other option for upgrades would be Blunami. I'm a huge fan of open platforms (closed, proprietary systems like Legacy always limit end user options and only benefit the people who own the rights to them, by design) and by far the best thing about the end of ERR would be that it would hasten the adoptance of DCC for 3 Rail. Just my $0.02.
I’m honestly surprised ERR is still alive as an aftermarket product through 3rd Rail. It seems to be on borrowed time right about now since Lionel did everything they could to kill TMCC deader than a hammer. I’m glad it’s still around for the time being since it works so well (that’s why it’s been around for a very long time).
Is 3rd Rail the last OEM user of TMCC/ERR? I’m pretty sure Atlas doesn’t use it anymore but I hardly look at their stuff now. I could see 3rd Rail offering Blunami since they could use the same basic platform for 2 rail and 3 rail. Doubt they could sell anything without some type of command control in it.
@Norm Charbonneau posted:I’m honestly surprised ERR is still alive as an aftermarket product through 3rd Rail. It seems to be on borrowed time right about now since Lionel did everything they could to kill TMCC deader than a hammer. I’m glad it’s still around for the time being since it works so well (that’s why it’s been around for a very long time).
Is 3rd Rail the last OEM user of TMCC/ERR? I’m pretty sure Atlas doesn’t use it anymore but I hardly look at their stuff now. I could see 3rd Rail offering Blunami since they could use the same basic platform for 2 rail and 3 rail. Doubt they could sell anything without some type of command control in it.
Atlas still allegedly uses ERR in their non-MTH tooled products. However, Trainman and Masterline locomotives are so infrequently produced, who knows when we will see those nicely tooled models again. Atlas O seems content repopping old MTH tooling which is disappointing. There are some fabulous Atlas models that haven't been produced in a number of years.
I am currently a Lionel and MTH/Atlas owner. I have the new WTIU on order to power my layout. I run all my Lionel via Bluetooth and it works fine. As I usually don’t lash up Lionel engines, the Bluetooth functions suite my needs. At this point I have no desire to purchase any TMCC based engines. If 3rd Rail would offer a Bluetooth option, I would buy their engines. I want a pair of the new Chargers, but again, I’m not doing TMCC. If there was a non-Command Control option available (which I understand why there is not) I would buy that and have someone install a Blunami decoder.
Honestly, I wish there was an easy solution to the Proto3/Legacy compatibility. The DCC side of Proto3 for the MTH/Atlas is a good fall back. I wish Lionel did the same. I think I could adapt to 3R DCC if all would just commit. Though we know that won’t happen anytime soon.
@GG1 4877 posted:Atlas still allegedly uses ERR in their non-MTH tooled products. However, Trainman and Masterline locomotives are so infrequently produced, who knows when we will see those nicely tooled models again. Atlas O seems content repopping old MTH tooling which is disappointing. There are some fabulous Atlas models that haven't been produced in a number of years.
I could be wrong, but I thought Atlas eluded to using DCS in all their old tooling releases during their last webcast.
@Carl Peduzzi posted:I could be wrong, but I thought Atlas eluded to using DCS in all their old tooling releases during their last webcast.
You could be absolutely correct. I have not kept up with Atlas like I used to and currently only purchase 2nd hand scale Atlas passenger cars when the price is right.
To me, the "elephant in the room" for diesels is the fact that almost all diesel operation uses either 2 or 3 multiple units, pushing the cost of a "consist" of freight diesels above steam. For those of us with layouts and the fact that we buy locomotives to OPERATE, the cost quickly gets prohibitive. Of course, modeling MODERN passenger diesels avoids this issue.
I believe the market for "named/famous" passenger trains is not saturated. Passenger trains might me successful if they do not weigh too much, they are prototypical in length, they have either warm or cool LED's depending on the era, they use insulated wheel sets and specifically NOT wipers, the diaphragms are not short lived, and they are painted absolutely correctly. I believe the brass 2-rail market for rolling stock for operators has largely vanished vs use of plastic. One additional important factor is that rolling stock, despite the homework required to do this correctly is basically lower tech than a hand crafted brass steamer or diesel. One impediment is the cost of plastic tooling.
I can think of two steam locomotives that MIGHT achieve the necessary ordering, although the price probably remains an issue.
The first would be a NYC L-2C, L-2D Mohawk. There were several variations of this locomotive that changed the appearance, including internal Coffin feedwater heaters vs sunken Elesco, water scoops vs none, and even two individual L-2D's with passenger pilots and one of these with Union Web Spoke drivers. The "as-built" versions also differed in appearance vs the late version with a larger sand dome and top boiler check. Of course the lettering also changed Antique Roman vs later block lettering. So several variations including the Big Four versions and the variations could be modeled. This model has never been made in O Scale/O gauge. All variations except the Union Web Spokes could be reproduced with minor changes in subassembly pieces.
