Looking through all the Legacy threads I haven’t seen mention of providing a set of computer codes, similar to those provided with the original TMCC, to control Legacy features from a computer. I thought it was very nice feature of the TMCC system to allow people, like myself who enjoy programming, to add to their TMCC systems while preserving Lionel’s architecture. Unfortunately, I’m afraid Lionel will not provide such codes in any form. I’ll be disappointed if they won’t be available but can fully understand Lionel’s reasoning, primarily since this generous inclusion and openness basically ended up being used against Lionel, a situation I’m sure they don’t want repeated. I think this was the least appreciated and understood feature of TMCC by most everyone who owns a TMCC or DCS system, but had lasting and profound effects on the command control landscape.

Ditto except my take is Lionel benefited from the use of the TMCC port. I think it was the licensed use of the train electronics where they were hurt due to the unsustainable pricing policy of K-Line.

I don't think you will see those anytime soon, even though I think NY would support it based on some postings he has had here.

Wasn't releasing the code what allowed MTH to incorporate them into DCS?

Cam:

I agree that Lionel benefitted from the inclusion of the TMCC serial port. After all, companies such as IC Controls prospered because of it.

My reference to it being used against them was when the openness of the TMCC codes allowed DCS to control TMCC trains and resulted in some perceiving DCS as a more open and universal system because of this when in reality TMCC was "more open." Neither system has an open architecture but the computer codes in the back of the TMCC manual allowed operators a little more flexibility. Also, the fact that DCS could control TMCC but not vice-versa was exploited in the marketing of DCS. I certainly don't expect Lionel to allow a repeat of that.

Chris:

You wrote:

"I don't think you will see those anytime soon, even though I think NY would support it based on some postings he has had here.

Wasn't releasing the code what allowed MTH to incorporate them into DCS?"

I certainly hope ny would support releasing codes sometime soon. What postings are you referring to? I looked through a lot of the postings and couldn't find any references to codes. Probably missed them.

Inspired by ny's devotion to his son prompted me to e-mail an organization looking for volunteers to help with severly handicapped people. I knew there were computer hardware products to allow handicapped people to use computers and I saw a computer program as the bridge between using a computer and controlling TMCC trains. Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough or because the people I talked to knew little about trains things didn't work out. I wrote a program to control all TMCC features from a computer screen thinking it would enable people who could not operate a conventional transformer to operate trains from a computer screen. In the end I had a lot of fun doing the programming and like to experiment with computer assisted layout control.

Releasing the codes certainly made it easier for DCS to control TMCC. Even if they weren't released they would have probably figured them out.

Cam,

quote:

my take is Lionel benefited from the use of the TMCC port. I think it was the licensed use of the train electronics where they were hurt due to the unsustainable pricing policy of K-Line.

Exactly! K-Line was literally eating Lionel's lunch.

I asked the same thing about releasing the Legacy codes. Jon stated that the Legacy command base will accept all TMCC1 codes but has been programmed to ignore the extended Legacy codes. He did say that the option was open to release the Legacy codes in the future. I suggested that Lionel release the codes with the caveat: "For Non-Commercial Use Only". I hope Lionel will re-consider.

Earl

quote:

Originally posted by EIS:
Jon stated that the Legacy command base will accept all TMCC1 codes but has been programmed to ignore the extended Legacy codes.Earl

That's interesting. The Legacy command base now outputs the new codes via the serial port, so it would not be too difficult to reverse engineer the codes (when I use the new functionality on a Cab2 I can view the new extended codes on a computer). But if the base ignores the new extended inbound codes that would prevent any programming.

quote:

Originally posted by Barry Broskowitz:
Cam,

quote:

my take is Lionel benefited from the use of the TMCC port. I think it was the licensed use of the train electronics where they were hurt due to the unsustainable pricing policy of K-Line.

Exactly! K-Line was literally eating Lionel's lunch.

They were eating it and still starved to death. Great trains crummy business plan.


(I am not bashing K-Line, over 1/2 my collection is K-line.. I loved them)

MyToyTrains, if I have interpreted what I have read about Legacy correctly the Legacy base software only allows the transmission of TMCC1 commands through the Legacy base serial port...

quote:

Originally posted by PRRMonDivision:
Chris:

You wrote:

"What postings are you referring to? I looked through a lot of the postings and couldn't find any references to codes. Probably missed them.

NY had a posting in Dec http://ogaugerr.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/57660482/m/2331001754/p/1

quote:

Originally posted by JimQ:
MyToyTrains, if I have interpreted what I have read about Legacy correctly the Legacy base software only allows the transmission of TMCC1 commands through the Legacy base serial port...

Hi Jim,
That is what I did to view the new Legacy codes. I connected a serial port of a computer to the serial Legacy connector.

Apparently though the Legacy command base will not respond to the new Legacy codes which are sent to it via the serial connector.

The original codes were three "character" codes, with the first code being fixed. The new Legacy codes have a new first character so they can be distinguished from the old codes. It made it very easy to expand the code set.

As an aside it is interesting to see the issue of changing engines before full speed has been reached. The Legacy base keeps sending a stream of codes to slowly increase the speed of the engine. You can see the stream of codes stop when the Cab2 is changed to a different engine.

quote:

Wasn't releasing the code what allowed MTH to incorporate them into DCS?

Yes, but my point is that benefited Lionel. For the price of a command base an user of DCS could control Lionel engines from the DCS remote. Then they would have less resistance to buying Lionel engines.

Looking the other way, if you had just TMCC you would have to face a larger investment for DCS and all that entails before you got to the same point of freely buying PS2 engines.

If you already run both then I don't think it had any effect at all.

The PR thing of DCS controlling TMCC is just hype - I don't see how it translates to lost sales for Lionel.

