idlemarvel Posted December 29, 2024 Posted December 29, 2024 (edited) I (and my grandchildren) just want to lay down track, place a train on it and go. We don't want to be plugging things in, checking wiring, cleaning track, worrying about isolating sections, etc. Wireless and bsttery power is the way to go, and powered up is a pretty good implementation. Sinple remote controls controlling up to 5 trains with more advanced programming and computer control if you want to go down that road. I agree some of the 12v era accessories would be nice (points, signals, uncouplers) but such things can be done with powered up if wanted. I guess at some point powered up will be retired but you can still get 12v stuff 40 years after it was last made so I'm not worried. Edited December 29, 2024 by idlemarvel Quote
BrickTronic Posted December 29, 2024 Posted December 29, 2024 23 hours ago, JopieK said: ... LEGO uses a TI microcontroller in Powered Up, I hope they move to e.g. STM32 which makes it easier to extend the custom firmware options :) ... Hello, There are STM included : Part Set HUB Name uC Program Memory Remark 45509 31313 IR Seeker STM8S103F3 Flash 8K 45504 45544 Ultrasonic STM8S103F3 Flash 8K 45505 45544 Gyro STM8S103F3 Flash 8K 45301 45300 Wedo 2.0 CC2540 Flash 128K 88006 17101, Boost Move STM32F070RBT6 Flash 128K 75273 CC2640 Flash 128K 88009 ... City/Train Hub STM32F030RCT6 Flash 256K CC2640 Flash 128K - 10874, Duplo CC2640 Flash 128K 6V Battery 10875, 45025 88012 ... Control+ STM32L431RCT6 Flash 256K CC2640 Flash 128K 45601 45678 Spike Prime STM32F413VGT6 Flash 1M CC2564C - - CC2564 SPI to BLE Bridge 88016 51515 Robot Inventor STM32F413VGT6 Flash 1M CC2564C - - CC2564 SPI to BLE Bridge 45609 45345 Spike Essential STM32F413VGT6 Flash 1M CC2564C - - CC2564 SPI to BLE Bridge 88010 ... Remote CC2640 Flash 128K 6V Battery - 71350, Mario CC2642R Flash 352K 3V Battery 71439 - 71387, Luigi CC2642R Flash 352K 3V Battery 71440 - 71403, Peach CC2642R Flash 352K 3V Battery 71441 - 42176 TechnicMove CC2642R Flash 352K 3,7V Li-Ion Jo Quote
JopieK Posted December 29, 2024 Posted December 29, 2024 1 hour ago, BrickTronic said: Hello, There are STM included : ... Jo @BrickTronic thanks that is a great list. So apparently they use the TI controllers mostly for the wireless (BLE) controller and the other controller as a main one. STM32F413 is still very able I would say so hopefully they upgrade the trains etc also to an F4, although an F0 is probably also more than sufficient. Quote
dr_spock Posted December 30, 2024 Posted December 30, 2024 On 12/29/2024 at 2:59 AM, Lok24 said: PU is much simpler and much more practical for nearly all other issues . Did you ever try GBC without any gear and fixed rpm? Maybe if I don't use LEGO motors which have gear boxes built in them. Quote
Lok24 Posted December 30, 2024 Posted December 30, 2024 (edited) 9 minutes ago, dr_spock said: Maybe if I don't use LEGO motors which have gear boxes built in them. Hm. With PU you - in many cases - don't need any gear boxes, that's the advantage. How do you adjust the speed? Edited December 30, 2024 by Lok24 Quote
M_slug357 Posted December 31, 2024 Posted December 31, 2024 On 12/28/2024 at 1:14 AM, mahjqa said: You're just making up random nonsense to get mad at. I need something to get my blood pumping LoL But really, why wouldn't Lego try some Ai-powered products? Especially with Trains as the guinea pig for new control schemes & devices. When you look back at the history of trains, almost all new electrical systems have debuted through train sets. I really hope it stays as random nonsense, kinda doubt it will though. @JopieK Admittedly, some Ai-enhanced elements could be nifty to see if they were implemented well but my hopes are . . . low Quote
XG BC Posted January 1 Posted January 1 (edited) with power functions being one noteable exception, that debuted with a Technic bulldozer (afaik). happy new year btw. Edited January 1 by XG BC Quote
JopieK Posted January 1 Posted January 1 14 hours ago, M_slug357 said: I need something to get my blood pumping LoL But really, why wouldn't Lego try some Ai-powered products? Especially with Trains as the guinea pig for new control schemes & devices. When you look back at the history of trains, almost all new electrical systems have debuted through train sets. I really hope it stays as random nonsense, kinda doubt it will though. @JopieK Admittedly, some Ai-enhanced elements could be nifty to see if they were implemented well but my hopes are . . . low True! But it also depends on your definition of AI, I was Russell and Norvig trained (i.e. a classical AI guy). Even if / then / else conditions could be seen as basic AI. But some basic sensor fusion and/or some tiny machine learning applications could be very useful. That is why it is so useful to have open / custom firmware. Quote
