And now more charges...

Here is some more information. We're a little frustrated, and that will likely come through in this post. I'm making these posts for two reason. First, to let people know what's going on with the throttle. And second, in case this information helps someone else with a future project.

After I made the video we replied to the mold makers saying we had decided not to make two of the changes, and I also contested two of the charges--one was a result of a mistake they made. Then I got a phone call from the mold makers saying that the change they made to reduce the shrinkage of the back created some new problems. So they wanted to talk about different possibilities for fixing the issue, and that each of the options would have an additional cost. (Insert grim facial expression here).

I was in the middle of an all-day meeting at work (the throttle project is a hobby for me), so I didn't have much time to talk to them. I think it's clear, even though I don't have all the information, that this will cause another delay in getting the molds done.

Alternatives?

Did you research and/or consider having the molds made in the US?   Saw the video and feel for your company; the investment is made and now you are being nickel and dime'd by the mold maker.   Are you permitted to remove the molds from China (I am making the a big assumption here)?   It was my understanding that under certain conditions, molds produced in China are embargoed from being removed from the mainland.

Not meaning to be argumentative.   There are those in the hobby that still produce on-shore, staring at three Bowser two bay hooper kits that have the "Made in the USA" stickers on them.   What would have been the cost multiple to do the molds on-shore.   Or is that even possible in 2019?

Waiting patiently for the throttle, my advance order is paid for and I am all behind what TCS is attempting to do.    The fact that your US rep disappeared for 3 weeks for a "vacation" does not bode well for your project. 

Best of luck to TCS and I do hope this has a happy ending.

Yes, alternatives

Hi Bob,

We wanted to have the molds made here in the US. However, I contacted a number of companies and they either didn't respond (the majority), or they gave a quote that was over three times the cost to have the molds made in China. TCS's contract for the molds is actually with a US molding company in OH who then contracted out to the company in China to have the molds made. This mold is built for export. The plan all along was to have a small run of parts made in China, and then the mold would be shipped to OH for all future runs.

Since then I've found a mold maker/injection molding company in NH that would not be too much more. We've asked the mold rep for more information and options. One of the options is to have the mold, as is, air freighted to NH to have it finished there. We'll see what happens.

From what I've learned, many of the inexpensive molds made in China are not built using standard parts, and are also not built to be repaired. If they have a problem, they just build a new mold. But in this case, TCS paid to have the mold made using standard hardware in China and shipped here. These molds can be repaired.

I'm not completely sure what the problem has been, but it appears to be a lack of communication and expectations. I try to get communications in writing and they like to talk on the phone. That should have been a warning to me. But since I'm not an expert--the Universal Throttle Pockets and Blue Point Turnout controls are my only previous experience. For those I worked with a mold maker/molder in WA state, about an hour drive away. And that was a joy. But that company gave me a very high estimate this time.

Getting it in writing

"I try to get communications in writing and they like to talk on the phone. That should have been a warning to me." 

This sounds so familiar to me... when I was in the Army, there were a couple of co-workers that I started insisting send me instructions via email, since half the time I couldn't understand them on the phone and the other half... our recollections of the conversations didn't match. 

Updates

Thinks seem to be back on track. We've approved the next set of changes that, with any luck, will result in the final mold. They're saying they should be able to shoot the next round of test samples around December 6. The mold rep is going to be in China at the time, and they have a circuit board and keypad. So if he feels the fit is good, they're going to do a small run and send them to us so we can start shipping to customers. But, you never know... This makes starting to ship before Christmas very tight. Everything has to line up just right. So there's still a chance, but there is probably and equal or larger chance everything won't line up. I've heard that Murphy is alive and well.

I wouldn't worry about Christmas

With the normal volume of package shipments during that period, I just wouldn't stress about trying to make it. 

Quick Update on Progress

Here is where we're at. We got some samples back a while ago where they just adjusted for the differences in the outside of the bottom from what it should be and what it actually is. The results were spot on. Now we're waiting to get the samples with all of the changes. They were supposed to have them done a few days ago, but we haven't heard anything yet. So obviously, we won't get the cases in time to ship before Christmas.

I also thought we were done with FCC testing, which is correct, but missed the certification part. It takes time to get the certification once the testing is done. We've gotten CE, AU, and NZ authorization and are still waiting for FCC and IC. So even if we had the cases, we couldn't ship US orders.

