When I asked this question, I was simply curious if MTH had given up on the HO market based on the reaction when the K4 was announced. I agree with Big Boy that at best they have an uphill battle to get anything but a toehold in the HO market. Just look at the ill will on the forum towards MTH. Perhaps it is unjustified (I don’t think so), but no matter, the image of the company is not good. If they also do not have good access to the HO scale market thru their existing dealer network they really do face an uphill battle.
On the other MTH related thread, an HO modeler volunteered to have an MTH representative test an HO K4 on his layout. To this day it has not happened. I admit I was curious. An O scale modeler posted that while DCS has good sound qualities, it is even more sensitive to dirty track and signal glitches than a typical DCC sound system and he felt that it would be even more evident in HO. I honestly don’t know if this is actually true or not. I’m not taking a pot shot here, just curious as to the comparisons between the two technologies.
Personally, it still bothers me that DCS is proprietary. I think that HO and N scale modelers now have a great advantage in that they, for example, can buy a Digitrax or NCE system and yet install TCS, Lenz, Soundtraxx or Digitrax decoders on their locomotives. The “open platform” of DCC and cooperation with the NMRA is what has helped it become a permanent and very popular mainstay.
I wonder if MTH would ever consider making DCS “open platform” and work with the DCC manufacturersa and NMRA. In sharing the technology, the rewards would come in the long run. IMHO, it makes good business sense. I still firmly believe that if MTH took this approach, HO modelers worldwide would be much more forgiving as time moved forward. In taking that approach, MTH would have to work hard in the Public Relations area.
Will
Antonio, just suppose for a minute that MTH has no baggage and that they are considering entering the market with a competing control system to DCC. Since it appears that a DCC equipped loco can not run on a DCS control system, the cost and time barrier for conversion from DCC to DCS will be far too great for most modellers. Further more, MTH’s own technical documentation reccomends against using a “bus” solution for wiring. They reccomend a “star” or “home run” wiring scheme. Meaning that most, if not all, current DCC installations have sub-optimal wiring for DCS. So if a modellers layout is already DCC, it is very unlikely that anyone will convert. I can not imagine what technology DCS could offer me that would cause me to walk away from, or convert my fleet of BLI and other DCC equipped locomotives, let alone re-wire my layout.
So the real potential market for DCS comes in the form of new modellers and existing DC modellers who decide to go for a command control system of some kind. Here again, I can not see how DCS could get much of a foothold. Unless there are some excellent DCS decoder installation options for modellers to convert locomotives from other makers, you would be limited to locomotives from MTH only. I can not imagine that there will be many HO scalers willing to do that. Not from any animosity point of view, simply a lack of choice point of view.
I can not envision any scenario in which DCS control systems can get penetration of the HO/N market that has already gone along way to converting to DCC.
If MTH comes out with decent locomotives, then I am sure they will find a market for them, just so long as they run flawlessly both on DC and DCC layouts.
The point I want to make here, is that there is so much emotion and animosity about MTH in these circles. If you strip that away and just simply look at the market challenge of competing with a dominant open standard that is widely adopted and you realize that the task is almost impossible
MTH engines have to have a “poliarity reverser” to operate on a regular layout. THis if from O scale magizine testing one of the new 2 rail MTH engines.
I’m not sure about dcc, but DCS runs both back and forth to the engine thru the rails, so dirty track could indeed affect this. Plus running both coming and going means to me twice the chance for something to go wrong.
THey will not open up the product to and open licence, heck right now none of the major players in O gauge wants DCS. You can run tmcc on a DCS system, however the same is not true due to incompatable designs. TMCC only runs out bound.
Having used TMCC for over two years now, i can’t imigine an easier system to install. One wire to the outside rail, and plug it in. Done. DCC my be as simple, however i have no particular knowage of that.