idlemarvel Posted January 1 Posted January 1 Happy New Year everyone. Not sure what AI has to do with whether Powered Up is being retired or not. And anyway as far as I can tell no two people can agree what AI is. If as @JopieK implies if-then-else constructs are AI then almost any software is AI. Retiring Powered Up would be a big proposition for Lego. There are deployments in City (trains mainly) Technic (Control +) and Education (Spike) themes which to my mind shows how versatile it is, and publishing the interface so that third party tools like pybricks could blossom makes it even more so. In general I think Powered Up does a good job so replacing it with something better (which one hopes would be the objective) would be no easy task. Quote
JopieK Posted January 1 Posted January 1 It is getting a little off topic but: https://deepgram.com/ai-glossary/rule-based-ai Read also the seminal work of Peter Norvig and Stuart Russell. Obviously I don't think that every condition (if-then-else) statement is AI, but if we try if they are arranged systematically to simulate reasoning or decision-making processes, they could indeed be seen as part of rule-based AI. On-topic: Control+ seems to still be around in 2025 Technic sets! Quote
Toastie Posted January 1 Posted January 1 17 minutes ago, JopieK said: Control+ seems to still be around in 2025 Technic sets! So they sell the app without the hardware? Happy New Year and all the best, Thorsten Quote
Lok24 Posted January 2 Posted January 2 16 hours ago, idlemarvel said: In general I think Powered Up does a good job so replacing it with something better (which one hopes would be the objective) would be no easy task. First time ever there is one system for all themes, completely programmable and with open protocol (and so every part of the system can be controlled by any external device with BT) That cannot be improved. Quote
zephyr1934 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 19 hours ago, Lok24 said: First time ever there is one system for all themes, completely programmable and with open protocol (and so every part of the system can be controlled by any external device with BT) That cannot be improved. Well, there's still room to improve the implementation, e.g., add back in the native option to, "keep going if receiver loses contact with controller," improve bluetooth performance in crowds, add a rechargeable battery, lower the cost on the plain battery box, and bring back the option to control more than one train motor per output on the hub. Quote
Lok24 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 3 hours ago, zephyr1934 said: Well, there's still room to improve the implementation, Sure, but not in the system architecture 3 hours ago, zephyr1934 said: add back in the native option to, "keep going if receiver loses contact with controller," It does. I have a program that controls hubs with the remote, you can turn the remote off or get far away, motor runs as before, you can connect again later 3 hours ago, zephyr1934 said: add a rechargeable battery, l exists (not from LEGO) 4 hours ago, zephyr1934 said: , lower the cost on the plain battery box, Just marketing 4 hours ago, zephyr1934 said: and bring back the option to control more than one train motor per output on the hub. That would be a simple Y-cable ;-) Quote
Barduck Posted January 3 Posted January 3 one improvement they should do is a train motor that has it's own rechargeable battery like Mouldking made but better (https://www.techbrick.co.uk/moulding/mould-king-rwy-module-and-controller). Would get rid of a lot of the cables Quote
Lok24 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 6 minutes ago, Barduck said: do is a train motor that has it's own rechargeable battery I'm not a friend of that, cause while charging train has to stop and can't be used, right? 8 minutes ago, Barduck said: Would get rid of a lot of the cables One ? Quote
Toastie Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 hour ago, Lok24 said: cause while charging train has to stop and can't be used, right? Not when using a mix of 9V and RC rails or 12V rails with some stretch of powered center lines, power pickup, and a bridge rectifier. The LEGO LiPo easily navigates the constantly changing power charging situations. Best, Thorsten Quote
MAB Posted January 3 Posted January 3 On 12/29/2024 at 12:13 AM, dr_spock said: My grandfather gave me a HO train set when I was a kid. I ran it on the bedroom floor. Cleaning was part of the routine to keep it running well. Had to teach myself to wire switches from the package instructions. Also noticed that shorts caused the 120VAC to 18VDC power pack to smoke. On the other hand, I have yet to get PowerUP! to smoke or shock myself. I wouldn't mind LEGO going back to PF or 9V. It was simpler and more practical for GBC modules with those stackable connectors. Same here, I used to spend ages cleaning track joiners and contacts on train track and other tracks like Scalextric. Whereas my son had a PF/RC train set which is now 15 years old. Still works perfectly, and no need for apps as the included IR remote does the job just fine. Quote