This all points toward January as the likely ship date for the throttles. Thanks everyone for being patient.

Any idea when the full system

Any idea when the full system will be released? 

And what the final specs may

And what the final specs may end up of the whole system?  I am looking to replace my Lenz system at some point but would like to replace as little as possible.  So I am intersect in what the plan is for boosters and such.l.

-Doug M

TCS LCC/DCC System Update

TCS has at least three more products planned and in development.

• DCC/LCC command station (integrated booster)
• Smaller knob based WiFi throttle
• Stand alone DCC/LCC booster

TCS made a decision about a year ago to focus the majority of their efforts on their large WiFi based throttle in order to accelerate it to market. Both this throttle, as well as the smaller knob based throttle, are dual protocol WiFi. Both handhelds support the WiThrottle protocol, as well as the much more feature rich and advanced LCC protocol that the DCC command station will use. The idea was to get updated technology in the hands of modelers sooner which can be used on existing DCC systems in the market with the WiThrottle Protocol, and in the future also have something that works with the updated LCC protocol should they wish to upgrade other system components to take advantage of the new capabilities.

The Large WiFi throttle is nearing the end of development. We are primarily waiting on a few last minute tweaks to the enclosure molding to polish it off. Therefore, there is already starting to be a gradual shifting of resources to the other planned products.

As you may have already gathered, there is a diverse set of individuals from all around the world working with TCS on these products. Many of us are simply MR enthusiasts with technology backgrounds, who want to advance the state of standards based technology in the hobby, and are not making any money off of our efforts. We have chosen to work with TCS because they have been so willing to engage on this shared vision, and have made significant capital and staffing investments of their own to match our efforts. Other established DCC manufacturers have been offered similar help to advance their product lines, and the primary reason that we have not engaged with them is that they have been mostly uninterested in making any investment of their own.

DCC/LCC Command Station (integrated booster)

Rev C of the hardware was produced just over one year ago. This revision is in pretty good shape, however, we identified a few opportunities to make some improvements. The Rev D version is expected to be the final Rev, and is just about ready for peer review before being sent out for a prototype build. If you have visited a TCS train show booth, or watched a recent TCS video, you have probably seen the Rev C in action, fully working with the TCS throttle using LCC protocol.

While there is some minor hardware effort remaining, most of the remaining effort is focused on software. Remaining items include:

• Improvements to the nonvolatile database for storing things such as locomotives and macros.
• Tweaking the short circuit and overload protection algorithm.
• Some minor refactoring of the NCE/SystemOne/Ramtrax Cab Bus implementation to reduce CPU utilization
• Implement the XpressNet software.
• Squash a few other known bugs that have been lingering for a while.

The planned feature set for the Command Station includes:

• LCC CAN Bus support
• LCC WiFi Support
• DCC protocol w/RailCom
• Marklin protocol
• NCE/SystemOne/Ramtrax Cab Bus master for up to 62 devices
• XpressNet Bus master for up to 31 devices
• DCC Programing on the main w/RailCom read-back support
• DCC Program track w/RailCom read-back support
• Software field updatable by the user over Wi-Fi
• 5A integrated Booster

Our goal is to have this product ready for sale by the 2020 NMRA convention in St. Louis, however, there is certainly execution risk involved.

Smaller Knob based WiFi Throttle

Rev A of the hardware was produced almost two years ago. This revision has some very minor issues that will be corrected in the next hardware revision, which we expect to be the final production revision. The software for this product is about 90% shared with the large handheld, and the scope of the remaining software work is mostly around adapting to the smaller display, fewer buttons, thumb switches on the side, and the potentiometer option.

We haven't estimated the schedule for this product yet, but the largest factors are the enclosure mold, compliance testing, and board revision. My gut tells me that a 2020 NMRA convention in St. Louis release date is possible, but likely a stretch.

This product supports all the same features as the large handheld, but with a simpler user interface. The expected price is also lower.

Stand Alone DCC/LCC Booster

Development work on this product is just now starting with Rev A hardware currently under development. Our goal is to release this product along with the Command Station, however, it is possible that this product will come later.