My personel feelings is that MTH has both advanced and hurt the hobby. They really pushed Lionel to make newer, more detailed designs, however in the last few years they have all the public support of congress. [:D]
Personally i think you will not see any ho product from MTH. Perhaps they will dump their K-4s at a discounted price, however i beileve youwill see no others.
Bill
I strated with computers the “IBM” compatibles, with Tandy “Radio Shack” stuff years ago, however as time went, I learned more about the “Proprietary” situation
as its hardware was very specific to its own “creation” and not compatible to anything else, albiet you could run many IBM compatible software on it, adding hard drives, floppies became brand specific.
This is happening in the Console games, IE Sony PlayStations, Microsoft XBox,
GameBoy versions, Dreamcast, etc etc, all these game consoles and none compatible to each other. To enjoy any/all the games you have to buy all the consoles and their individual games of each to have maximum enjoyment of it all.
You think I am going to spend the money for all that?
no way.
I have no consoles, the Tandy stuff I am currently digging thru, dumping data and software into archiving, pfft if I have a Tandy BootDisk and plug it into a standard XT machine, it warns… “This disk is only bootable on a Tandy Compatible system” HooYah!!!
If any manufacturer tries do introduce a proprieatary control scheme into the market as their standard, it will only mean problems.
I’ll go buy my new “MAC 450” diesel and place it on my “IBM turbo” track, and ask myself…why won it run?
Any manufacturer wanting to enter the market better be smart.
Many game makers make their games to run on several platforms, some are platform specific however, but it means they are plenty capable to be compatible to the market, and that should be no different to the Model Railroad market.
Being proprieatary, and selfish and lawsuits will not help the model train hobby.
This is already evident on the BLI website, and I wish it never showed up.
Just for fun guys, could you imagine if Athearn, Atlas, Kato, etc all had their own control systems. Talk about chaos!!!
As for MTH and BLI, I got the impression from comments made in the big topic in September, that MTH thinks the guy who runs BLI is a crook. I’m not sure what the truth is, but the market seems to like BLI. Maybe MTH will exhaust their legal budget and just make O gauge trains. We can only hope.
Simon, Bill, Dimwitty,
Thanks for your info! I have an understanding of electronics…but it’s bare basic! I was not aware that a DCC equipped unit could not run on DCS. I had assumed it could since DCS equipped units can run on DCC. So there are indeed significant technical differences between DCC and DCS that would limit the compatibility. From the comments above, I would agree that “it appears” that DCS HO will be marketed to new modelers since DCC already has a solid foothold in HO and the NMRA.
However, an interesting twist[/b] to consider about this scenario is that most HO newbie’s that are interested in quality locomotives and rolling stock get their first exposure to Command Control by way of…DCC! How many hobby shops around the U.S and Canada already have small HO and N scale modules or layouts for customers to try out DCC equipped units. All the counter rep has to do is tell a newbie HO or N modeler:
“Hey, wanna see something cool? Take this controller and run these engines. Now, turn on the headlights…turn them off…turn on the ditch lights…turn on the Gyra light. You like that huh? Yeah, just like the real trains. O.K, now while this engine is running, press these keys on the pad and run this other engine now on the same track in the opposite direction…Oh yes, the downside is that you can have head on collisions!..Yep, no fancy wiring needed. Yes, we do decoder installations if you prefer…”
In scenarios like these you can bet that scores of customers are hooked! I admit this is what happend to me at a train show in 2003.
Currently my LHS’s owner is getting ready to convert the store’s big DC layout to DCC (Zephyr) with the help of my friend who is a technical guru. Amazingly, already my LHS (Happy Hobo Trains) still runs out of DCC components as the DCC fever has hit hard in the Tampa area
The QSI lawsuit that you commented about to Jennifer may be the reason that BLI started PCM and switched to Loksound for the new models. This would prevent MTH from stopping the production and sales of the Loksound models, since they are from Germany and the EU could sue MTH.
Just a thought.
