MTH Strikes Again

TRAINMAN9 wrote: >>> It seems they forced Broadway Ltd. to disable their speed control from their most recent offering.

Could you please explain what "speed control" is. Will this affect the forth coming Broadway Limited Cab Forward engine?

Many Thanks! Matt

Is this the thing about reading back-EMF during the "off" time of pulse wave modulation?

The way I heard it from a DCC dealer is that MTH subcontracted the programming and coding of reading back-EMF. It seems the subcontractor (according to my source, who may or may not be accurate) offered the stuff to all comers after his contract MTH expired. Since other mfrs bought into the stuff, which the subcontractor may not have had rights to sell, they will have to disable it until the outcome of the lawsuit is known.

The issue seems to be who owns the back-EMF software, MTH or the subcontractor? If it's the subcontractor, then all mfrs. can re-enable reading back-EMF. If it's MTH, they'll either pay up or not be able to use it, or have to roll their own programming code.

Jay CNS&M North Shore Line - "First and fastest"

Not sure what it means to HO or other gauges but in O it allows an engine to maintain speed regarless of curves, inclines, uncoupling of rolling stock or changes in voltage to the track.

I belive it does affect the forth coming BL Cab Forward.

You need to check with your dealer to find out.

I wonder if BL has a web site?

A pretty pessimistic view of the effect of not being able to use a feature that not everyone thinks is necessary anyway.

In the protoype world the engines (neither steam nor diesel) automatically compensate for speed changes caused by grade changes. The engineer has to do that - even anticipating when to do it to get the smoothest operation of his train. So why should our models do it for us?

It doesn't bother me one bit if decoders are shipped without speed compensation, back emf conntrol, or whatever you want to call it. I won't don't enable it anyway even if it's there.

Not having it might leave more room in the code for other more desireable (in my opinion) functions.

Dale.

TRA> I would

Dale Gloer wrote: >>> In the protoype world the engines (neither steam nor diesel) automatically compensate for speed changes caused by grade changes.

I think the real concern lies in how fast the model operator can react to voltage drops. Those can happen with virtually no warning whereas the prototype scenarios would probably be more easily anticipated. Aside from a major engine failure on the prototype, the engineer would be aware of grades and curves just as we all handle our approach to these same obstacles while driving our cars.

I guess we'll find out how valuable this feature is by the way in which BLI and others respond. If they're not concerned, I won't be either.

=>The issue seems to be who owns the back-EMF software, MTH or the subcontractor? =>If it's the subcontractor, then all mfrs. can re-enable reading back-EMF. If =>it's MTH, they'll either pay up or not be able to use it, or have to roll their =>own programming code

Interesting info.

The principle of using back-EMF to maintain locomotive speed is ancient - AFAIK there are analog ways of doing it, even. MTH can own the code (and probably does - depends on the exact wording of the contract with the coder), but it can't own the concept.

As to whether it's a useful wrinkle - I don't know. It may be useful for exhibition layouts where trains may have to run unattended, but pretty well all I've seen have no grades, so where's the need? Personally, I agree with Dale - don't need or want it.

Wolf Kirchmeir ................................. If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on this train? (Garrison Keillor)

Train America Studios which makes/markets O guage TMCC/Railsounds upgrades also has a function called EOB or Engineer on Board.

If you'd like to take a look at their explanation, the URL is

and click on "Engineer on Board Cruise Control" in the list of selections on the left.

Carl He>Not sure what it means to HO or other gauges but in O it allows an engine to

"TRAINMAN9"

Thanks for the explanation.

In other words, it's something a model railroader wouldn't want but that appears eminently suitable for toy trains. After all, what model railroader wants his/her trains to operate at a constant speed regardless of grades and curvature? That's completely unprototypical and, as I said above suitable only for the toy train market.

A non issue for model railroaders.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

"Dale Gloer" <

Hear, hear Dale.

Great for the toy train market. Useless for model railroaders.

So, who cares what MTH does?

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

appears eminently suitable for toy trains.< Not exactly, even it you don't use it to maintain the constant speed part of it the control is used for many other features related to the sound system. Like heavy chuffing going uphill with load as an example. It really is a big deal. A it's not just this area MTH is going after. They claim just about anything electronic related to model railroading including the bi-directional communication the NMRA is working on. They have brought the introduction of a new Soundtraxx decoder to a grinding halt.

Because layout grades are typically steeper and shorter, so the adjustments ae required much more frequently.

Often grades are simply used to get one track up and over another and it is preferred to not have the grade have an effect on the operation of the train.

You this as if it is a bad thing?

No prototype locomotive that know of has this ability, certainly no steam unit. I say this is a good thing as now it puts control back where it belongs, in the Engineers hands (or in Model RR land, in the hands he/she who holds the controller. This is good.

The only type of layout that would have any benefit with this device would be museum display layouts.

OK... MTH aside, what additional features WOULD you like to see on decoders? It's not like there isn't room in the standard... only about half of the CVs set aside in the standard for mobile decoders have been spoken for, and even on N scale decoders (outside of the smallest ones) there's physical _room_ for more components (which would allow more code). So what do you want to be able to do with a locomotive that you can't do now?

-- Joe Ellis ? CEO Bethlehem-Ares Railroad - A 1:160 Corp. ___a________n_mmm___mmm_mmm_mmm___mmm_mmm_mmm___mmm_n______ ___|8 8B| ___ /::::: / /::::X/ /:::::/ /:::::/|| ||__BARR| | | /::::::/ /:::::X /:::::/ /:::::/ ||

---------------------------------------------------------------- [(=)=(=)=(=)=(=)] |_________________________| [(=)=(=)=(=)=(=)] =============Serving America's Heartland Since 1825=============

Sounds like this MTH company is just greedy. Just think where the hobby would be if someone had patented something in DCC or DC control systems. We would probably have only one company making control systems. MTH should stay in the O toy train market. Thanks Marty Hall

I agree except for the fact everything from N to 0 scale or 3-rail..it is all is toy trains arguments to the contrary are just based on elitism and/or foolishness. Been into N, H0, 0 scale and tinplate for over 50 years; it's all toy trains.

Ray H.

It'll be interesting if MTH attempts to demonstrate that TMCC is implicit in their product and attempts to go after Lionel.

I agree it's likely that they'll only go after those who can't afford the legal costs of disproving their claims.

Carl He>Unfortunately, it will cost major dollars to prove this and related matters

Yes but it requires money and lawyers, lots of both.

What are MTH's ultimate goals. Is he wanting all DCC companies to pay him licnese fees or is he wanting to stop the selling of DCC. I have a hard time with this issue. It seems to me that DCC was being discussed and sold in some form years and years ago, long before MTH ever came out with any kind of command control. Did the DCC companies just fail to patent their stuff and he jumped on the loop hole or what? Thanks Marty Hall