Hey guys, i just got into TMCC about 3 years ago (but only run trains durring xmas time) so i have a little experiance, but am not a pro. This year i have added the function of an asc to control a remote switch, so i guess im getting a little deaper into it.
But i simply can no longer limit myself to just TMCC engines. There are some really nice MTH pieces i would like to get my hands on in the future, and am looking to get into DCS.
Problem is, i just read an article in the new CTT that shows u have to use all these crazy toggle switches, and this and that to get both systems rumming together? Is this really the only way of getting thre systems to function together? This seems like a huge tunoff to me. How would you handle something like an mth engine crossing from its own track onto a tmcc track without having to stop a tmcc engine and switch from tmcc to dcs???
IS it really this hard??? I was very much looking to own both systems, but if they are this cumbersome to operate together i may have to rethink my future plans.
I run both systems. I have the newer ZW with 180 power bricks. I hooked up TMCC to this and run my TMCC engines the regular way. I then bought 2 more 180 watt power blocks, and ran them to the DCS TIU units and ran them to two tracks. I f I run my MTH I just turn on the power switch of the 180 watt bricks and away I go. I tried the cable hook up from the TIU and the Command Base for TMCC but sometimes its very hard to give or recieve commands for TMCC engines. Hope tis helps?
So when you turn on your switch for DCS, do you have to turn off your zw power suply, or do you end up having two 180watt bricks pumping into the same track at the same time?
Out of curiosity, why isnt it as simple as setting up dcs in its normal way, and then adding thw wire from the tmcc base to the outside rails??? Do the signals from the two diffrent systems interfear with eachother?
No I let them both on. The answer to your other question is that the seine wave of the newer ZW is not pure and I had trouble with this while running MTH. With the 2 power blocks never had any problems. If you got a 4000Z by MTH you could probably run both then but would be limited on power. I went with the newer ZW because I can get 4 blocks of 180 watt power and also run conventional engines on two tracks by uing the Cab1. I later got into MTH and this is the way I set it up.
what are the advantages of running one of these fancy transformers over just a simply power brick (for someone that does NOT plan to run conventional)
Can having that many watts pumping into you track be hazardous to the trains, or lighted cars??? Sorry not an electrician.
While im at it, with these big fancy new transformers, are they equiped with fast blowing circuit breakers substantial enough for these high tech engines?
The simplest and most reliable way to operate TMCC and DCS simultaneously is to hook each system up to the trackwork as described in their manuals (some of the DCS stuff is undocumented except on the MTH website and OGRR Forum areas). Then use the cab-1 to control TMCC locos and the DCS handheld for PS2 locos. There is no reason to do anything more complex, and this works best.
This is for a command only layout. It’s a little more complex for a conventional combined with command layout as you need to choose whether you’ll use transformer’s handles for conventional locos, and/or whether the DCS or TMCC conventional control approaches will be used. There are plusses and minuses to each approach, plus you need separate loops or a block wiring scheme for conventional operation.
In general the two systems do not interact with each other with this setup, although some have reported PS2 locos acting weirdly if very close to some TMCC locos. Otherwise it’s not a problem.
You can use the DCS handheld to operate TMCC locos if you hook the TMCC command base up to the DCS TIU with the special MTH offered cable, but this is only desirable if you have and operate primarily PS2 locos. TMCC locos are less reliable being used this way, and some TMCC commands are not available in the DCS system without using the cab-1.
Thus, contrary to some of the implied concepts in MTH’s advertising, you really do need both handhelds, and both sets of hardware (TMCC command base and DCS TIU) if you want to operate both systems fully and reliably in command mode.
This is exactly what i am looking to do. So then why this crazy article in CTT about all these nutty toggle switches?
Thank you and Laz57 for all your help so far… i wish i could find an extensive write up on the topic so i didnt have to ask so many silly little questions, but i have had little luck so far.
“This is exactly what i am looking to do. So then why this crazy article in CTT about all these nutty toggle switches?”
No clue, except perhaps that this approach gives equal emphasis to each system, and keeps them utterly separate, just as the manufacturers wish. If they focused on using the DCS to TMCC cable, Lionel would be annoyed and if they just ran the two systems together, MTH would be annoyed that CTT didn’t discuss their magic cable ;).
I guess you’d have to ask Peter Riddle why he chose this approach.