If MTH were to make a truly superior HO product, people would choose MTH and they (MTH) would not need any laws protecting them.
Hey Bangertt,
Do you have more info? I was not at all aware that BLI was going to be using LOK sound. What is PCM?
Would appreciate knowing. I’ve heard good things about LOK sound decoders , but not much else other than it will be used in upcoming Athearn Genesis units.
Thanks!
Wow… So I’ve been reading all these Mike Wolf is the devil posts for some time now and have come up with some theories of my own…
First off, my guess is that many of the people posting comments about the lawsuits MTH is involved in know next to nothing concerning the issues involved. MTH has been the victim far more than the aggresor in these conflicts I can assure you. Before adding needless verbage to these “MTH sucks” posts, take some time and do some real research into the actual nature of these suits, you might be surprised what you learn.
Also, why does everyone think the whole world is addicted to DCC? There are large clubs locally that still run trains the old tried and true DC way (not that I agree with this sort of behavior mind you), and I know more modelers than I can count who won’t switch to DCC because of the complexities involved. Why can’t there be a simpler way of running trains for those who don’t want to understand the complexities of programming and decoder setup. Now keep in mind I’m not condoning DCS, although I use it extensively with my 3-rail O scale equipment and find it head and shoulders above any DCC system I’ve seen in terms of ease of operation and setup, but I have a hard time reading all the negative posts from people who have probably never even seen the system in operation much less used it day in and day out. I’ll be the first to admit that if a DCS to DCC interface comes about, my Digitrax Super Chief is going on the auction block!
I don’t mean to sound like a Mike Wolf supporter as I surely don’t agree with his methods all the time, but I find it hard to believe that this man has sanctioned or even deserves all the hate gatherings on the forums that run rampant. I for one welcome MTH to HO scale and hope the products are worthy of all this chat!
Antonio, PCM is Precision Craft Models, a new HO and N company owned by BLI. Right now they make N scale E7s with sound, but they announced a bunch of stuff for HO too, like a Big Boy and a PRR 2-10-0.
And our diecast AC-12. Hopefully it won’t cost as much as their Big Boy.
I believe your question has already been answered, but Precision Craft Models is a company started by the founders of BLI and are in the same complex as BLI in Florida. Their web page is listed below. Sorry I did not see your question sooner.
http://www.precisioncraftmodels.com/
Just a comment about BLI. They probably started the new company to isolate
their future business from MTH lawsuits against QSI and possibly BLI. BLI is not using Loksound, but their new start up PCM will use Loksound only according to the infomation sheet.
It is the latest Loksound, which is much better than the Loksound I have in the Trix Big Boy, 4015. That engine sounds fairly good, but you have very little control over
the functions. I have been told Loksound 3, has proper whistle control and does have mulitple inputs for the sound.
I did not realize Genesis was using Loksound. It will be interesting to see what BLI uses in their F units.
We can only guess what is coming at this time, but one thing for sure, with more competition for our money, the product should get better.
Guys, thanks for answering my questions regarding LOK Sound and PCM. Again, you all make this Forum a great resource!
Mr. JNichols…
Interesting post. First, while some modelers are upset this has not been an MTH Sucks post. If you’ve noticed, MTH has received some compliments in addition to the criticisms. I for one have seen photos of MTH locomotives…and was impressed as I was originally an O-Scaler.
Mike being the victim? MTH and Lionel had been going at it for years. Lionel was in the wrong, but long before the Lionel suit, MTH was using dirty tactics against Lionel as well. Stove calling the kettle black! I’ve read the articles on MTH’s history, including the one that seemed to give accolades to his accomplishments. The dirty laundry is there in black and white.
I love this comment:
Dude, you sure are defensive. NO ONE here has stated that the whole world is addicted to DCC. What has been pointed out on this and other forums is that DCC is steadily increasing in popularity, worldwide. I remember that even back in 2003 most modelers I spoke to were not interested in it…now two years later even some of those same modelers are going for it as it has become easier to understand and use, thanks to plug and play features, cooperation from manufacturers, and a younger “technically geared” computer literate generation.
