NotofthiscenturyTim

Does connection to pins 16 and 20 use the same onboard diode and resistor as the power bank socket and the C+ and C- solder pads? The (much-read in my case) manual is silent on that. It's also silent on the electrical characteristics of said diode and resistor or what values of capacitor could be connected to C+/C- and whether any components other than capacitor(s) are needed when making a direct connection to them. I haven't been able to locate a teardown of the official Hornby power bank but the odd comment implies that it contains components other than just capacitors, despite the decoder containing an onboard diode and resistor which you'd typically find as part of a powerbank connected to decoder positive and ground/pins 16 and 20. Also unclear from the manual whether the decoder's clever tech to prevent the powerbank interfering with programming will work if a powerbank is connected across pins 16 and 20 rather than the socket or C+/C- pads. Rather than providing some useful factual specifications alongside a "you will void your warranty if you tinker" caveat, instead Hornby's "comprehensive manual" resorts to pure backside-covering: "We can not advise re “third party” or “home brewed” types of “Stay Alive” solution…. We do not guarantee their operation and cannot officially endorse their use. If you decide to fit a solution you may invalidate the guarantee on the decoder for the reasons above. "

Funnily enough I was also puzzling over that yesterday. Looking at high res photos of the board, the conclusion I came to was that there aren't any pads on the 21 pin version as it's a different board to the 8 and 18 pin ones which share the same layout.

The Lenz LZV100 has no Bluetooth or WiFi so no built-in app support of any sort. It is fully compliant with XpressNet. The Z21 app can be used via the 3rd party "XP-MULTI" dongle made by the German electronics firm MXion. The dongle is connected to the LZV100's XpressNet port and connects to the phone by WiFi, either directly or via WiFi router. Loco addresses and functions work properly unlike the Hornby dongle. Programming isn't supported, like the Hornby dongle. It can also be used with Loconet command stations to add Z21 app control to them. But it's more expensive than Hornby at €67. While I enjoy tinkering with the dongles and trying out the Hornby and Roco apps, I've found the open source Arduino-based DCC-EX system and Engine Driver app much more reliable and easier to use. The support is also great unlike the Hornby "walled garden" attitude; you message the dev team on Discord and get rapid answers. And it's much cheaper - parts cost £20 and it takes around an hour to assemble a full DCC system.

Just tested. No, unfortunately not, no long addresses. I can probably live with that but it's still annoying.

Thanks for the tip. It didn't work initially but... Good news - all 29 functions now working with the Lenz LZV100 with v3.6! Had to reset and completely reinstall the dongle firmware and the app. Set to "Elite". Still a bit temperental on power on - sometimes Bluetooth doesn't connect, sometimes it connects but doesn't send any commands to the track. But still great progress compared to half the functions not working.

Disappointing but classic Hornby. "Let's develop a product which is 99% compatible with an existing standard, but cripple the remaining 1% and limit it to the Hornby faithful." I've also been using the dongle with a Lenz LZV100 with v3.6 of the software. In terms of loco control the only thing that doesn't work for me is Functions 13-26. Functions 0-12 and, bizarrely, 27 and 28 work fine. Support for functions 13-28 was added to the XpressNet specification 3.6. Maybe the Select and Elite implement those functions in a way that's non-compliant with the XpressNet spec? Probably a pretty straightforward problem to fix in the dongle firmware, but as we've seen, highly unlikely that Hornby will bother. As the ease of triggering functions from the app is one of the main attractions of the dongle, this is a deal breaker. Haven't tried points or accessories yet.

Well then how come those products are still on sale in the US and the UK?

The issue is individuals saying "don't buy that cheap decoder, it's pirated and from a disreputable company. Buy this expensive one instead." And then providing zero evidence to support it.

The genesis of this was a post looking at how to build the cheapest possible DCC system. That included a mention of LaisDCC decoders as they're the cheapest new ones on the market. Various individuals said not to buy LaisDCC because they were pirated. That's quite a serious accusation so needs to be substantiated.

And that's exactly the point. People are very happy to throw around accusations of "x pirated y" and when asked for any facts to support that... crickets

The "Google it" replies have oddly enough now been superseded by "the info has disappeared".

I have no interest in any company. I'd just like any facts please. Not more speculation.

