January 2016 Railway Modeller - comment piece

[Dunsignalling]

Hello all,

 

From a marketing point I would tend to regard the relatively small number of existing British 1:100 modellers as something of an irrelevance.

 

If you were to seriously consider making TT RTR a commercial reality then you need to be attracting hundreds of new modellers to the scale, and the majority of these are likely to be disillusioned OO modellers or N modellers who want something slightly larger. But they will also need to be convinced to switch, and yet another scale/gauge compromise would be a kliller in my view.

 

For them, a "proper" scale and gauge relationship, with the knowledge of compatibility with other RTR stock, will be a draw.

 

Besides, if we assume at least a loco, some coaches and wagons arriving in 1:120 scale then even 1:100 modellers could run complete trains at 1:120 as long as they don't park them next to their 1:100 models.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

If launching British 1:120 from scratch, two locos on day one and two more well advanced for release inside three months would be the minimum needed to get it taken seriously IMO.

 

A complete train of any significant size requires a minimum of BR Mk1 SK, CK and BSK (each in more than one livery) plus a couple of NPCCS items to inject a bit of variety. 

 

I don't really think a significant number of TT (3mm) modellers would be interested in mixing scales; if they aren't offered r-t-r that matches what they make, they'll just carry on making.

 

If people are disillusioned with the OO scale/gauge issue, converting to EM (even if they forego anything for which a drop-in conversion isn't produced) will give them a much greater choice of models than a new scale will deliver in a decade.

 

The quality and rate of delivery of new OO models exceeds anything in the history of our hobby, if anyone can be disillusioned by that, there's no hope for them.

 

John

[steve1]

 

I don't want to rake over too much previously discussed ground but, does anyone think that we will ever see the return of commercial ready to run British-outline TT or 3mm scale to any significant level?

 

No.

 

steve

[Revolution Ben]

Hello Johns,

 

I agree that TT is unlikely to happen, but we are working on the what-if premise.

 

I still think that for a manufacturer to make any kind of case you need to be attracting a lot of *new* entrants, and where possible taking advantage of existing RTR.

 

There is a decent, and good quality, range of track already available suited to 1:120, so IMO a new gauge is a non-starter.

 

So it comes down to scale.  And again, if you are looking to maximise your market, and make the new range as attractive to the new entrants as you can, then I think you'd be crazy to look at anything other than 1:120 because it's accurate, and (especially if you're an existing continental supplier looking to expand into the UK) you may well be able to use existing mechanism components etc.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Taigatrommel]

 

 

There is a decent, and good quality, range of track already available suited to 1:120

 

There are three.  Tillig is well known, but honestly, not that good.  The rail profile is hugely overscale, they use 2mm (code 80) rail for it which is very chunky.  The build quality of points is not even on a par with Peco either.

 

Kuehn have a limited range, better quality but lacking realistic geometry points:  http://kuehn-modell.de/gleiselemente-auf-einen-blick.html

 

The undoubted best, but pricy, are TT Filigran.  This is what I'll be using for all scenic track in future.

 

As with H0 track used in 00, none are really prototypical for British use, so it's horses for courses what choice anyone modelling 1:120 British outline would choose.

[johnarcher]

As with H0 track used in 00, none are really prototypical for British use, so it's horses for courses what choice anyone modelling 1:120 British outline would choose.

As you say, so as they're not so accurate anyway they might as well be used with 3mm (as with HO track in 00), so using all the 3mm bits and pieces already available, rather than a manufacturer trying to establish a completely new scale.

[Revolution Ben]

... rather than a manufacturer trying to establish a completely new scale.

 

I think this cuts to the crux of the matter.

 

Your view, as I understand it, is that 1:120 British is a "new scale" whereas I see it as harmonising with the rest of the world, in the context that presently there is no RTR TT to speak of.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[PaulRhB]

I suppose the issue for a rtr range would be whether to embrace the existing accessories and stock to help sell your new range or start from scratch and assume people want to use continental accessories like buildings. I suspect they would follow the former because it opens up the new market and gets the existing modellers in too. Having the correct scale/ gauge combination hasn't seemed to cause a mass move to EM or P4 in OO so I think a big manufacturer would be more likely to go for the 'bigger' market and a crowd funded one would be sure to fail if it tried to start in a new scale to the existing modellers.

[johnarcher]

I think this cuts to the crux of the matter.

 

Your view, as I understand it, is that 1:120 British is a "new scale" whereas I see it as harmonising with the rest of the world, in the context that presently there is no RTR TT to speak of.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

What I mean is that it would indeed be a new scale for British modelling.

