The Wishlist Poll 2016

[JSpencer]

Nice Poll, although the Industrial loco list was a bit too generic.

 

There are certain industrial types that would interest me like Baxter on the Bluebell, but any other 0-4-0 with outside cylinders would not.

 

Of course I understand that industrial have a huge variety to choose from.

 

On the other side of the coin, would you like true SECR wagons (a generic question aswell), that I found ok as I am sure any pre-grouper will buy everything offered there.

[micklner]

Why have the LNER pre grouping Locos 2-4-2 F1 to 8  Class variants been ignored please ? Bachmann have recently done the L&Y 2-4-2 so a chassis already with any needed  slight modification already exists.

 

Same applies to the  LNER grouping Atlantic Locos  again Bachmann have done the C1version.

 

Otherwise thanks for the survey .

[Tim Hall]

Yes, me too.

 

I was particularly pleased to see some of the M&GN items you have listed - I don't have great hopes that vast numbers of modellers will suddenly be converted to my interests, but it's lovely to dream.

 

It was also particularly good to see the "proper" E4 - the delightful GER 2-4-0 - listed. If that's ever manufactured I think it will be the first 2-4-0 to modern standards?

 

Paul

Not quite:

 

http://www.kernowmodelrailcentre.com/p/42320/K2056-DJ-Models-2-4-0WT-Beattie-Well-Tank-Steam-Locomotive-30587

[BMacdermott]

Hello J Spencer

 

The alternative to 'too generic' is 'massively detailed' to ensure everything gets covered. When we started in 2014 (at the request of voters) we went through five drafts with the list getting bigger and bigger each time before that fact dawned on us.

 

The results from 2014 and 2015 show pretty clearly that many would like an 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 steam loco, saddle or side tank, and with outside cylinders. The rest  is up to someone else to decide!

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[BMacdermott]

Hello mickLNER (#27)

 

We list the GER F4/F5/F6 2-4-2T as one item. I will add the others to the Agenda for you. The answer as to why the others aren't in is much the same as we say for others - we only have a certain amount of room.

 

We list the GNR C2 Atlantic (or is that not what you meant?).

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[Fat Lieutenant]

I note elsewhere that those who model prior to 1923 feel the best has not been done. Their ongoing crusade against the wicked capitalists who offer the wrong models with intent to break even or better, knows no bounds. I just wonder where the Poll Team is going to find the dozen or so extra wise men or women who will enable the aspirations of the pre-1923 bunch to be met.

 

A disappointing level of "debate".  Since returning to the hobby, I have enjoyed many hours on RMWeb reading the entertaining and informative posts of many who devote a lot of time to providing encouragement, information and advice and helping others.  I have noted the unfailingly courteous Edwardian as one of many who do make such worthwhile contributions.  Then there are the others.

 

To be frank, as a child of the '70s, blue diesel British Rail was a run-down affair.  I never travelled on it.  It has no draw. Of course, I have no recollection of the end of steam.  I am free to find inspiration in other places.  The perspective of a new-comer without emotional ties to a particular era is that the dominance of a single era of the steam age does, I'm afraid, looked skewed.

 

I realise that is heresy in this here and now, but I don't see why there is a need to slam people down for not following the herd.  Vive la difference.

 

I must say that the wishlist poll seems comprehensive, well researched and well written.  I have enjoyed reading through it.  I shall enjoy completing it.  Well done to all involved.  At the same time I can see that it poses a dilemma for those wishing to register interest in earlier periods.  A matter Edwardian sought to discuss with the people affected. That thread shows an understanding of the difficulties of specifying different periods or variations.  It also has posters making constructive suggestions.  

 

Hopefully the community is tolerant enough to allow people to voice their enthusiasms, even pre-Grouping enthusiasms, without the quality of debate having to suffer.

 

I will now return to my bunker ....

[Edwardian]

A disappointing level of "debate".  Since returning to the hobby, I have enjoyed many hours on RMWeb reading the entertaining and informative posts of many who devote a lot of time to providing encouragement, information and advice and helping others.  I have noted the unfailingly courteous Edwardian as one of many who do make such worthwhile contributions.  Then there are the others.