The second would be a 2-6-6-2. An importer issued a NYC NE-2 2-6-6-2 mallet a number of years ago. They had driveline problems and were of questionable quality, and most of the few still in existence have either been modified or pending modification.
There should be a way to use the SAME 2-6-6-2 mechanism and with select use of subassembly pieces make credible 2-6-6-2's used by several railroads. The C&O's were the largest, but for MOST of these the driving wheel size was within a narrow range. That might imply use of the same mechanism. The boilers varied in size so this would have to be investigated. Again, the price point might be an issue.....
@Carl Peduzzi posted:I could be wrong, but I thought Atlas eluded to using DCS in all their old tooling releases during their last webcast.
The Trainman GP15 will be the 1st Atlas - tooled engine to have ProtoSound 3. I would expect that future 3R Trainman and Master models will follow suit as PS3 has far more capabilities than TMCC (ERR). And, Atlas currently continues to use PS3 in their Premier models.
2R Trainman models will be DC with a board that can accept a plug-and-play LokSound L decoder and the 2R Master models will continue to be equipped with DCC (LokSound L's).
@catnap posted:The Trainman GP15 will be the 1st Atlas - tooled engine to have ProtoSound 3. I would expect that future 3R Trainman and Master models will follow suit as PS3 has far more capabilities than TMCC (ERR). And, Atlas currently continues to use PS3 in their Premier models.
2R Trainman models will be DC with a board that can accept a plug-and-play LokSound L decoder and the 2R Master models will continue to be equipped with DCC (LokSound L's).
A bit off topic …. But …..
I use both MTH and Lionel OSs but Prefer MTH. For Me, it’s just simpler to use.
I Welcome the Atlas GP 15 to be delivered with MTH PS3 !!!! The 15 is Really quite a Nice model. I’ve managed to score 2 Atlas GP15 / conventional models that I’ve gutted to lights only dummies. A 3 diesel lash up will be quite Cool when the new model arrives. I hope Atlas will follow with More Master Line and Trainman models the include the MTH OS.
Cheers 😉
@Hudson5432 posted:To me, the "elephant in the room" for diesels is the fact that almost all diesel operation uses either 2 or 3 multiple units, pushing the cost of a "consist" of freight diesels above steam. For those of us with layouts and the fact that we buy locomotives to OPERATE, the cost quickly gets prohibitive. Of course, modeling MODERN passenger diesels avoids this issue.
Modeling modern Amtrak consists may or may not face that problem. In my case, I want to (and likely will) reserve two Chargers in Amtrak livery for my long-distance consists...and a Metro-North unit for my AtlasO M-N coaches since the real ones are already in production (at least two were recently seen being delivered).
Technically speaking, I have enough set aside to swing all three (and assuredly more than that by the time they're actually built) but the idea of one day seeing a near $2600 invoice ($2400 plus maybe $200 shipping?...my 5 Viewliners had $120 in shipping fees) is intimidating to say the least.
---PCJ
@RailRide posted:Modeling modern Amtrak consists may or may not face that problem. In my case, I want to (and likely will) reserve two Chargers in Amtrak livery for my long-distance consists...and a Metro-North unit for my AtlasO M-N coaches since the real ones are already in production (at least two were recently seen being delivered).
Technically speaking, I have enough set aside to swing all three (and assuredly more than that by the time they're actually built) but the idea of one day seeing a near $2600 invoice ($2400 plus maybe $200 shipping?...my 5 Viewliners had $120 in shipping fees) is intimidating to say the least.
---PCJ
When GGD or 3rd Rail production starts (reservations close) I Start sending Scott partial payments. I try to time finishing payments when product is “on the water” heading to Oakland. This works most of the time for me - eliminating that intimidating one off payment. 🤔🤔🤔
Cheers 😉
@Norm Charbonneau posted:I’m honestly surprised ERR is still alive as an aftermarket product through 3rd Rail. It seems to be on borrowed time right about now since Lionel did everything they could to kill TMCC deader than a hammer. I’m glad it’s still around for the time being since it works so well (that’s why it’s been around for a very long time).
Is 3rd Rail the last OEM user of TMCC/ERR? I’m pretty sure Atlas doesn’t use it anymore but I hardly look at their stuff now. I could see 3rd Rail offering Blunami since they could use the same basic platform for 2 rail and 3 rail. Doubt they could sell anything without some type of command control in it.
3rd Rail using Blunami 4408 Decoders in both their 2 Rail & 3 Rail locomotives sounds like an awesome idea!
Given that Scott has largely shifted to diesel models, I would absolutely love to see Blunami as an option for 3 rail. The Soundtraxx library for quality diesel sound files is very extensive and high quality. Nearly any diesel model could be produced and have accurate sounds. It really bugs me when prime mover and horn sounds do not line up with the model which is a very common problem with manufacturers who licensed TMCC. Blunami would allow for proper prime mover sounds and let the owner program any horn or bell of their choosing.