Lok24 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 6 minutes ago, MAB said: Same here, I used to spend ages cleaning track joiners and contacts on train track and other tracks like Scalextric. This was long time ago, today the models have buffer capacitors ;-) 8 minutes ago, MAB said: and no need for apps as the included IR remote does the job just fine. just like with PU Quote
dr_spock Posted January 3 Posted January 3 6 hours ago, Barduck said: one improvement they should do is a train motor that has it's own rechargeable battery like Mouldking made but better (https://www.techbrick.co.uk/moulding/mould-king-rwy-module-and-controller). Would get rid of a lot of the cables I think it is more flexible to have batteries that can be swapped out with charged ones. The train would be no-go while motor module is recharging, unless one has spare charged locomotive ready. 5 hours ago, MAB said: Same here, I used to spend ages cleaning track joiners and contacts on train track and other tracks like Scalextric. Whereas my son had a PF/RC train set which is now 15 years old. Still works perfectly, and no need for apps as the included IR remote does the job just fine. I had a track cleaner that was a model of the Plasser EM80C track inspector. Fun times. :-) LEGO track and traction tires could use also cleaning from time to time when there is wheel slip. I pick gunk off the tracks with MOW LEGO cleaner. I like that out of the box I can speed control any PF motors with the PF IR speed remote. Not quite the same with the PU remote and non-train PU motors, without Pybrick reprogramming or PU app or Legoino or diy adapter hack, the non-train PU motors only get the on/off control with the PU remote. Quote
zephyr1934 Posted January 4 Posted January 4 On 1/3/2025 at 3:54 AM, Lok24 said: Sure, but not in the system architecture It does. I have a program that controls hubs with the remote, you can turn the remote off or get far away, motor runs as before, you can connect again later exists (not from LEGO) Just marketing That would be a simple Y-cable ;-) Yep, most exist via 3rd party solutions, but I'm just saying they should exist from 1st party. I know they won't, but I've got to complain somewhere... Quote
JWBDolphins Posted January 4 Posted January 4 50 minutes ago, zephyr1934 said: Yep, most exist via 3rd party solutions, but I'm just saying they should exist from 1st party. I know they won't, but I've got to complain somewhere... I agree with this. As I understand it, PU is a very powerful system......once someone reversed engineered it and actualized its potential. I don't blame LEGO, they're a toy company not a software engineering shop. Its LEGO's proprietary stuff that I don't like. Again, not blaming LEGO for making that choice. As an example, both PF and PU use proprietary connectors. At least with PF they also sold extension cables. You could (*gasp* ) cut the cable in half, attach a more common connector, and introduce any piece of third-party control into the system. You sacrificed a cable, but motors, train motors, lights, etc remain untouched. To do this with PU you have to cut the connector directly off the device. You can always reattach it, but it just isn't clean. I know for PU you can buy a third-party 3D printed extension cable but it would be nice if that came from LEGO directly. Quote
Lok24 Posted January 4 Posted January 4 5 minutes ago, JWBDolphins said: once someone reversed engineered it and actualized its potential. No reverse engineering needed, the protocol is published, so it's open for everyone. And all what third parties offer is based on this. And BT is documented too. 8 minutes ago, JWBDolphins said: I know for PU you can buy a third-party 3D printed extension cable but it would be nice if that came from LEGO directly. Agreed, I proposed that to LEGO years ago, the answer was "perhaps" Quote
JWBDolphins Posted January 4 Posted January 4 (edited) 2 hours ago, Lok24 said: No reverse engineering needed, the protocol is published, so it's open for everyone. Oh, Awesome! - I didn't realize that. A step in the right direction! So its almost as if they want it to be improved upon - just missing a few extras to make that easier. So yeah, probably about time for them to discontinue it! Edited January 4 by JWBDolphins addition Quote
Toastie Posted January 4 Posted January 4 2 hours ago, Lok24 said: the protocol is published, so it's open for everyone. True, since 2018. 24 minutes ago, JWBDolphins said: A step in the right direction! Agreed. This is the hardware/firmware side and people are improving this as well as the software side since then, 6+ years. Yeah, it seems to be the time to move on ... Just kidding. We'll see. Best, Thorsten Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.