All is all the availablility of the codes to MTH was probably a wash. But then look at the other value of having the port open (IC controls, Z-stuff) and it is clearly a benefit.

By contrast the Licensing progam is much more dangerous - but again not all one sided. I think it is a trickier thing to manage - the license fee for TMCC should have been reflected in the K-Line pricing. However, if someone wants to go out of business giving product away it is hard to stop them.

You guys are correct.

Legacy base:
TMCC1 (in/out)
TMCC2 (out only)

so yes, you can reverse engineer the codes, But you cant use them.

(If that upsets you - I'm sorry, it was a tough decision to make but i think we all know why it had to be that way)

DCS uses an interesting method of actually authorizing access to their port. The TIU sends you a code and you have to give it the answer (formulas a mystery) before ANY commands can be send to it.

So, be grateful we can send at least basic commands to our trains with TMCC

Personally, I agree with NY, it would be better for everyone to open it all up.

SO

thats all i have to contribute to this topic, enjoy your variable brakes!

quote:

Originally posted by Mark R:
You guys are correct.

Legacy base:
TMCC1 (in/out)
TMCC2 (out only)

so yes, you can reverse engineer the codes, But you cant use them.

Hi Mark,
I just wanted to confirm (for my intellectual curiosity) whether the codes to increase the speed of an engine with high momentum are being sent by the Cab2 or the Legacy Base (I know they are initiated by the Cab2 and are output by the Legacy Base)?

Changing engines or changing to another mode like Accessories stops the speed increase.

Also when I power off the Cab2 or put the Cab2 out of range of the Legacy Base the codes stop.

Is my assumption that it is the Cab2 that keeps sending out the speed increase commands correct?

quote:

Cam,

quote:
my take is Lionel benefited from the use of the TMCC port. I think it was the licensed use of the train electronics where they were hurt due to the unsustainable pricing policy of K-Line.

Exactly! K-Line was literally eating Lionel's lunch.

Not exactly True! K-Line stole trade secrets from Lionel to produce many of it's "Electronics" (No R&D Costs) All other TMCC licensed Manufacturers played by the rules, and continue to have a great relationship with Lionel.

It only takes one bad Apple

Ernie

Ernie, I wasn't talking about K-Line misappropriating TMCC secrets. I was talking about their legitimate licensed use of TMCC and then "underpricing" the engines at an unstainable price to grab market share.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark R:
You guys are correct.

Legacy base:
TMCC1 (in/out)
TMCC2 (out only)

so yes, you can reverse engineer the codes, But you cant use them.

(If that upsets you - I'm sorry, it was a tough decision to make but i think we all know why it had to be that way)

DCS uses an interesting method of actually authorizing access to their port. The TIU sends you a code and you have to give it the answer (formulas a mystery) before ANY commands can be send to it.

So, be grateful we can send at least basic commands to our trains with TMCC

Personally, I agree with NY, it would be better for everyone to open it all up.

SO

thats all i have to contribute to this topic, enjoy your variable brakes!

The following is PURE SPECULATION.

I've been wondering why Lionel changed the handheld-to-base frequency to 2.4GHz? Does that put it on the same channel range of 802.11g (wireless G)? If so, perhaps a software refresh will allow an IP address to be assigned to the Legacy base and Legacy will be live on your wireless network? Once there, any computer in the world could run your layout. Add a webcam they could watch the layout too.

If any of this is true, perhaps that's why Lionel is keeping the codes secret at least for now. And explains why the Legacy port will ignores any inbound Legacy commands because it wants all commands through the air waves either by the TMCC2 handheld or in the future, a train layout control computer application running somewhere on your household network.

Again, this is PURE SPECULATION.

Joe

Joe,

What we are talking about here is the command set as it appears on the serial ports of Legacy. This is about as raw as it gets - a few codes sent in sequence maps to a single command.

You are right that the 2.4 GHz range is used for wireless networking. It is also used for wireless phones. Either way there is a protocol for sending data and somewhere layered in that data might be commands similar to what is seen on the serial port. However, given that the base is where things really happen and the fact that configuration and settings and status must be passed to the remote that does not directly map to the instructions send to engines, the data between the base and remote may not even resemble the discrete commands sent to the engines.

I would expect that if Lionel wanted to provide an networking connection it would be a jack on the command base. That would be more universal than a wireless support. It is also possible one of the serial ports could be put in a synchronouse mode and connect to a network adapter at much higher speed than the current relatively slow asynchronous mode.

I like Earl's idea. Of course my opinion doesn't count - it's up to Lionel. Perhaps Lionel could license non-comercial use of the port to end users and license the commercial use selectively or not at all. Enforcing this with a hardware or software mechanism is a real headache. On the other hand, if left open, the DCS remote supporting Legacy engine features would be prima facie evidence of infringement. Lawsuit anyone?

It is unfortunate but clearly this is something Lionel has to consider carefully.

I've been busy and missed all these past posts regarding the Lionel Legacy system and pc communication by way of the serial port. However, I too have played around with this a bit, using a couple of small Visual Basic v6 programs and have presented the information here:

http://milwaukeenorthern.net/TMCCpcCAB/pcOverview.htm

This had all been summed up nicely by Mark R with his post:

Legacy base:
TMCC1 (in/out)
TMCC2 (out only)

So there's nothing really new there, except for some details and screenshots of how you play around with a pc and Lionel Command Control.

Hopefully, someday Lionel will be able to open up the full serial port functionality for pc programs to use, as I posted on my web:

"In my opinion, even with all the wonderful improvements in the CAB-2 over the CAB-1, there are still parts of the Lionel layout operating experience that could be enhanced with a pc based control program."

This message has been edited. Last edited by: catrains2004,

Craig - great site!