PF XL Motor

[ronenson]

What I'd really like to see is an extension of the PF system that allows way more channels (e.g. by bluetooth), and a snap-on motor to automate switches. Combine these, and you'll get a lot of remote-controlled switches. I'm guessing a lot of people would buy these if it's affordable, and it would in my opinion make the PF train system more mature.

[codefox421]

Bluetooth with smartphone control anyone?

Have you heard of the BTbricks project or SBrick?

[Aaron]

I love the XL motor, and the current power functions system works perfectly for me. I'd really hate to see it go.

[3797]

I don't see them replacing the whole PF system. Maybe it's just a change in the manufacturing process.

[andythenorth]

I dunno. I think that Power Functions is probably on the way out. My evidence for this is that within last few years, we have had two new motors (L, Servo), a new version of the IR receiver, and a recent change to the cable moulds. All points to TLG abandoning PF in my opinion.

Oh wait, maybe it's just rumours starting out of absolutely nothing. Yes. That might be it.

[PROlego]

I hope they keep with the PF system at least for 10 years. Maybe they should start making V2 versions of many components (even if I think they are all OK) or designing new products (something for you, train fans, since you seem to dislike PF but I'm sure they're better than a old 9v system ungeared motor :P).Hope they keep producing the existing motors (maybe not the M-motor, since it has about the same speed the L-motor has and less torque and mounting points). I hope they keep the same plug. I think PF system is very well designed and it seems to be good enough for most of us even if there is still room for improvements. Also a new system will be a lot more expensive than a new motor.

I think PF has a place in our hearts and is good enough to be kept in production.

I must say this is the opinion of a Technic fan who knows nothing about trains.

@andythenorth in my opnion those are signs that lego still worries about the PF system and can spend some money. Do you think they will have redssigned the plug if they were going to stop producong PF? I don't thing so unless they are using the same plug for a compatible system.

Sorry for my poor English.

Edited December 28, 2014 by PROlego

[raised]

@andythenorth in my opnion those are signs that lego still worries about the PF system and can spend some money. Do you think they will have redssigned the plug if they were going to stop producong PF? I don't thing so unless they are using the same plug for a compatible system.

@PROlego: Sarcasm, one of the better, if dying out, species on the internets.

[andythenorth]

@PROlego: Sarcasm, one of the better, if dying out, species on the internets.

But hard to follow when you're not a native speaker of the language.

Edited December 28, 2014 by andythenorth

[PROlego]

But hard to follow when you're not a native speaker of the language.

Yes in fact I thougt it could be sarcasm but I was not sure :)

[Brickthus]

As one who helped to develop the PF system...

I believe the PF system will be around for a long time yet. You can see how different devices have been added to it. The system comprises four types of element (list corrected!):

Power Input devices - currently battery boxes but also 9V sources with a PF lead or empty PF battery box to connect power to the 9V/0V wires

Control devices - The switch and IR Receiver, and now the community-based S-brick.

Output devices - currently motors and light brick

Control input devices - handsets, NXT/EV3 IR Link sensor, smart phone for S-Brick. These are usually not physically connected to the rest of the PF system.

I see the XL Motor and Switch are back to their regular prices. The Standard handset 8885 is temporarily out of stock, which means more will arrive.

If there were ever to be any design change to the switch, it might because some idiot with both eyes on the money tried to remove the extra switch on the back. I persuaded TLG to add this as a means of reversing the polarity so that the switches can be used as a control panel. This means you can make a panel like a signal box and the points can be set straight with the lever up (or centred) and to the curved track with the lever down, whichever polarity the motor needs in order to achieve it. It also ensured backward compatibility with the previous 9V pole reverser switch, which could rotate freely through more than 360 degrees. The move to a limited travel for the main lever was a cost reduction in the first place. It is imperative that all LEGO elements retain maximum versatility - any reduction on cost-cutting grounds should result in the person suggesting it being sacked from TLG IMHO!

In fact I think the community has barely got to grips with PF up to now. It is definitely not time to change the system again. There is so much more opportunity to add more elements of all 3 types to the PF range.

As a new control input device (a 4th type of device) I would like to see a dial and execute handset where you dial a number from -7 to +7 and press to send that speed signal to that channel. Not an unreliable incremental device but a precise control where a PF Servo could drive the dial and another motor could press the "send" switch to change to a precise speed (or Servo position) in one move.