 

It seems to me much less useful that possible (but unlikely?) new British models should match continental ones (how often would they be suitably used together?) than that they should match the range of British outline 3mm scale bits and pieces which a new manufacturer would hardly produce quickly (I mean transfers, scenic bits, castings, crossing gates, signals etc etc).

 

Sure there's no RTR 3mm stuff (fine by me, as I said), but equally there's no British 1:120 (2.5mm scale?) at all, RTR or otherwise.

 

Still if you want it I hope you get it, but I have my doubts I fear.

[GreenDiesel]

I don't think the January is due is out here in Canada yet, but I agree that TT is the ideal scale and would certainly be interested in it. My dad also liked TT and was frustrated that it wasn't very popular. I'll look for this issue in the near future.

 

I've recently (and temporarily) put my 00 locos into storage and have plunged into N scale with a new layout. But I would have gone the TT route had there been any TT items easily available. Even finding British N scale over here is a challenge, let alone TT.

 

I do hope the TT idea takes off and someone starts testing the waters.

 

Cheers, Rob

[Dunsignalling]

I think this cuts to the crux of the matter.

 

Your view, as I understand it, is that 1:120 British is a "new scale" whereas I see it as harmonising with the rest of the world, in the context that presently there is no RTR TT to speak of.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

For all but the post-Channel Tunnel era, any harmonising with the rest of the world (or rather, in existing r-t-r terms, non-adjacent bits of Europe) is academic because the prototypes (apart from the odd Ferry Van) didn't interact for most of our railway history. 

 

Equally, the discrepancy between American 'O' at 1:48 and British 'O' at 1:43.5 doesn't matter because they shouldn't mix.

 

For that reason, I now consider my earlier rolling stock suggestion wrong. If adopting 1:120 scale, the better bet at launch would be to go uncompromisingly modern.

 

However, I still think the whole idea smacks of commercial disaster, primarily because choosing 1:120 would probably alienate the largest group of potential customers (1:100 scale modellers) who represent the best chance of getting r-t-r TT off the ground in the first place.

 

People currently wedded to OO and N might buy the odd item out of curiosity but few would be likely to commit their funds wholeheartedly to "New TT" until it began to look a safe bet.. 

 

John

[Revolution Ben]

Hello all,

 

Just for clarity, I am in too deep with N to switch to TT, but I find the debate about the best approach for a putative new range interesting.

 

There seems to be a strong view that existing TT modellers will be needed to get any RTR venture off the ground, but are there any realistic estimates to their number?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[south_tyne]

Compatibility with what other RTR? How many people would need British models to be compatible with Continental ones?

Basically that would be expecting a manufacturer to risk money on creating a new scale from scratch, which wouldn't even have 3mm's advantage of falling neatly between 2 & 4mm scales, but would be only a little bigger than 2mm.  As John said above that seems unlikely.

Would existing 3mm modellers really mix in 1:120 (2.5mm) stock?

 

I reckon it would be  a bit more practical to try 3mm RTR (if people really want it), and, if the inaccurate gauge worries them (understandably, though it's not a lot worse than 00) then keep the scale (and all the 3mm kits, bits etc) and use a better gauge (maybe the Society's 13.5mm?) After all the new RTR would hardly have standards compatible with the old coarse Triang TT wheels and track anyway (or one would hope not).

 

A whole new scale (which 1:120 is in Britain) seems an unlikely commercial adventure.

 

I agree that 3mm scale bridges the British 4mm/2mm gap better than 1:120 but I think the gauge issue is still a concern. Let's be frank, supporting 1:100 and 12mm gauge is just daft - there are lots of modellers working to these standards, who are members of the 3mm Society, but if we were starting again there is no way that a scale 4' gauge would be acceptable. But, would adopting a 13.5mm or 14.2mm gauge be more viable that going to 1:120 and making use of the already available 12mm gauge track from other manufacturers? I don't really know what the best answer is - really it just highlights the continued shambles of British scales/gauges when compared to the rest of the world!

[south_tyne]

Hello all,

 

Just for clarity, I am in too deep with N to switch to TT, but I find the debate about the best approach for a putative new range interesting.

 

There seems to be a strong view that existing TT modellers will be needed to get any RTR venture off the ground, but are there any realistic estimates to their number?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

I think that is true. I suppose the question is... as well as existing TT modellers supporting a venture, would enough 'casual' modellers also support a new venture to help with the initial launch? So, as committed N Gauge modeller, would you buy a loco in TT if it was brought to market and it was a particular favourite of your's? It would take years to gather momentum and build a range but that is why I would imagine the trainset option, with a generic shunter (Class 03 for instance) or common diesel loco (Class 37 or Class 66) might be a good choice. 

