From: sra@bistromath.mitre.org (Stan R. Ames)
Subject: Re: Command Control Standard Status Update
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 13:13:20 GMT

In article <4715@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> ebe+@pitt.edu (Elmer Beachley) writes:
>
Please note that while the Lenz receivers use a custom VLSI chip, none is 
required.  It is possible to build receivers without this chip but the
receivers will be larger.  At least one US manufactures believes that they
can adapt a US chip and make a HO version of the receiver that while larger
than the Lenz design will be fully functionsl.  Alas to fit into N or Z
guages a custom design is needed.

>From what I know about the economics of the semiconductor business, you
>need volumes in the 6 figure range before the costs become reasonable.

Actually the numbers are in the low 4 digit range to make the cost tradeoff
reasonable.  By the time you make it to 6 digits (as they have in Eurpope)
the volumes allow you to make significant design improvements (ie different
versions of the chips) without effecting the manufacturer cost significantly.

>I question whether this volume will ever be available in model railroading.
>
>In Europe, where these things have been in use since the mid-eighties,
>and where it would appear there was significant market volume, the
>decoders still list for around $100 US.  
>
I do not have the numbers with me but they were posted on the net by someone
it Eurpoe earlier this year.  Generally the Europe prices are about 50% of
the US cost for Marklin equipment.  I seem to remember a C-82 decoder somewhere
in the $60 range.  We have been told that by October the Lenz C-100 decoder
(same size, better performance) will sell in the US for around $48.

>Most of the competing command-control systems on the market appear to
>be designed around off-the-shelf components, though I'm sure Stan,
>who has studied this much more than I, will correct me if this is not
>true.
>
actually there is much custom VLSI in use today and 1993 will see a great
deal more.  The new CTC 16000 chip is custom, the onboard sound chip is
custom and the new onboard digital system uses a custom chip.  Once you
design it it costs 15K to produce the first versions.


>Don't misunderstand;  I'd like to see a Marklin-equivalent system
>succeed.  I'm just not sure the economies of scale are there to support
>it.
>
Just to clear up one misconception.  The proposed NMRA standard is not a
Marklin-equivalent system.  The Marklin system implements a good subset of
the standard.  The command stations offered by Marklin while of very good
quality may or may not be useful to many US modelers due to the operation
philosophy.  The standard only covers what goes over the rails.  Calling it a 
Marklin like system scares off both users and more importantly new 
manufactures. To be technically correct the standard was based upon a system
designed by Bernd Lenz. Numerous changes have been made and more are comming.
To date Bernd Lenz has incorporated our changes.  Lenz Electronics makes 
equipment for Marklin, Arnold, SBmodelbau, Roco, and Lenz.

We live in a world market.  If our requirements are different we should have
different systems.  Where we can take advantage of existing markets we can
greatly reduce cost.  I have seen the numbers while visiting Lenz and although
optomistic a end user cost of $25 for a HO scale receiver is not out of line
by 1994 or 1995.  I think that you will see receivers that implement subsets
of the standard in the lowwer $40 range by spring.

I also believe that we will see at least two competing but COMPATABLE systems
by mid 1993.  If we can both reduce cost and achieve multiple compatable
manufactures than I will consider the efforts worthwhile.

Stan

Newsgroups: rec.models.railroad