Bomag

I got mine today and they are very nice. The only slight niggle is that there is no clear, plain text, indication on the box, nor sleeve, which livery the models are. Its a voyage of discovery every time you open one up!

Try the VCT carriage survey http://www.cs.rhrp.org.uk/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=2715

I have a sound 8F, 40, 31 and Dapol 68 used on DC. Only the 31 was a discretionary purchase in that I could buy the same model with or without sound. Steam sound is underwhelming, sound on a EE powered loco would is a deffo goer but probably not on a Sulzer. In the end I would rather go for 3 DC locos for the same price as 2 Sound.

What percentage of these were desiesls etc.

I have no idea why people say anybody should change scale, I don't think many people chose a scale for a specific model. I model N as it fits my preferences and available space, just I wish that Farish would have a more logical production cycle. Given the number of models that Bachmann are producing there is still sufficient capacity; it would be nice if N got a slightly larger slice of the cake but given the money they can get from the super bling 47s I would settle for a better mix of available N slots i.e. the re-run of the inspection saloon, or a couple of the BG slots, for a normal TSO/SK.

The liveries delivered are: NCB Green; NCB Olive; NCB Maroon; British Steel Yellow and RMS Locotec. From the NGS shop posted 15th; both of mine are in there!

I have received my invoice for my two pre-orders Balance is £55 per 55T (spooky, or contrived?). Hopefully one or both will be here by Christmas. The only question is why did I chose those liveries; must have made sense at the time!

Compared to even 5 years ago I would not categorise that as heavy investment. 10 years ago that's we got that in less than 12 months. Class 40 to Class 69 is likely to be the best part of 3 years. Going back to previous points, they don't need to put that amount of money into 'new' when there is an obvious market for using existing mouldings. However, it's likely to come down to accountancy - 'new' can put against capital and development costs.

Yes they purchased GF and revitalised the market with frequent fully updated models and regular re-runs of the popular stock. Given changes in China + COVID that was not sustainable. However, what they are producing now is not a subset of what they have done; it targeted to specific areas of the market. The question is, is this sustainable? A discussion with one retailer I recently had indicted that Fairish is less than half the market it was 5 years ago.

There is large difference between what range of products the market wants and what Bachmann thinks it wants to produce. Hence the the comment in another earlier post about the Inspection Saloon. Ditto the issue with DCC and sound upgrades; where they can charge an added value for the subset of the market with possibly the deepest pockets. The point above that people only ask for what they want is not always correct - I have suggested they do a run of maroon SKs, I would not want one but a large percentage of the N modellers I know do want them. Its not all about me, me, me (either as a modeller or manufacturer) and there is a need to maintain an active, diverse, market with a range of interests to sustain the it over the long term (20 years).

I don't believe that Bachmann properly understands the UK 'N Gauge market, or doesn't want to put the effort into undertsanding it, or doesn't care enough to. Apart from the Class 59 I don't think any of the 'new' manufactures have 'picked off' current models from either Dapol or Farish, they have had enough knowledge of the market to test expressions of interest, or just produce, models which have been successful and which the big two were unlikely to take a punt on. I am not certain what Hornby or Accurascale have to do with the N Gauge market. Time to production is not relevant here as we are talking about doing limited (TSO/SKs), but more frequent, runs of existing modes in existing liveries with a simple change in number

Your first point makes the assumption doing repeat releases would lead to models sitting on shelves; that is not a logical progression. While the market for a B/G Mk2s TSO is not the same as lets say Mk1 Maroon SK, given the current 2nd hand prices, a run of 504 models of either will sell out at the major retailers quickly enough. The number of coach and livery combinations mean that if you had thee batches a year (lets say 1 Mk1, 1 Mk2a/Mk2f, 1 LMS/Thompson/GW) each in a single livery then it would be something like 3 years between repeats. This does not mean farish cannot do new models and new liveries; however, the time and cost of doing the research is going to be more that checking a suitable new number for a TSO and doing a re-run. For the avoidance of doubt I don't mean doing a run of 504 Mk2a TSO, FK and BSO together, or 504 MK1 TSO/RU/BCK/RFO all at the same time; so for Mk1s do a TSO and one other and then SK and one other and rotate them. I fully understand the artificial restraint imposed by the parent company but when politely questioned about re-runs over then last few years the responses have moved from 'we didn't sell any last year' (well you sold out two years ago!) to 'it was popular in OO'. Both would imply a limited knowledge of the potential market and their 'N Gauge' range. The smaller manufacturers seem to have a better understanding of their market.

DMU and coaches were renumbers for TOPS from 1983 so 52xxx power cars didn't need to renumbered as Westerns had gone for 5+years BFK 14xxx and CK 15xxx-162xx needed to be cleared for 4 EPB DMSO (14xxx), EPB TS/TSO (15xxx) and EPM DTSO (161xx) - they lost the S prefix/suffix and were absorbed into the BR number series. There were less than 200 BFKs and about 80% of CKs had gone by then so it was less work to renumber the coaches rather than the EMUs.

Yes its that bad - 25 releases in a year. If you exclude the EFE that's probably a single complete new model (319), 3 Chassis upgrade locos and a load of reruns. I would say that I would like 'much' more but with current prices I just think some more B/G Mk2s and B/G and maroon Mk1s (even if they are only TSO/SO/SK) would go down well with a large percentage of modellers. I gave up on Farish for this quarter and spent this quarters' modelling budget with Revolution.