Control devices have standard input and output protocols if you would like to make your own transistor circuits. I've had a go - examples here

As a new output device I would like to see a light brick that changes the colour of an LED as the input varies. This would be for a single-aspect searchlight railway signal between red, yellow and green with a 3-lead LED but there are also 4-lead RGB LEDs now so blue and purple could be in the range of another device. I notice that some sets of Christmas lights contain 2-lead RGB LEDs with a colour-varying flasher circuit built into the LED - not much use for controlling the colour but interesting and easy to use - just apply 3V dc. For the 3- and 4-lead LEDs I would use an oscillator circuit to tune the colour - one I have needs 70% duty cycle of the green and 100% red to do the best yellow for a signal.

As the rumour mill turns for the new Technic sets it seems we will still have a motor driving a pneumatic compressor in the flagship truck 42043. I suspect there would never be a combined electro-pneumatic device because it is so easy to add PF and pneumatic devices together in more versatile combinations and then re-use the parts another day. In industry the combined electro-hydraulic devices generally cost more and are less reliable than devices in a single domain. This means use an L-motor to drive a compressor and use a Servo motor to drive a pneumatic switch valve. Then control both with an IR Receiver and handset or NXT/EV3.

Mark

Edited January 3, 2015 by Mark Bellis

[legonerd54321]

PF V2 would be nice. It could have Bluetooth, better/more mechanics, ( for example, more options that just go forwards,reverse, and stop) etc. A new mechanic it can have is to have the horn mechanic we had in 06, but with a better sound affect.

[pirzyk]

As one who helped to develop the PF system...

I see the XL Motor and Switch are back to their regular prices. The Standard handset 8885 is temporarily out of stock, which means more will arrive.

huh, they are still on sale price here in the US but I did change region and I see they are non-sale price in the UK.

Thanks for all the back story on PF, but I am confused on one point. You list 3 type of devices (input, control, output) but where are the handheld controllers? Also you list an input device at one point is the battery and the other point is a controller. I think there should be a 4th type of device (power source, input control, receiving control, output) that corresponds to battery, hand unit, IR reciever/switch, motors/lights.

As for wish list for devices, I would like to see another power source, maybe a USB -> PF cable or even AC -> PF. I'm looking to power a Windturbine (4999) and would like not to run it off a battery. Controllers to flip the track switches is another case where battery power is not required, i.e. any trackside or fixed position device.

[Brickthus]

Yes, the handsets are effectively a 4th type of device, though they really only provide the input to the IR Receiver so they are an adjunct to the control device. They would now include an NXT/EV3 IR Link sensor and a smart phone for the S-Brick. These would be the control input devices, as opposed to the power input devices that are battery boxes. I have corrected the list above. I suppose I listed 3 types for 2 reasons: 1) that was the original concept in terms of physical electrical connections and 2) it was 2:40AM in the UK as I posted it

If you would like to power a motorised device from the mains then the LiPo battery with the charger plugged in would be the current PF-only option. Paying an extra £42.99 for the privilege of using the PF charger seems silly, but there are other options. A 9V train controller and PF extension lead would do the same job to drive a PF motor. This would not power an IR Receiver unless you modified a PF lead or used an empty PF battery box to connect the C1/C2 power to the 9V/0V wires. Any 9V power source could power PF devices using the PF leads and a battery box, making a composite power input device.

A device that will power a PF Medium motor from USB is the WeDo USB Hub, but this provides only 5 Volts i.e. not much power at all. I have managed to communicate both ways between WeDo and NXT using motor power levels and the sensor interface.

I have used a 9V 300mA wall wart to power a control panel for 9V motors controlling rail points before - this worked fine at a show. This would also work with a panel of PF switches 8869 and either PF motors with clutch gears or PF Servo Motors for points control - examples here. I might need a higher current supply in future e.g. 9V at 800mA would be similar to the capability of PF battery box. It depends how much current a pair of servo motors needs when changing 2 points as a pair. Interfacing any 9V supply to a 12V LEGO plug is easiest, then use half a 9V lead with another 12V plug and a PF lead to convert 9V to PF for the switches.

Mark

[zephyr1934]

As a new control input device (a 4th type of device) I would like to see a dial and execute handset where you dial a number from -7 to +7 and press to send that speed signal to that channel. Not an unreliable incremental device but a precise control where a PF Servo could drive the dial and another motor could press the "send" switch to change to a precise speed (or Servo position) in one move.

Oh yes, that would be fantastic if they ever did that.

