Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Results - Wishlist Poll 2014


Recommended Posts

Why is the original Merchant Navy always held out to be a problem around here?

If the initial trials smoke lifting variations are excluded there are no more variations than on a number of already produced classes. Series 2 and 3 are effectively identical apart from the tenders. Series 1 needs a different body and tender but if the later cab style is used and the first three locos are ignored there is really no great problem.

People have been trotting out this view for years as a kind of spoiler on this much wanted loco but provided the later body styles used it is a perfectly reasonable project - and we're going to see it in N gauge now anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Is there a third way? Does anyone else apply extra conditions? ...

 From a base of 'the useful items for my area of interest' (which I would expect to be most folks starting point), I'll also go for anything with bashing potential toward something else that is both unavailable and in my opinion pretty unlikely to get a RTR model.

 

Probably fourth and fifth ways too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Marcus

 

There are a number of GER-specific items in The Poll. These include:

* J70

* J67/68/69

* N7

* B12

* E4

* F4/5/6

* J17

* J19

* J20

* Gangwayed 50ft coaches

* 20-ton Brake Van

* 10-ton Goods/Meat/Banana Van

 

Also for the GE section are:

* Quad Arts (not the same as the GN ones)

* Quint Arts

* Push-Pull Driving Trailers

* 52ft 6in Gresley stock

* Non-gangwayed stock (Diags.265 etc)

 

If you want to suggest specific items for us to consider, we are always pleased to hear - either on this thread, or to the Poll Team email as below.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

thepollteam(at)gmail(dot)com

Noted - and I spotted them and voted for them - silly me if I did not, despite most being in a queue round the block outside my workshop. I was just hoping one day soembody might conjure up the humble diag 17 5 plank open - numbered in the many thousands at one point. Maybe you can put us GER folk down for one for next year...

 

Otherwise let's all hold our breath for the J15...oh, I have five almost done. Others: F4/5/6 - check (Gibson), N7 check (Connoisseur), J65/67/68/69 check (various), E4 (Gibson), J70 check (D&S and Connoisseur) and so on - so it would seem us die hard GER types would have been squirrelling this stuff away for years 'cos we have to...its the only way ('You know it makes sense, Rodney'). It's almost go to the point where anybody releasing a GER prototype as RTR is going to be a disappointment. All that stuff stashed over the years and somebody negates the whole plan by actually releasing one! Dear, oh, dear! Enough to drive a chap to another pint of Abbott Ale...or McMullen's in my case...

 

Now who's up for a 305 EMU - yes I voted for it!

 

We live in hope (a small hamlet just outside Bishop's Stortford, which is a two block area of the lower east side)

 

Best,

Marcus

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 I was just hoping one day soembody might conjure up the humble diag 17 5 plank open - numbered in the many thousands at one point. Maybe you can put us GER folk down for one for next year...

 

Marcus

 

Hello Marcus

 

I'll put that on the Agenda for you. Is Diag.17 the one on page 16 of Peter Tatlow's book, LNER Wagons. An Illustrated Overview?

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I believe that having unlimited votes in each section is giving false readings!

 

If there were only four votes, then each voter would have to make their mind up as to what they really want rather than just being able to pick all in that section!

 

Mark Saunders

I don't see what difference it would make.  If everyone only votes for things they would buy then you get exactly the same result but with less choice for the manufacturers.

 

But why would the manufacturers need choice?  Well don't forget that some (most/all?) of them probably have at least ideas of future plans if not a strategy and that will have to be related to their business plan.  Obviously there will be flexibility within their plans but at the same time some of them will already have preliminary research files sitting on their shelves and from them will be able to assess ease of manufacturing, use of existing parts, costs and hence pricing.  For example we might all vote for 'big engines' but they know that the marketable price point at the moment means they can't do those to the standard they would like, and could sell.

 

It's no good if, say every GWR inclined person votes for Toplight coaches and they are too expensive to develop once the options are considered or the manufacturing costs make them unmarketable.  The same, increasingly so, with DMUs - everybody carries on shouting for a 'TransPennine set which immediately means 5 vehicles instead of three so the costs reflected in the retail price will be much higher than a straightforward 3 car set which would sell as well or in even greater numbers.

 

Thus with an open vote manufacturers etc can see where the weight of the market and the weight of 'wants' are heading - exampled by motive power and quite likely other things which are particularly company/region specific.  Thus as far as the poll is concerned if I vote for every type of GW loco I would buy it helps create 'weight' in the GW sector, similarly if someone votes for every type of NER loco it shows interest in that area and that it might be worth making something.