Would also give those who have not already invested in a proprietary control system to operate models using just a phone or tablet. I encounter lots of new hobbyists who want access to all the bells and whistles but are late comers so they have difficulty getting their hands on TMCC, Legacy, or DCS systems at a reasonable price. A Bluetooth control option for 3rd Rail could open the door to a new group of customers.
I would also support 3rd rail moving to Blunami decoders in their 3 rail products. For 2 rail, they have ESU loksound, which is probably one of the best decoders on the market, so I don't really see a need to change from that.
Yeah I think I'll be converting my Chargers and P42s to Blunami. 30 year old sounds sets from a freight unit just don't cut it for a model that's over $800 by the time you factor in shipping IMO.
Great thread and ideas! Lionel's, electronics in third rail would be awesome, especially if Blunami / Lionel worked together creating a hybrid board including the best of both.
A few items I would like to see produced / reproduced by Third Rail would be:
Erie Dunmore Caboose
Pennsylvania BP-20 A-B-A
Nyc Commodore Vanderbilt Mercury cars
Wishing you all health, happiness and never-ending fun with your trains!
The difficulty with Blunami control, from a manufacturer's p/o/v, is that it does not facilitate "conventional" operation. To achieve both "conventional" and Blunami, a "host" circuit board would need to be developed to automatically switch between the two when no Bluetooth signal is detected. That "backwards compatibility" is something that those of us who don't bother with "conventional" often lose sight of. I suspect that Blunami/3R DCC control will remain a hobbyist option, not an OEM one.
During a podcast interview with Scott Mann a few weeks ago, he stated he had enough ERR boards on hand to support about another seven years of product. After seven years he would also be nearing retirement age. I assume the seven years of ERR product included use in new models as well as upgrade sales. I would be curious to know how many Cruise Commanders and Cruise M's for engine upgrades he sells in a year. That would give some indication of how many hobbyist's actually do upgrades.
Ken
@KarlDL posted:The difficulty with Blunami control, from a manufacturer's p/o/v, is that it does not facilitate "conventional" operation. To achieve both "conventional" and Blunami, a "host" circuit board would need to be developed to automatically switch between the two when no Bluetooth signal is detected. That "backwards compatibility" is something that those of us who don't bother with "conventional" often lose sight of. I suspect that Blunami/3R DCC control will remain a hobbyist option, not an OEM one.
How many people are spending $800 on am engine to run conventionally?
For the guys still posting their wish lists, this is the podcast where Scott said brass steam production is pretty much over:
https://www.miniaturemodelspod...-rail-sunset-models/
It's worth a listen!
@Will Ebbert posted:How many people are spending $800 on am engine to run conventionally?
Good and valid point, from the user perspective. But the manufacturer one is different. Right now, Blunami control is a niche item, closely identified with the "dead rail" community. To ensure sufficient orders for production, a loco needs more universal appeal. While a fully-integrated, Blunami-controlled loco needs only a smartphone or tablet for control, that's a concept not familiar to many and not acceptable to those who are only comfortable with a dedicated, handheld controller. I'm all for Soundtraxx offering a fully-integrated (rectifier/filter plus control card), 10A-capable, AC input Blunami card, but I suspect that the potential sales don't justify the (low) development cost, at least not at this time. As more folks get comfy with smartphone/tablet control via Cab3 and WTIU, perhaps things might change.
I’d say the industry appears to be moving in the direction of smart phone/tablet control. Lionel hasn’t been able to produce a physical CAB controller in several years due to part obscelesense and they have been integrating bluetooth into all the Legacy models for at least 4 or 5 years now. The new Base3 is now a catchall that will merge use of all the old CAB controllers and smart phone apps into one receiving unit. Heck, the Lionchief stuff won’t even operate like a conventional train; you need the remote control.
I can’t speak much about DCS but I thought there is an app as well but don’t quote me on that.
DCC is an unusual animal for 3 railers but the Bluerail products seem to be the linchpin that can unlock the taboo of DCC for us 3 rail weirdos. It simplifies all the programing and a number of 3 railers are waking up to all the cool possibilities that a DCC sound decoder can offer. All it takes is one manufacturer to embrace a new technology for it to take off. Until then, it will remain a niche.