The command station uses the NMRA standard booster interface (S-9.1.2), and can be used to drive most existing brands of DCC booster. So far we have tested with Digitrax and NCE, but it should also have no issues with Lenz, and modern CVP boosters. If there are other brands of interest, we can confirm as needed.

The only thing that is required to drive another brand booster is a special cable to pull out the appropriate signals. TCS plans to offer a plug in play board that plugs into the LCC standard interface on the TCS command station and then breaks out the NMRA booster signals to connectors that are standard to other popular booster brands.

While other brand boosters may be used with the TCS command station, the TCS booster will add additional features. The TCS booster is capable of collecting RailCom data and forwarding it on to the command station in real time. The TCS booster also supports an LCC connection, which can be used for easy configuration, as well as feedback to the user, such as an active short, loading, temperature, and other diagnostics.

The LCC and RailCom features of the TCS booster are optional, and do not prevent it from being used with another DCC manufacturer's command station.

Thanks,

Stuart

While I am not in the DCC

While I am not in the DCC business...

I would remind TCS that they should try to release the board to interface with other brands of boasters as close to the release of the main command station as possible.  As I suspected this new generation of DCC command stations is going to be used to replace older systems in a LOT of cases,

I personally know three different people out af about a dozen modelers that are currently considering/looking for replacements for existing systems.  (Oddly Lenz, CVP and Digitrax)  and the ability to pull the command station and reuse everything else is critical.  Of course everyone wants to be able to buy the new throttles and such but if you have a large layout with boosters and throttle busses and a large number of radio throttles and if forced to replace EVERYTHING or stay with the current brand most will stay with the current brand.

So I expect that a lot of folks will be waiting for the ability replace their existing command station.  
 

I also think that this new generation of systems that work with components from other systems is good for DCC as it will encourage companies to improve as you will now be able to mix and match.  If A has the best command station/interface and B the best bipoosters and C the best throttles then you can potentially use those and not be forced to pick one.  Of course this will hurt the company that has the worst,... so it will be interesting as this all shakes out.  
 

-Doug M

Loconet

Hi

Why no Loconet on the DCC Controller??

Answers about command station

@Doug, releasing the board to allow working with other boosters is easy and I don't see why they wouldn't release it right away. I think Stuart's main point is that the TCS booster itself may not be released until later. One goal is, as you describe, to reuse your existing NCE (already working) or Lenz (not yet implemented) throttles.

@Craig, Loconet is not on the list for legal reasons. It requires a license, and I doubt Digitrax would provide it. Note: like Stuart, I don't work for TCS--this is a hobby for me. Although, when we stay with them, they do feed us.

Digitrax

Wont work with anybody else

You can use WiFi with it though.

Yep, you can blame Digitrax

Yep, you can blame Digitrax. I know of several vendors developing complimentary products (such as the Protothrottle) and when asked about technical LocoNet details so they could seamlessly connect to their system bus, Digitrax put up the hand and said "no way, that's proprietary and we will not share the technical details with anyone, ever."

If Digitrax doesn't watch out, everyone else will go around them and their system will end up being the DCC dinosaur system that won't integrate.

Which is weird

Because they have provided Loconet specs and licences to at least a couple European manufacturers, such as Dijikeijs. I've even discussed that I was using a UR91 (it needs and adjustment) and a LNWI with the DR5000 with them.

Digitrax LocoNet

I know Digitrax viewed LocoNet as a competitive advantage, and evidently they still do.  Not sure if it ever was technically, although it does seem to have been a marketing advantage.  Anyway, it seems like rapid change is starting to happen on the throttle bus side of things and keeping LocoNet proprietary may no longer be any sort of advantage in short order.

Europe inroads

Digitrax isn't as big in Europe, so anything that's a foot in the door there will be interesting to them. They're looking for growing their market share across the pond.

But they're the biggest DCC system vendor in North America, so anyone else here is just small-fry competition to them and you won't get the time of day from them. The assumption is anyone in North America is just trying to eat into *their* market share, so the answer is a big NO.

...Some Answers to Some Questions

This is the plan. The necessary board is quite trivial. It contains no active components and is simply wires to different style connectors. In fact, this board is not required, as a special cable could also be used.