Absolutely you're welcome to reach your own conclusion. It has nothing to do with "grunt work". As we've seen from subsequent replies, the alleged information has now vanished, oddly enough. Personally I don't reach any conclusion based on forum hearsay. I'd be delighted to change my mind if any evidence were provided.

Because all sorts of statements are being made that those decoders were pirated. And that alleged piracy is being used as a reason why other people shouldn't buy them even though they're the cheapest product on the market. Given the cost of living crisis, where every penny counts, I'd like to get to the bottom of it.

Great! Please share your knowledge with your acquaintances who purchased faulty products.

So just to wrap this one up, I can carry on buying LaisDCC with a clear conscience as the facts are: There's allegedly plenty of hearsay that x pirated y, if you search this forum/Google for it. But if you ask for specifics, the info has disappeared. Some other people cannot possibly talk about it for legal reasons because of ongoing litigation in China (a very odd jurisdiction to bring an IP suit given the weakness of the rule of law there rather than the G7 countries where the allegedly pirated decoders are being sold). My own most charitable interpretation of the info provided is that either legal action happened and was settled or there was no legal action at all. Hence why zero evidence of any legal action in the public domain. The products continue to be sold in jurisdictions where TCS or any other injured party could actually seek rapid and effective legal redress if they decided to (US and UK). Assuming they have protected their UP adequately. It's astonishing that seeking facts about an IP dispute to inform a purchasing decision elicits such reactions.

Sorry to hear that. I've used 20+ LaisDCC decoders with no problems. Here's some info about what to do if a product you've bought fails: https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/what-do-i-do-if-i-have-a-faulty-product-aTTEK2g0YuEy#who-is-responsible-for-the-fault And a gentle reminder that this thread isn't about subjective views and experience of these decoders. It's a request for facts and evidence.

Cloning a decoder may be legal or illegal. It all depends on what Intellectual Property is involved, how it has been protected and whether it is still valid. If the decoder design is 20 years old or more, any patents will have expired. The first NMRA DCC standard was published over 30 years ago which makes patent infringement issues rather unlikely for a basic motor/function loco decoder.

Yes, we live in a globalised world. Links to USA info please?

In the UK the consumer's contract is with the seller, not the manufacturer. If the decoder "goes pop" the seller is on the hook not the manufacturer. That makes sense because the manufacturer could be anywhere in the world, whereas the seller will be in the UK for a UK purchase. Out of interest, what direct experience do you have with LaisDCC decoders being pot luck?

Yes. Plenty of allegations and speculation. I would be immensely grateful for some facts and evidence to enable cash-strapped consumers to make an informed decision.

Link please?

In my recent thread about budget-friendly DCC during the cost of living crisis, various allegations were made that LaisDCC decoders are copies of TCS decoders, that TCS sued LaisDCC and won and that LaisDCC is a disreputable company. LaisDCC are the cheapest new loco decoders on the market so it's important for a budget modeller to know the facts about this when deciding what to buy. I have not been able to find any record of a court judgement against LaisDCC or its distributors. I have found many forum threads containing allegations such as "cloning", "pirating", "copying" and "reverse engineering". Where these cite evidence it's usually that the manufacturer ID CV was identical, other CVs and software were identical (including bugs) or that the PCB design was very similar. Some also state that an older TCS design was used by LaisDCC. To establish the facts it would be really useful to see: 1. Any statements by LaisDCC, its distributors or TCS on these allegations. 2. Any records such as court filings, judgements or reports of out-of-court settlements. 3. Any TCS patents or other IP which was infringed and whether it has expired or not. Patents usually last 20 years.

If someone did that I imagine they'd get sued. Just like Lais did. And Apple/Tesla would get their redress just like TCS has. I don't really see how it affects buying current Lais products if the case has been settled in TCS' favour.

Great recommendation that Lenz. Thanks. The R8249 is pretty limited. I've been using the Hornby R8245 Sapphire which has a wide range of CV adjustments and 1A continuous output. Around £10 secondhand. Personally I don't have an issue with Lais losing a patent infringement case. Just about every big tech firm has both won and lost similar cases - Apple, Microsoft, Google etc. I don't see it as a sign of being disreputable.