Yes you can run each system just by the bricks and they do have a circut breaker in them to reset. Thats how I have the DCS hooked up. I think sometime this past year in CTT they had an article on TMCC and DCS hookups? If I get a chance I’ll look into my archieves.
this may be kinda re-asking the same question, but do most of you feel that these internal circuit breakers in the bricks blow fast enough to protect the boards on command locos?
Someone in the editorial department needs to analyze this article and retract it as:
1.) being too complex,
2.) the author is not knowledgable to wriite about this “new-fangled” stuff,
3.) be very careful in the future not to publish incorrect or mis-leading information.
Three Rail Command Control systems, whether TMCC or DCS are very user-friendly and while somewhat compatible, the DCS can run TMCC, Proto 2.0 both in Command mode, using the correct cables. Proto 2.0 will not run, in command mode, in the TMCC environment. Both systems will operate trains in conventional mode.
The latest MTH E-Mail News Letter goes over the new (free download in November) software for ProtoSound II. Version 4.0 claims to give full TMCC control, including the Lionel Crane and the Acela.
Wonder if the new Lionel TMCC can control MTH? Maybe we have a “comming together”?
I don’t think so… MTH has locked down PS2 and will not release the specs and reverse engineering it could be difficult… not to mention if you were you would most likely be breaking copyright laws.
Where I would love to see O-Gauge get a single command control system, I don’t see it happening. I’m sure we will see a third player in this venue with 5 years with Bachman coming on-line and probably adapting DCC to 3-rail. Now THAT may force the other two to stop bickering and start playing in the sandbox together again…
With all the PS2 locos I’ve collected I have to give serious thought to expanding into DCS/TMCC with the new layout…
“the DCS can run TMCC, Proto 2.0 both in Command mode, using the correct cables. Proto 2.0 will not run, in command mode, in the TMCC environment.”
I think this is one reason why the article is written the way it is. The fact that DCS can issue TMCC commands through the Lionel command base but the TMCC or Legacy systems cannot issue PS2.0 commands through the TIU is because Lionel made TMCC’s instruction sets public information in 1996, whereas MTH has refused to reciprocate. This is a delicate issue in the industry. If CTT wrote an article focusing on how DCS controls TMCC without discussing the reasons why this is the case, they could pretty much kiss any future relationship with Lionel goodbye. Likewise, if they DO address MTH’s litigious and uncooperative approach as part of the article, that would infuriate MTH.
Thus this article is apparently some sort of twilight zone middle ground approach to discussing these issues. Keep the systems separate and keep the manufacturers happy? It certainly makes no practical sense as everyone has pointed out.
On the other hand an article that says “just hook up each system as in the instructions and they work fine” isn’t much of an article ;).
CTT should have their readers as first priority. Publishing misleading information is inappropriate. I think the folks at CTT just goofed and let a misleading article get published and I think they will correct it.
Your second statement, "On the other hand an article that says ‘just hook up each system as in the instructions and they work fine’ isn’t much of an article " is exactly what CTT should do.
The circuit breakers in my bricks trip so fast it is amazing. I have never had a command board go out in the six or seven years I have been running with bricks. (Incidently, I am running only TMCC.) I am using a TPC 300 with about 180 feet of mainline track.
I’m using Post War ZW’s with fast acting circuit breakers between the transformers and the TIU. Run the TMCC separate with CAB1. Track power goes through the TIU [all programed at fixed voltage]. I just switch from the TIU to the TPC’s to run conventional. Those circuits are through circuit breakers too. No problems. Trip ASAP. Run both TMCC and DCS at the same time and on the same mainline or on separate mainlines. Works great. Not as complicated as some want you to believe.
Guys, there is nothing misleading or inaccurate in the story.
There are many areas in the hobby where there is more than one path to getting a job done. The important part everyone seems to be overlooking in this debate is - as Pete Riddle noted on p. 87 of the story – he wants to utilize ALL OF THE FEATURES OF BOTH SYSTEMS. This is how Pete approached the problem.
Reader reservations about the story will be in an upcoming letters column.
Nothing misleading? Look at the posts of first time TMCC/DCS users that are confused by what is required to run TMCC and DCS together. If you hookup each system per the TMCC and DCS instruction manual and use both the CAB-1 and DCS remote, you have “ALL OF THE FEATURES OF BOTH SYSTEMS”.
The “Consumers Report” magazine stepped up to the plate when they screwed up with their report on baby seats. CTT should step up to the plate too. That’s what separates the men from the boys and that will be a good first step in regaining the confidence of your readers.