 

Above all don't forget that while polls might be conclusive to some of 'us', and notwithstanding a superb job by Brian and his team, as far as some of the manufacturers are concerned wishlist polls are only a part of the way in which they assess the market and the direction in which it is moving.

 

PS - I voted for over 100 items, and even if I live to that age I doubt I will ever see all of them manufactured but I'm sure some of them will be and I will buy them, especially as in my votes a long way over ten times your ration was for rolling stock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

 

It's no good if, say every GWR inclined person votes for Toplight coaches and they are too expensive to develop once the options are considered or the manufacturing costs make them unmarketable. 

 

 

Thanks Mike

 

I would fully agree that the Toplights - despite being way up high - would be almost impossible to produce commercially due to there being so many variants. See extract from the Q&A below (my text highlight). We will be reviewing the text of The 2015 Guide to explain the situation more fully in respect of those coaches. 

 

Does The Poll Team expect ‘the top items’ to be made?

We would ask pollsters to appreciate that manufacturers lay plans anything up to three years in advance and have to continually balance requests against their current models and proposed portfolios – as well as those of their competitors. To us, it’s a hobby; to them, it’s a commercial decision. 

 

Brian Macdermott (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ORIGINAL MERCHANT NAVY LOCO DATA.xlsx

 

Why is the original Merchant Navy always held out to be a problem around here?

If the initial trials smoke lifting variations are excluded there are no more variations than on a number of already produced classes. Series 2 and 3 are effectively identical apart from the tenders. Series 1 needs a different body and tender but if the later cab style is used and the first three locos are ignored there is really no great problem.

People have been trotting out this view for years as a kind of spoiler on this much wanted loco but provided the later body styles used it is a perfectly reasonable project - and we're going to see it in N gauge now anyway.

 

Hello all,

             An original form M.N. holds great interest for me and in anticipation of  a model being made available in OO I have compiled a matrix to show all? major variations. I know some people will have all the facts at their fingertips but for me it was necessary to trawl thro, the necessary to provide a condensed 2 page  list.

I hope  this will help me to determine which variant to choose as and when the model becomes available--I hope it may also assist others,

regards,

Ed

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would fully agree that the Toplights - despite being way up high - would be almost impossible to produce commercially due to there being so many variants. 

 

 

Brian makes a good point.  It is even more applicable to the GW Colletts, with Swindon turning out three different body profiles simultaneously at one stage.  Add to that the several different lengths and we begin to realise what a task it would to fulfil some of our wishes.  Even kit makers [remember them?] did not get fully to grips with them.

 

When I voted I chose items which can be used to produce other variants or prototypes.  It is sad that as a breed we seem to be less and less willing to do things for ourselves.

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only voted for things I would buy which meant that I didn't vote. I have no interest in RTR products and look forward to picking up some bargain kits when other people decide they would prefer to buy a RTR version rather than build the kit. I would much rather build the kit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would fully agree that the Toplights - despite being way up high - would be almost impossible to produce commercially due to there being so many variants. See extract from the Q&A below (my text highlight). We will be reviewing the text of The 2015 Guide to explain the situation more fully in respect of those coaches. 

 

There are well over 80 diagrams for the "standard" 61'6" Gresley stock without getting into anything articulated or tourist stock, short underframes, BR rebuilds etc and it was not beyond the wit of man to select half a dozen or so to make. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hello Andy

 

I suspect that there are more variations than you might imagine. The Poll Team is fortunate to have in its ranks the respected GWR author, John Lewis. John sent me some lengthy notes last year about the Toplight complexities - and there are complexities within complexities! Even as I write, John is looking at The Guide text, and we will have a much more informative set of notes for readers for 2015.

 

I take your point that Hornby introduced six Gresley types. However, some would argue that a Diag.130 Composite (instead of a Sleeper) and a Diag.174/114 3- or 4-compartment Brake Third (in lieu of a Brake Compo) would have served modeller purposes better. I have no idea if Hornby felt that the selection met their market purposes, but I saw a lot of Sleepers hanging around on shop shelves.