 

People have cited 0 Gauge as an example of a recent blossoming in RTR - now I would imagine (based on intuition but no absolutly no facts!) that the number 0 Gauge modellers when established brands such as Heljan/Bachmann came back to the scale with their RTR ranges in the late 1990s/2000s is far in excess of the the number of TT/3mm scale modellers now? Membership numbers of the Gauge 0 Guild and 3mm Scale Society would at least give an indication of potential market. 

[south_tyne]

I think this cuts to the crux of the matter.

 

Your view, as I understand it, is that 1:120 British is a "new scale" whereas I see it as harmonising with the rest of the world, in the context that presently there is no RTR TT to speak of.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

As an aside and ironically given the timing of this thread, I had a chance to look at some of Corgi's recent static models this afternoon on a browse around a local toy department. These are at 1:120 and the immediate thing which sprung to my mind is what an ideal size they are!! The TT/"table-top" definition is certainly apt!

[Allegheny1600]

What a fascinating proposition!

I'm deeply wedded to H0 in British, European & American scales however, I've long hung my nose over various 1/120th scale items - they really are cute!

I'm not saying I would buy anything in 1/120th scale, should anything British be introduced BUT I will say that quite a number of European (& possibly American) collectors certainly will buy British models! I know this because I've seen H0 collectors cabinets and they will add items of 00 gauge - because they like them!

So, Continental sales of British outline models should not be discounted as it does happen. On what scale, I cannot say but certainly compatibility with Euro models would help.

Clearly 1/120th scale is the way to go as like it or not, we are now in a global world and any attempt to resurrect a (commercially) long dead scale would be madness imho.

Cheers,

John E.

[Revolution Mike]

I suppose the issue for a rtr range would be whether to embrace the existing accessories and stock to help sell your new range or start from scratch and assume people want to use continental accessories like buildings. I suspect they would follow the former because it opens up the new market and gets the existing modellers in too. Having the correct scale/ gauge combination hasn't seemed to cause a mass move to EM or P4 in OO so I think a big manufacturer would be more likely to go for the 'bigger' market and a crowd funded one would be sure to fail if it tried to start in a new scale to the existing modellers.

 

It is a difficult one but one that I think British TT has to resolve if it is to work ie 1:120 and 12mm track or 1:100 and 14.2mm track.  The point about OO being wrong is not the point - by going for something more accurate you provide modellers with more of an incentive to switch.  Just creating "yet another" British scale/gauge compromise doesn't really help you. Furthermore OO is very firmly entrenched, TT isn't and has largely a blank canvas.

 

Cheers, Mike

[NCB]

Seems to me that in considering the 3mm versus 1:120 argument people don't understand the real reason why virtually every commercial modelling scale, when it comes to British outline stock, uses overscale bodies on scale track, or scale bodies on underscale track, whichever way you like look at it. The reason is that the British prototype worked to a very restricted loading gauge which resulted, particularly for steam locomotives, in very tight tolerances when it comes to things like outside cylinders and motion. Commercial models have wheels considerably thicker than the prototype. You end up with either using those wheels on scale track, which means that you have to cheat by pushing cylinders, and sometimes splasher faces, outwards, or you use those wheels on underscale track, which allows you to get cylinders and other things in the right places. An additional factor is the need for sideplay in the wheels to allow steam locomotives to go round train set curves, which increases the tolerances needed.

 

If you're not concerned with steam locomotives then British 1:120 models on 12mm track become possible, but what manufacturer is going to cut themselves off from steam? Add in the fact of a very healthy modelling scene in 3mm supported by the 3mm Society and others, and it makes sense for a would-be manufacturer to stick with 3mm on 12mm track. 3mm scale being halfway between British N and OO has advantages over both, and like both those scales being able to use fairly sharp curves (on 12mm track) means it's open to those who are space restricted.

 

Personally I model 3mm scale on correct scale 14.2mm track, and get a lot out of it. I know what's feasible. If a manufacturer came in using 12mm would I ignore it? No way. I'd continue with 14.2, but I'd quickly start up a project in 12mm; I like the scale and I'd be interested in seeing what I could get out of the products. Also, I think a sensible manufacturer would produce stuff which could without too much difficulty be converted by people like myself to 14.2mm. 

 

I read Simon's account on his Hornby blog and was surprised. He talked to the 3mm Society but at no time do I think he mentioned he was thinking of 1:120. He did I think mention scale track, but most 3mm modellers, whatever their own approach, seem to reckon that commercially 3mm scale needed to use 12mm track.