 

To be frank, as a child of the '70s, blue diesel British Rail was a run-down affair.  I never travelled on it.  It has no draw. Of course, I have no recollection of the end of steam.  I am free to find inspiration in other places.  The perspective of a new-comer without emotional ties to a particular era is that the dominance of a single era of the steam age does, I'm afraid, looked skewed.

 

I realise that is heresy in this here and now, but I don't see why there is a need to slam people down for not following the herd.  Vive la difference.

 

I must say that the wishlist poll seems comprehensive, well researched and well written.  I have enjoyed reading through it.  I shall enjoy completing it.  Well done to all involved.  At the same time I can see that it poses a dilemma for those wishing to register interest in earlier periods.  A matter Edwardian sought to discuss with the people affected. That thread shows an understanding of the difficulties of specifying different periods or variations.  It also has posters making constructive suggestions.  

 

Hopefully the community is tolerant enough to allow people to voice their enthusiasms, even pre-Grouping enthusiasms, without the quality of debate having to suffer.

 

I will now return to my bunker ....

 

To be honest, I found my characterisation as some kind of Corbinite Marxist Zealot hilarious.

 

I don't want to continue this distraction, however, I will just add this: I regret, in my original post, that I did not stress the importance of the Wish List poll, and the hard work and the challenges it entails.  I imagined that I was posting merely to the like-minded, so referred merely to the challenge it represented for pre-Groupers. It did not cross my mind that any of the Wish List team would read it.  Given that my post has been rudely exposed, I will add now what perhaps I should have included: 

 

I was not having a pop at the Wish List team.  The Wish List is a valuable exercise.  I, too, found it comprehensive and well put together and enjoyed reading the notes.  I, too, intend to complete it.  It is neither the cause nor a symptom of manufacturers' rigid adherence to late-condition tooling.  It is a neutral exercise in that regard.  It is not, however, presented in a way that permits any interest that there might be in earlier-condition models to be captured, and it is legitimate to raise the issue of where that leaves adherents to pre or early Grouping eras and, perhaps, to consider constructively if that is a matter that can be addressed.

 

As I say, it is my intention to complete the survey.  Despite the limitations of the exercise from the point of view of the earlier period modeller, there is nothing to be gained from shunning what remains a worthwhile exercise.  

 

If my original post did not come across as sufficiently supportive of the efforts of the team, I can only apologise.  It was intended merely to be constructive in raising a specific issue to a specific audience. I would merely ask people not to mischaracterise my support for earlier periods as an attempt to exterminate their well-fed herd of sacred cows!     

[BMacdermott]

Hello Edwardian

 

Many thanks for your clarification posting (#32) which is much appreciated. Thank you.

 

The purpose of The Poll is to say what models we would like to see made. If this was the only source of 'market data' then it would need to be far more comprehensive. We believe that the makers can usefully put the results into their mix of data, which comes from emails, letters, phone calls, forums, social media, visitors to shows etc.. and not to forget that many are modellers in their own right.

 

We - as a modelling community - don't get to see the market research data that companies glean from all their sources. The Poll Results show us how we are feeling (based on the view of those who vote).

 

When we first started running The Poll back in 2012, we did have some questions about age, era modelled etc but dropped it fairly quickly as it was 'clouding' the purpose.

 

We do look at all suggestions and many go in year-on-year. We ask that you trust us to do that to the best of our ability but that we have already discounted many 'theories' as they are simply too complicated.

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[micklner]

Hello mickLNER (#27)

 

We list the GER F4/F5/F6 2-4-2T as one item. I will add the others to the Agenda for you. The answer as to why the others aren't in is much the same as we say for others - we only have a certain amount of room.

 

We list the GNR C2 Atlantic (or is that not what you meant?).

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

 

Thanks re the other F series locos , no idea if I can get back on the survey. I will have look.

 

As to Atlantics I was thinking of all the other versions upto the C11's all beautiful locomotives.

 

 

edit.

 

 As I thought , i am unable to access the survey again. Please add the F8 for me and the C6 and C7  please if possible , thanks.

[rue_d_etropal]

Wish lists are interesting, but manufacturers are only going to produce items that sell enough to make them a profit.