 

Note: Please don't anyone start up 'the tumblehome saga' here! There are other threads for that one.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Andy

 

I suspect that there are more variations than you might imagine. The Poll Team is fortunate to have in its ranks the respected GWR author, John Lewis. John sent me some lengthy notes last year about the Toplight complexities - and there are complexities within complexities! Even as I write, John is looking at The Guide text, and we will have a much more informative set of notes for readers for 2015.

 

I take your point that Hornby introduced six Gresley types. However, some would argue that a Diag.130 Composite (instead of a Sleeper) and a Diag.174/114 3- or 4-compartment Brake Third (in lieu of a Brake Compo) would have served modeller purposes better. I have no idea if Hornby felt that the selection met their market purposes, but I saw a lot of Sleepers hanging around on shop shelves.

 

Note: Please don't anyone start up 'the tumblehome saga' here! There are other threads for that one.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Surely ANY form of GWR coach would be welcome - as the GWR didn't, for the most part, run any form of uniform trains, anything to mix in with the current meagre range available would do! A full range of whatever variant would not be needed - just choose the odd one that had a fairly long life (I realise there would be detail differences - those that worry about them probably have the knowledge and ability to modify them): someone, please, just offer one, any one, try just one - when it sells, as I'm sure it would, do another one next year - it doesn't matter which diagram! Given that many of the kits which have been available are now next to impossible to obtain I think ALMOST anything, within reason, would sell - we don't after all want a uniform rake.

And what about clerestories - given that even the Triang ones often fetch silly prices on a certain auction site these are surely in need of a makeover?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hello sp1

 

I'd agree with that, but Hornby and Bachmann have tended to make 'ranges'. That might change with new entrants to the hobby though (Oxford Rail perhaps). Hornby has made good use of 'spin-off' potential with the Maunsells.

 

We'll try to find the best solution to put forward. 

 

The Dean Clerestories polled 170 votes in 00, pacing them in the 'high polling segment'. The Colletts took 251; the Toplights 299.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello sp1

 

I'd agree with that, but Hornby and Bachmann have tended to make 'ranges'. That might change with new entrants to the hobby though (Oxford Rail perhaps). Hornby has made good use of 'spin-off' potential with the Maunsells.

 

We'll try to find the best solution to put forward. 

 

The Dean Clerestories polled 170 votes in 00, pacing them in the 'high polling segment'. The Colletts took 251; the Toplights 299.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

In Hornbys case I can understand making a 'range' - they go into train sets (and use, for the most part, old tooling, ad infinitum), but do Bachmann sell as many 'train sets' - they don't tend to appear in the likes of Argos or Mail order catalogues.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Belgian

Re the MN, it has polled highly for a while, there is the complexity of variants, and now Hornby's added spanner in the proverbial chain(!) that models are to be tooled with all parts and not use tooling from other models (due to distributed manufacturing), so the argument that they already have loco and tender chassis possibly goes out of the window. Room for Bachmann, Dapol Heljan or DJM?

 

Regarding variants, my guess is that the 'final form' front end would be the easiest, as it would allow the final 10 to be built without much trouble, and many of the others to be captured in BR livery, which the data tell us is what the majority of steam modellers want. Or maybe this would have been the solution 10 years ago, but not acceptable to today's market who want detailed differences? How about DJM doing 21c1 and Hornby announcing the rest.

 

Curiously, the Bulleid locomotives have proven to be the exception to that rule: all varieties (Rebuilt MN, Original and Rebuilt Light Pacifics) have used the same chassis, wheels and motors.

 

The various forms of the MN all had much in common, the changes being evolutionary rather than major. Two forms of MN tenders and underframes, out of three, already exist. The front end changes to the casing are the most obvious ones and also the cab shape. The curved ends to the valance on the first 10 machines shouldn't be too much of a problem for modern molding techniques and the various forms of deflector plates, which constitute the most dramatic shape-changes, can be done by making them separate mouldings as done for the Lght Pacifics. The only truly difficult alteration between batches is the casing below the deflectors and the way it turned in much more noticeably on the initial series.

 

I've been perplexed as to why Hornby haven't done the Original MN for a long time - the simple one-piece casing is far closer to their 'design clever' manta than any BR class 8 or LNER P2 and should be relatively cheap and simple to produce.

 

Jeremy English

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hello sp1

 

I'm afraid I can't make any comment on Bachmann 'train sets' and sales, but they do (or will) have their Mk2f, Thompson and Porthole ranges. The Birdcage stock is really 'a set' as opposed to a 'range'. And their Autocoach and Inspection Saloon are 'stand alones'.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that having unlimited votes in each section is giving false readings!