The main reason is that it requires a license from Digitrax and so far we have been unable to get one. Digitrax has a long history of denying LocoNET licenses (at any cost) to vendors that they see as a competitive threat. There is at least one other popular vendor in the US who has tried to obtain a license, they actually sell a LocoNET product in Europe, who has been blocked by Digitrax in the US. This is a Digitrax problem, not a TCS problem. TCS would be happy to build a LocoNET to LCC bridge that would allow using Digitrax throttles on a modern LCC system.

The LocoNET patents are only enforceable in the US. The US patent office has stopped allowing these types of patent grants going forward, but existing patents are grandfathered in. There are legal opinions out there that the LocoNET patents would not hold up to a legal challenge, but nobody has been willing to invest the resources to find out. TCS is unlikely to mount a legal challenge given the costs involved.

There is potentially a legal back door by utilizing JMRI as some kind of bridge. JMRI has been granted a LocoNET license in perpetuity. JMRI currently lacks the feature for bridging throttles to LCC, but it could technically be implemented by someone clever.

The LNWI allows for use of the TCS throttle on a Digitrax system using the WiThrottle protocol. The LNWI does not allow the use of Digitrax throttles on a TCS system though. The LNWI can only translate in one direction.

Thanks,

Stuart

hmmm......

Could one do this if they terminated their own cables???

That could be a problem if one wished to change systems without great expense.

From the FAQ

I took these quotes from  https://tcsdcc.com/throttle-faq

Stuart;  My question is.  Would a RasPi with Steve Todd's sketch work in the above instances?
https://mstevetodd.com/rpi

Yes

Dear TC,

The key is that the TCS throttle speaks the JMRI-based "WiiThrottle" protocol over a WiFi connection.

What the Host (computer) hardware is, (PC, MAC, RPi, LNWI, whatever),
that any given modeller uses to run JMRI/WiiThrottle 
is irrelevant.

As long as:
- the (computer) hardware
(In this case, RPi)

- can run JMRI, and thus the "WiiThrottle" service
(This would be addressed by Steve Todd's excellent RTR RPi/JMRI image)

- and creates/connects to an accessible WiFi network
(a RPi3B+ , running Steve Todd's image, acts as it's own standalone "WiFi Access Point")

- which the TCS throttle can _also_ connect to

then Yes, it should work...

...the only variable I can think of is that the TCS throttle will need some way
(dedicated button, mappable button, or "menu addessible option"),

to enable the JMRI "Track Power" button to turn ON the Track-Output of
_Whatever DCC Output stage/system you have the RPi/JMRI connected to_
at the "cold-boot" start of each layout-running session... 

NB Presumably by saying "Steve Todd RPi",
you are _also_ implying the use of an Arduino-based "DCC++" DCC output stage,

although it must be noted that "the RPi/Steve Todd" bit
and the "DCC++" bit
are _two_distinctly_seperate_ components,
which _may_ or _may_not_ be used together...
...one does_not_ automatically imply the other in any given instance or discussion...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

How long can Digitrax enforce

How long can Digitrax enforce the liscence but?  The system is not exactly new and I was under the impression that those things had a limited time span.

-Doug M

Patent Enforcement

US patents are valid for up to 20 years. Yes, it is true that the original Digitrax LocoNET patent is expired. However, they have been granted successive LocoNET patents over the years that are still valid. In theory, yes, they will eventually run out and the patent office is not supposed to be granting these kinds of patents anymore. However, the patent office is well known, even today, for continuing to grant dubious patents and leaving it for the courts to sort out. That is an expensive solution for an industry that has a pretty small market capitalization.

Our development team could spend a lot of time, and money, contemplating this, trying to find some clever workaround, etc... We have instead decided to focus our efforts on creating the best MR control products we can for an open standards based ecosystem instead. We cannot control what others do outside of those standards, but the door remains open for anyone, including Digitrax, to join our efforts at any time.

It has been well known from nearly day one of DCC that Digitrax is building a purposely closed and proprietary ecosystem where they retain all meaningful control. It is 100% within their rights to do so, and there are pros and cons to this both for Digitrax and consumers. Many consumers do not see their position as a negative. Only time will tell if this protectionist position will be good for Digitrax in the long run, and I suspect that if they no longer see it as good for them, their position will change. One thing that I know about Digitrax is that they are incredibly practical.

Thanks,

Stuart