Take a ride in the wayback machine to when digital sound first became a thing in the late 80s and 90s. How on earth are we going to control all these sounds on a postwar ZW with only a whistle button?!!! Hobbyists saw the light and transformers were updated to newer tech or fancy add on control boxes were added to PW power. Then came TMCC and a whole new complicated world emerged. Hobbyists adapted because of the new operating capabilities. The 3 rail industry has been using the same level of tech now for 30 years. I think its time for another leap forward; programmable sounds and lighting features and…anything a modeler’s creativity can think up. If the manufacturers are beholden for eternity to making their trains conform to a 100 year old method of operation, progress and product improvement will be greatly limited and interest in the hobby will suffer. How is young blood going to enter this hobby and stay engaged if the tech advancement is limited by a handful of operators who are bound to their fixed in place boat anchor with handles? There’s plenty of trains out there that run conventional; if some newer, high price models come out that have a new generation of sound and control but cannot be operated by a conventional transformer, I don’t think too many are really going to take issue with that.
@Ryan Selvius posted:I’d say the industry appears to be moving in the direction of smart phone/tablet control. Lionel hasn’t been able to produce a physical CAB controller in several years due to part obscelesense and they have been integrating bluetooth into all the Legacy models for at least 4 or 5 years now.
Lionel is perfectly able to produce a physical CAB controller, they just don't want to.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:Lionel is perfectly able to produce a physical CAB controller, they just don't want to.
Well, whatever their motivation is, the result for the hobbyist is the same. Smart phones/tablets seem to be their escape pod to get out of making handheld controllers.
No argument that the net result is the same, we don't get a new physical remote. 
Conventional is great for running postwar stuff under the tree at Christmas with my Dad's original ZW. I love the growl of the motors and the smell of the old trains. It's nostalgia to the max.
For anything else, give me a modern control system. Norm's recent videos about his Blunami project are awesome. I want to be able to control every parameter of the engine and all of its sounds and behaviors, and not be stuck with what the manufacturer decides it should do or what whistle it has and how loud (or quiet) it is.
TMCC on an $800 engine is an absolute minimum. That's not a knock on 3rd Rail -- I understand the situation with ERR and Scott's stash of radio boards, and am OK with it because of the overall quality and accuracy of his products. But man, Blunami is awesome.
Personally, I would never buy a conventional-only engine in 2024 unless I already knew I was going to install Blunami -- or unless I was only going to run it under the tree at Christmas. I have a little Lionel J & L Steel docksider and its train of glowing slag cars that fits this description.
Just my $0.02.
@Norm Charbonneau posted:For the guys still posting their wish lists, this is the podcast where Scott said brass steam production is pretty much over:
https://www.miniaturemodelspod...-rail-sunset-models/
It's worth a listen!
No more steam? Are they going to try and produce steam engines using some other method or complete abandonment on the steam market?
I always had a fondness for a Pennsy H10 Consolidation Somewhat of a brute, as I remember them doubleheaded pounding the Mainline out of Manor thru Westmoreland City,Biddle and Shafton to Trafford and points west.
The track was, and is now, super elevated heading west from Manor with a long straight away shooting along to East Pittsburgh and maybe beyond. It was quite a run. Every now and then we kids would ride our bikes to Shafton and sit on the bridge to wait on the steamers to shoot bye underneath us. What a thrill that was and there was never a long wait in those days!
A realistic PRR H10 is not to be,I guess.
Norm
Unless there is a steam locomotive that can be produced in the 100-unit range and people are willing to pay $2,500-$3,000 for one, there will be no new steam from 3rd Rail beyond the H10a and H10b unless the last 12 Allegheny models reserve. This is purely a function a market that doesn't exist for new steam locomotives. Everything is in the numbers. Scott has always been a businessperson first and doesn't make decisions based on any emotional investment in a project like we might as modelers.
@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:No more steam? Are they going to try and produce steam engines using some other method or complete abandonment on the steam market?
Well, in my opinion the market is actually abandoning steam locomotive models. If Sunset/3rd Rail can no longer offer highly detailed, hand made brass models at prices under $2500, then that's the end. Now "using some other method", such as die-cast or injection molded styrene, would be even more expensive, for small quantity production runs.
How much steam do we need? How about a few Heritage Amtrak cars to go with the Amfleets etc?
@VistaDomeScott posted:How much steam do we need? How about a few Heritage Amtrak cars to go with the Amfleets etc?
Would love to see these Heritage cars made as well as Autotrain and Rocky Mountaineer. May as well have the best in the industry make them all right?
@GG1 4877 posted:Unless there is a steam locomotive that can be produced in the 100-unit range and people are willing to pay $2,500-$3,000 for one, there will be no new steam from 3rd Rail beyond the H10a and H10b unless the last 12 Allegheny models reserve. This is purely a function a market that doesn't exist for new steam locomotives. Everything is in the numbers. Scott has always been a businessperson first and doesn't make decisions based on any emotional investment in a project like we might as modelers.
Well, the market exists, it's just not a $2,500-$3,000 market. Oddly there is such a market for diesels in that price range that never arrive, 
So, brass withers and dies......steam has been done in die cast, resin, and I expect 3D printing eventually.
Traction modeling has already moved to 3D printing!