 

If there were only four votes, then each voter would have to make their mind up as to what they really want rather than just being able to pick all in that section!

 

Mark Saunders

 

 

I don't see what difference it would make.  If everyone only votes for things they would buy then you get exactly the same result but with less choice for the manufacturers.

 

But why would the manufacturers need choice?  Well don't forget that some (most/all?) of them probably have at least ideas of future plans if not a strategy and that will have to be related to their business plan.  Obviously there will be flexibility within their plans but at the same time some of them will already have preliminary research files sitting on their shelves and from them will be able to assess ease of manufacturing, use of existing parts, costs and hence pricing.  For example we might all vote for 'big engines' but they know that the marketable price point at the moment means they can't do those to the standard they would like, and could sell.

 

It's no good if, say every GWR inclined person votes for Toplight coaches and they are too expensive to develop once the options are considered or the manufacturing costs make them unmarketable.  The same, increasingly so, with DMUs - everybody carries on shouting for a 'TransPennine set which immediately means 5 vehicles instead of three so the costs reflected in the retail price will be much higher than a straightforward 3 car set which would sell as well or in even greater numbers.

 

Thus with an open vote manufacturers etc can see where the weight of the market and the weight of 'wants' are heading - exampled by motive power and quite likely other things which are particularly company/region specific.  Thus as far as the poll is concerned if I vote for every type of GW loco I would buy it helps create 'weight' in the GW sector, similarly if someone votes for every type of NER loco it shows interest in that area and that it might be worth making something.

 

Above all don't forget that while polls might be conclusive to some of 'us', and notwithstanding a superb job by Brian and his team, as far as some of the manufacturers are concerned wishlist polls are only a part of the way in which they assess the market and the direction in which it is moving.

 

PS - I voted for over 100 items, and even if I live to that age I doubt I will ever see all of them manufactured but I'm sure some of them will be and I will buy them, especially as in my votes a long way over ten times your ration was for rolling stock.

 

I am afraid that you have missed the point, only allowing a limited number of votes in each section would show a positive result rather than a what we have a present is a lot of numbers meaning very little!

 

It gives no clear result as there are too many putting their cross in every box rather than a limited number to give a clear result that rtr manufacturers might actually think about producing the item that gets top place!

 

Mark Saunders

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hello Mark

 

I can see the point you are making, but it doesn't match 'The Purpose of The Poll' (see extract from the Q&A below). Note the use of the word 'easy' - I suspect many would find your method very difficult and time-consuming. I have just tried it myself on GWR steam locos, but got fed up after four minutes of to-ing and fro-ing! And I'm a poll enthusiast!

 

Have you tried your method yourself?

 

Since the 2013 Poll, the spread of announced items has been as below...which seems to indicate our method is fairly reasonable:

High Polling Segment: 25 items (13 of which were in The Top 50)

Middle Polling Segment: 4 items

Low Polling Segment: 2 items

 

The results of 2014 were published last Friday,and the Adams Radial (8th place) has already been announced.

 

Brian (on behalf of The Poll Team)

 

What is the purpose of The Poll?

To provide an easy and enjoyable way for modellers and collectors to tell the major manufacturers and commissioners of ready-to-run railway models what they would like to see made from new tooling (excluding models announced, tooled or made since 2000).

 

It aims to seek what you would realistically wish to buy at any time in the future, bearing in mind that new models take around two to three years to develop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I am afraid that you have missed the point, only allowing a limited number of votes in each section would show a positive result rather than a what we have a present is a lot of numbers meaning very little!

 

It gives no clear result as there are too many putting their cross in every box rather than a limited number to give a clear result that rtr manufacturers might actually think about producing the item that gets top place!

 

Mark Saunders

I'm not sure how you can know that "too many are putting their cross in every box" without having data from individual contributions that I suspect even the Poll team lack. I am firmly in the "I vote for what I would buy" camp, and suspect many others are too. If, for example, the GER supporters who were on parade earlier would buy every item that they voted for, where's the distortion?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but can I come out of the closet as a LSWR fan too, Ian?

 

It’s to do with my Father buying me a beautiful print of an Adams design  T3 in LSWR livery in full glorious color. Had it on my bedroom wall in the family home since 11 years old... So elegant.

 

Of course there is a link with both the NLR and the GER.

 

Best, Pete. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...