Of course there are many that are not embracing DCC. No big deal. That’s why we have choices.
O.K…this reminds me of the mid 1980s when "I knew more people that I could count who wanted nothing do do with owning personal computers because of the complexities involved… AND I WAS ONE OF T
FP45 - You need to step back and look at the situation in perspective.
Yes, the use of DCC is slowly and steadily increasing. However, JNichols is correct that, to read the magazines and forums you’d think DCC had already taken over the hobby…which it definitely has not. Nor will it. I can find no valid indicator that DCC amounts to even 25% of operating systems at this time. Again, yes, newbies and many younger
“MTH has been the victim far more than the aggresor in these conflicts I can assure you.”
If aggressively pursuing legal remedies against multiple competitors makes you the victim, yes MTH is the victim. IMO, they are only the victim of their own legacy of questionable advertising, publicly expressed contempt for one’s competitors, hostility to others in the industry, and their own litigious, uncollegial approach to business. Hopefully they have learned something from this episode. Sending threatening letters to competitors under the guise of “informing them” when there is no history of co-operation or collegial communication, is unprofessional and hostile, pure and simple. They caught the public relations disaster that they deserve. Their claims against Lionel are largely without merit, despite the court finding. They’ve been profiting from Lionel’s name, reputation and history for over a decade, without permission. The question is whether they can change their culture and approach and become a good citizen of the model railroading industry in the future. Their record to date is terrible, but there are signs they are learning from their defeats. Time will tell.
NBlum, well stated. MTH reps do read these threads. I hope, in a postive way, that they’re taking notes and plan on making some changes that will benefit them and modelers alike.
Your Points, understood CNJ.
Yes, I know very well about many of the longtime guys that have no intentions of changing. But you must be aware there are “boomers” interested! One of the counter reps at my LHS was a “Hardcore DCC Basher” due to the command control problems of the 1980s. However, after seeing “current” DCC equipped units in action with full lighting and sound effects and no complex cab/block system setup with yards of wiring, he now has a very strong interest in it. The gentleman that sold me on DCC back in 2003 was in his mid 50s, which surprised me. So if this happened here in little ol’ Tampa Bay, then it stands to reason that there are boomers elsewhere that are interested in this technology.
Here’s a very interesting twist that hit me in the face and almost made laugh [swg]. According to a TIMES MAGAZINE article I looked at some years back at a doctor’s office…I’m a boomer! No kidding. Even though I’m currently 42, according to the article, the baby boomer generation cut off year is 1963…the year I was born! To me it’s weird but it makes sense as my parents were in the age group of WWII and Korean War veterans. So, there it was.
Quite a few guys that go to my LHS are in their 40s, and they’re on the DCC bandwagon. I’m not disputing that DCC will be considered “an alternative” but if this boomer time line is “Official” then there are FAR MORE baby boomers in DCC then is commonly thought!
I honestly doubt that we’ll get to the stage where
I agree that this hobby won’t be as dominant as it was decades back, however, people will still find it interesting and challenging.
I understand MTH’s position. They borrowed on DCC technology freely because it is open. They incorporated their own features and put a patent on it, threatening to litigate anyone borrowing on their features. What it boils down to is take and no give. MTH looks at the money they invested in their system and could care less about what was invested in the DCC technology they borrowed on. Not a fair way to play ball. Nobody cares what’s legal or not legal. People are looking at what’s fair. There is no law that can dictate what’s fair in the minds of individuals. We make our own assesments. The HO community is not brand loyal like the O gauge community that MTH is accustom to. HO modelers want to be able to run anyone’s engine made by anyone on anyone’s track and control system and be able to do the same thing with anyone’s engine. It’s what the NMRA is all about. Otherwise you become an off brand with a very small following such as Marklin which has its own standards.