I think I noticed the working level crossing idea a while back, so set about designing one to be produced by 3D printing. It is not easy, but I think I got there in the end. For many people it is necessary to have everything table top. This was one reason  I was not initially very keen on the Dapol signals till I saw the Lattice one so have changed my board so it will fit. Similarly one problem with a working level crossing is having to fit something below board. I did manage to get mine so that everything was above the board , but it might be necessary to have the gate posts extend though to help balance the weight of the gate. It is probably this type of technical problem that puts manufacturers off, as I belief it would be well received. Triang did produce a working level cross back in the late 50s/early 60s, for their grey standard track. Something similar tomodern standards could be produced, but it would have to suit both setrack and modellers standards.

[BMacdermott]

Hello micklner (#34)

 

Consider your suggestions duly added.

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

[Jub45565]

Thanks to the team from me too!

 

One thing that I appreciate is probably scope creep is as to whether people would consider (or even prefer) a kit offering. This could be a simple tick box at the end rather than indivually per line item. It might help, for example, The Nucast partners decide which products from the range to re-release.

 

Likewise an option to indicate where individuals think they sit in terms of RTR purchases. For example I wouldn't buy a long firebox Jubilee if it was based on the dimensions of the Bachmann short firebox variant, but would otherwise be interested. So finescale/collector/whatever.

 

I'm in no way saying there are rights & wrongs with the RTR manufacturers taking decisions to ease assembly or hit cost points - or on who buys what - this is a broad church - but may help aid the decisions made based on the polls.

[gwrrob]

Hello micklner (#34)

 

Consider your suggestions duly added.

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Brian, what was the reasoning behind dropping the GWR K42 pbv from the list and not having it as an option with the K38/41 versions.

[TheSignalEngineer]

Time for a burst of workbench activity before something I'm building gets announced RTR.

Based on current projects my wagon forecast for this year is an LNER Plate Wagon, Boplate E, revamped LMS 12T vans and LMS Cattle Wagon. For coaches I am going for LMS Pl or Pll Opens, some of the most numerous Big Four stock which lasted about 40 years and carried at least four livery variations, and a Pull-Push Brake. For a complete oddball I would pick a Palethorpes 50' Sausage Van - parts sitting waiting, ready for the next spare bay in the cut'n'shut erecting shop.

 

Regarding my credentials in this field, in recent years just before RTR offerings I have built the Pillbox Brake, SR BY, CCT and PMV, LNER Long CCT, LMS CCT, LMS Suburbans, Dogfish, Tube wagons, Pipe wagons and Coke Hoppers. 

[Mikkel]

Thanks to the poll team. I have voted since the start and feel it improves year by year.

 

I am saddened to see a divide developing in these debates between pre-grouping and post-grouping modellers. I do not wish to be lumped into neither one nor the other group. I am railway modeller, the rest is details. 

[cromptonnut]

Did I miss the opportunity to suggest what should be included on the list?  Still waiting for someone to bring out a OO gauge "Dace" wagon as there were many in the 1980's BR blue that would make up a nice engineering train.

[Steamport Southport]

Thanks to the team from me too!

 

One thing that I appreciate is probably scope creep is as to whether people would consider (or even prefer) a kit offering. This could be a simple tick box at the end rather than indivually per line item. It might help, for example, The Nucast partners decide which products from the range to re-release.

 

That's a good point regarding kits. Although possibly out of the criteria for this wishlist.

 

There are plenty of prototypes that there isn't a kit currently available or the kit is outdated that will probably never be released as a RTR model.

 

How many would buy a SR N15X Remembrance 4-6-0 or The Great Bear as RTR for example? Very few I would guess. But I would buy both if a kit was readily available.

 

 

 

Jason

[Mad Carew Too]

Thanks to the poll team. I have voted since the start and feel it improves year by year.

 

I am saddened to see a divide developing in these debates between pre-grouping and post-grouping modellers. I do not wish to be lumped into neither one nor the other group. I am railway modeller, the rest is details. 

 

Agree.  We are all modellers, and being in the minority should not mean being marginalised.

[Clearwater]

Hi

 

Is there a reason the Raven Pacifics have been excluded from the LNER section?

 

Thanks

 

David

[caradoc]

Thanks to the Wishlist Team for giving us the opportunity to vote, a lot of work has obviously gone into creating the Poll and the Guide, and it is appreciated. If I can however make one very small and pedantic point: The Class 700 EMUs are now in service on the Thameslink route. I travelled on two on the way to and from Bedford last week. They were both the 12-car versions so I don't expect to see an RTR model any time soon !