[legoman666]

Oh yes, that would be fantastic if they ever did that.

Codefox421's Bluetooth controller can do that. It is by far the best way to control trains.

[zephyr1934]

Yes, there are several alternative control systems that can set the speed directly, but lego actually included the protocol to do it but never built a controller. It would be nice to have an all lego solution that is compatible with the IR elements so that you do not have to be a heavy duty MOCer to get the functionality... but probably most people who want that function are already MOCers and they are frustrated by the other limitations of the stock PF system.

[Legoboy22]

Any chance they will add in a new train motor powered by 9V :)

I doubt it because lego just fairly recently released power functions. I would like to see it stay at least for another 5 years because it is a pretty good system. If they do change it will probably be related to RC controllers. I hope they keep the train motor because it is quite strong, unless they convert back to 9 volt. That would be terrific because I missed out on 9 volt.. There is still a hope. Edited January 6, 2015 by Legoboy22

[Brickthus]

I doubt it because lego just fairly recently released power functions. I would like to see it stay at least for another 5 years because it is a pretty good system. If they do change it will probably be related to RC controllers. I hope they keep the train motor because it is quite strong, unless they convert back to 9 volt. That would be terrific because I missed out on 9 volt.. There is still a hope.

I think a return to 9V is extremely unlikely - I am more likely to have a flying car! One part of the idea of Power Functions trains and the move to plastic track as that more custom track pieces are possible e.g. the double crossover.

It is frustrating that TLG has not produced more specialist track pieces like a 22.5 degree crossing or even a 90 degree crossing like the 9V one, though some AFOLs have made their own either by cut-and-shut or 3D printing. I had hoped for an express point with both tracks nearly straight or at a wide radius; the track overlap would be long though, too long for use by younger railway enthusiasts with living room floor layouts.

I hope Power Functions will be around for at least 20 years - AFOLs have barely started using it yet after 7 years!

Mark

[Paperballpark]

The one bit of extra track I'd like to see is outer radius curves. I'm really not interested in the third-party track.

[fred67]

It is frustrating that TLG has not produced more specialist track pieces like a 22.5 degree crossing or even a 90 degree crossing like the 9V one, though some AFOLs have made their own either by cut-and-shut or 3D printing.

As seen in this thread, you can brick-build a 90 degree crossover without modifying any LEGO pieces.

Edited January 7, 2015 by fred67

[Legoboy22]

I think a return to 9V is extremely unlikely - I am more likely to have a flying car! One part of the idea of Power Functions trains and the move to plastic track as that more custom track pieces are possible e.g. the double crossover.

It is frustrating that TLG has not produced more specialist track pieces like a 22.5 degree crossing or even a 90 degree crossing like the 9V one, though some AFOLs have made their own either by cut-and-shut or 3D printing. I had hoped for an express point with both tracks nearly straight or at a wide radius; the track overlap would be long though, too long for use by younger railway enthusiasts with living room floor layouts.

I hope Power Functions will be around for at least 20 years - AFOLs have barely started using it yet after 7 years!

Mark

I agree, I wish there would be a large variety of curves.

[1974]

9V = 100% totally and utterly dead. Molds are right next to the monorail molds under the parking lot. If you want 9V, stock up now!

PF is here for good (and yes, it's evolving, nice stuff will come soon, allthough TLG is loosing the battle to 3rd party suppliers)

I've heard of NO new train parts though

Cheers,

Ole (<-- 9V/12V man only, PF sucks imho)

[pirzyk]

I just noticed on the US S@H site that the XL motor has been pushed out to 22nd Jan (was the 15th) and that the PF Transformer is out of stock until 8th August? That seems not right to me. 9 months out of stock? I was thinking of getting a second one to put inside my train shed to hide charging of my PF engines.

[MusicaRibelle]

Yes, I saw that, it's a bit weird.

Maybe it's just supply / factory problems, i.e. maybe they're changing supplier for the transformer, which has nothing to do with lego material and parts, and can easily be replaced by a standard transformer and one of the standard dc plugs.

[andythenorth]

allthough TLG is loosing the battle to 3rd party suppliers)

Losing the battle, or watching a stronger PF ecosystem develop, whilst not taking the risk on capital, nor tying up resources in product dev, nor tying up resources in supporting increasingly complex software and electronic hardware? I don't think it's any kind of battle at all, I think it's strategy.

Edited January 12, 2015 by andythenorth