I can't remember HSTs being a regular performer on either TPN or Calder Valley services! Interested to know what the supporting layouts will be.

Written and oral records are kept by those who survive, that does not mean its always its the 'winners' - there are plenty of 'heroic' tales from losing sides. Some of them even true. Even winners cannot influence history if they are dead - see what happened to Nelson's family.

The points bmthtrains was relating in terms of the implication if you are not researching race or colonialism your research is racist and misogynist. The concentration on colonialism and slavery (well transatlantic slavery in most cases) implies in some cases that the negative impact on the working classes, the old and the disabled of railways and industrial revolution in the C18-C20s is not relevant or worth researching. There is an implication in some of these statement that researching the impact of anything on to large number of the UK working classes was defacto racist. So I have no problem with doing research which covers a broader brush than currently done; but that is not what is proposed, both by NRM specificity and many institutions in general. Its a narrow topic to show that you are fully 'educated', what many people define as 'Woke'. Its research to show you 'care', and hopefully they won't find anything they cannot resolve, other than cancelling somebody. As an example, the impact of the French wars (1793-1816) on society and its use and development of technology is not as well researched as it could be and has some surprising twists e.g. there was a dearth of horses in the period 1808-1816 as the Army kept on drafting them for the peninsular war. This directly led to the first commercial use of steam locos. Lets look at anything historial in the news for the period. Well its Picton. While he was thoroughly unpleasant and fatal to many while a governor in the west indies his impact on the wider world was as one of Wellingtons trusted generals. Without his military acumen (i.e. not being nice to people) and ability to get his men to kill large numbers of Frenchman in battle (they got him at Waterloo though) the C19 history of western Europe may have been blighted by even more conflict by not definitively ending the wars in 1816. The outcome is that a picture to Picton is being removed based his time in the indies. If the picture had had a note added that he was responsible for killing a large number of people, including many under his care due to his lack of obvious care/compassion (unlike General 'Daddy' Hill for example) then fine but that is not what is going to happen.

Your post rather proves the point people are making, I don't think all the varied and often comprehensive research over that 20 odd years on the 'exploitation' (aka poor working conditions and often relativity poor pay) of the railway industries workforce - plus the wider community - to be either racist or misogynistic. The conditions endured by navies was covered by a number of programs this year (mostly Ch5 though), something which is only really possible with recent research. The only way recent research could be seen to insufficient is if it didn't give the relevant academics the ability to virtue signal that their research was aligned with current dictact (as in the soviet mode). So stories of the forgotten, marginalised and used have been told, unfortunately its not the stories etc of the right set of people for current preoccupations. Given one family member spent most of the second half of the C19 trying to eradicate slavery in Africa and another died leading 'colonial' troops to attack axis forces in C20 the presumption that there is a need to 'decolonise' history is as much academicly idiotic to me as it is offensive to me. Others may disagree. In some respects NRM is covering its arese to get the relevant tick in the box; it just sounds that they may be taking it seriously. One of the points was about the Indian railways and the Raj. While there was definitely a monetary and control gain from initiating development and trade - there was a lot of descenter involvement who were often more interested in humanitarian issues. I went to a presentation about a decade ago and one presenter spent 20 minutes saying that the development Indian railways was oppressive since it provided opportunities for Anglo-Indians etc who were not sufficiently Hindu. Hmm.

Going back again to the start of the relevant point - could you go into a local shop and get a loco - 8F was mentioned - along with a train of suitable wagons -16t coal wagons. Kernow would not be representative as they have a major online presence and although the Cornish shop is 'compact' it carries a lot more stock that the average shop. Your last two sentences either mean you are agreeing with me (but that is not the tone) or you have nor been following the point.

Let me guess - your local shop is Kernow models? Not exactly representative. The quote train relates to going into a shop buying a 8F and not having suitable 16T coal wagons - something which is representative of many local shops I visit. Others may vary. In terms of LMR (8F) coal trains I have not seen a picture of a fitted head to a coal train. Vans and mixed, yes but not a rake of 16T coal.

Good look at finding many of these in stock in your local shop; in any event I would not call mixing NCB, fitted, unfitted and iron tipplers a 'decent' mineral train.

While being a complete redesign Farish did an 8F before (actually one of the better ones) so is not a new loco for them. Doing something new, even if they do it in OO, would be nice - Midland 7F, LNER K4/K1, Class 85 (not to be taken as a wish list). Given they have done more new locos in 009 than N over the last few years (and the Double Fairlie does look nice) for a market identified as being less than N to 'grow' it I cannot see why the same argument cannot be made for N itself.

I have no issue with them gradually updating chassis but the point I asked was have GF said why this seems to be in almost total exclusion to new models, or fully revamped models - tinkering with details e.g. Crewe cut 47s and refurbished 31s are nice but doesn't really count for me. Also if you were concerned about sales than a brand new model would sell to a much wider market than those wanting a second or third version of an existing model.

Has Farish said in any official bumph why they are spending so much time doing amended chassis after amended chassis for existing models rather than doing something properly new, or at least something like the 8f with a completely revised body? As for the lack of re-runs of Mk1 and Mk2a in bog standard liveries, probably they think that they cannot justify the increase in cost without a bit of tinkering.

Really, it still carries passengers? Its been a departmental coach since 1988 so hasn't been in service for 33 years. It may have been 'in use', but that's not the same.