[surfsup]

A Thank You to the team for this years Poll.

 

More a small begging note to Bachmann (If you are reading this) as I'm not sure how such things could be included within the confines of the Poll - A Suggestion box maybe? But For those of us who model such things, Could we have an option for single DMU Coaches - I.e The extra 150/2 Car inserted into many Centro/Central Trains, FGW, Regional Railways and Regional Railways North Western / GMPTE 150s.

 

Also, could I suggest Network Rails 950001 and the 210 units if not already listed?

[Dunsignalling]

Thanks for another opportunity to encourage the manufacturers to make what we want. Once again, I've tried to be responsible about it.

 

In last year's poll and this, I resolved only to vote for items I would definitely budget for and buy, as opposed to ones I might like if they happened along at a time of spare cash. It's still a lot of items but I always assume that no more than a tenth of what I pick will make the cut in any one year!

 

One entry, however, made that difficult for me. That for LNER Horseboxes lumps together the Diagram 5 and the visually similar but longer Diagram 9 vehicles. Having already built one of the former from the excellent Parkside kit for a friend and purchased a couple for myself, I'll only be interested in a r-t-r Diagram 9.

 

Can I widen this by making an appeal to the decision-makers; where two options are available, please pick the one that can't be got at all rather than duplicating an existing kit. Hornby would have sold me several Blue Spot fish vans if only they'd made the type I didn't already have a string of.........  

 

John

[Dungrange]

As a post-privatisation modeller, I'm not particularly interested in the pre-grouping period, but I have to say that I have some sympathy for those who model this period, as to the uninitiated there appears to be a lack of RTR models produced by the main manufacturers - certainly not matching locomotives and rolling stock.  I appreciate that it isn't viable to list early and later rebuilds of locomotives separately without the poll becoming extensive (which I wouldn't advocate - it seems about right as it is), but I would perhaps suggest returning to collect data on the time periods that people model, with the pre-1923 period split into say four separate periods such as; early pioneer (pre-1840); late pioneer (1840-1875) (both Bachmann Era 1); late Victorian (1875-1900); late pre-grouping (1900- 1922) (both Bachmann Era 2).  I appreciate that this is not obviously relevant to a 'wish list' but as the annual wish list poll gets a useful response rate, this would help to identify whether those who model or would like to model the pre-grouping period are as much of a minority as some people seem to think.

 

The alternative would be to add a pre-grouping section to the poll, very much along the lines of the Industrial section with reasonably generic descriptions.  Given that modellers of this period don't have a lot of choice, they would probably be willing to purchase most stock that fits with their time period, so the list could perhaps be along the lines of:

 

Tank locomotive (LMS constituent companies)

0-6-0 tender locomotive (LMS constituent companies)

Other tender locomotive (LMS constituent companies)

Freight stock (LMS constituent companies)

PCCS (LMS constituent companies)

 

This could then be repeated for each of the big four or a selection of the most popular pre-grouping railway companies with an 'other pre-grouping design'.  I appreciate that the current poll team may not know much about this era (or perhaps they do) but maybe one of those who wish for more Victorian era models could assist with the design of a pre-grouping section in next years poll.

 

It's just a thought.  In the meantime I'll happily review the list of models that I'll be voting for - mainly modern on-track plant.

[Dungrange]

Also, could I suggest Network Rails 950001 and the 210 units if not already listed?

 

I'd also like to vote for Network Rail's 950001, but I don't think it is listed.  I think it was included in a previous year, polled half a dozen votes and was subsequently dropped from future polls.  I just hope that Bachmann announce one next year, but if not there is always the PDH conversion kit.

[Torn-on-the-platform]

Always enjoy filling out the poll. Thanks to the team for putting it together!

 

I try my best to boost things that I actually think will have a good chance of being produced. Surely the 2MT/3MTs aren't too far in the future, 2MT 2-6-0 most likely I'd have thought.

 

Apologies if this counts as wishlisting, and I may have missed them on the list, but I would have liked to have seen the Metropolitan Chesham set alongside the Dreadnoughts. Limited scope for operation but I'm sure those who have Bluebell or LT locos would snap them up! Much more likely to be a money spinner than, for example, a slightly different breed of Maunsell coach or a variation of a Thompson pacific.