 

I'd be very happy if some manufacturer did take another look at this. One way of doing this is a toe-in-the-water approach. Produce an attractive steam locomotive which can be offered in a number of variants and liveries, maybe a GWR pannier. Produce a B-coach and you have a short train of a B-set, or longer if you double up on B-sets. The 3mm Society has a load of high quality easily-built wagons from Parkside and others, so maybe you only need to produce a wagon or two and a brake van and you're away on the goods side. You'd have to do a bit of thinking about track; Peco HOm is useable. Give it a go, someone!

 

Nigel

[Tiptonian]

Before urging a manufacturer to provide us with another over-compromised scale/gauge combination, I suggest reading the following thread on this forum...

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106133-165mm-traditional-oo-gauge-classic-steam-era-pointwork/

 

.....all 941 posts (and counting) in four weeks!

[Rivercider]

While I don't think it is very likely to happen it is an interesting idea.

 

I was thinking about it from a slightly different perspective.

The major manufacturers are working several years ahead and have to decide what they are going to bring to the market

that us modellers will want to buy in the future. The fact that nearly all the major diesel era classes have been produced

in recent years means that either a new version has to be produced, or increasingly obscure locos are being produced. 

(Yes I realise there are still electrics/DMUs/EMUs and hundreds of steam loco classes still to be done).

The law of diminishing returns must be at work here to some extent. 

 

Yes it would be a gamble, but if a major manufacturer did give it a go there are all the numerous/popular/long lived/wide geographically spread 

classes waiting to be done again,

 

cheers

[Joseph_Pestell]

I think that this would probably have to be a product for diesel/electric era modellers. RTR might not happen (apart from the 66) but I could see potential for body kits to put on existing Piko/Roco chassis and Halling motor bogies. Rolling stock on the "modern" railway is not so diverse as in the past and it should not be too difficult to produce some in 1:120 scale for the locos to pull.

 

Alan Doherty (Worsley Works) does produce some items at 1:120 and is always willing to adapt existing products from other scales.

[PaulRhB]

Before urging a manufacturer to provide us with another over-compromised scale/gauge combination, I suggest reading the following thread on this forum...

!

Whatever would hypothetically be produced its not going to please some groups

The only thing the manufacturer wants is a viable market and they are more likely to choose an established group than start a new market, or choose an existing minority. The only way they will choose that is if a seriously dedicated, and wealthy, individual funds it. For a big player with shareholders the potential market isn't big enough to take such a risk when there's established scales and gauges they can predict much easier

The likes of Dapol and Ixion rntering into the O gauge market is a good example of finding a new niche to exploit that appeals to a new market and the existing one.

[Revolution Ben]

Hi Paul,

 

You're right, but in the case of TT those conditions do exist, the question is: Do you take your "existing market" as being British 1;100 TT modellers, and produce a new range of track to the correct scale gauge, or take it as being the European/US standard of 1:120, use existing track and possibly mechanisms, bogies etc and try to chose items that will appeal to collectors whatever their nationality?

 

My view is that the 1:120 market is the one to target, as it is already used to the prices of RTR TT and probably already has the right track.

 

If you go down the 1:100 route, using scale track, you need to tool up track for an RTR market. And many existing British TT modellers may still not want to rip up their existing track or rewheel their current stock. And to 1:120 modellers it is a completely irrelevant scale/gauge.

 

If you go down the 1:100 route with 12mm track then you're creating yet another scale/gauge disconnect that will, I contend, be unattractive to those switching from OO or N who are the real target market for to grow the market.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[NCB]

Ben A

 

I think the scale/gauge disconnect is vastly over-rated. Hornby, Bachmann and the likes are churning stuff out in OO, and have no great trouble in selling it. Looking at say the recent Hornby King, the overwhelming impression is of a model which captures the prototype extremely well, not "it's no good it's undergauge".

 

NO manufacturer is going to produce British stuff with a correct gauge/scale ratio, for the reasons I outlined earlier, at least in TT or larger. They can get away with something like it in N because they happily do things like shift cylinders and valve gear outwards and at the scale nobody really notices. In larger scales they will. All commercially produced models are going to be a compromise; the only question is do you compromise on the track gauge or the body?  12mm gauge, 1:100 scale would be appeal to those who aren't fussed about buying OO but appreciate the appeal of the smaller scale.

 

Produce British stuff at 1:120 and it's not far off N. Do it at 1:100 and it sits nicely between N and OO.  A commercial offering in 3mm would have the advantage of a healthy group of modellers and  a large range of kits already in existence.

 

Nigel

[johnarcher]

Ben A

 

I think the scale/gauge disconnect is vastly over-rated. Hornby, Bachmann and the likes are churning stuff out in OO, and have no great trouble in selling it. Looking at say the recent Hornby King, the overwhelming impression is of a model which captures the prototype extremely well, not "it's no good it's undergauge".

 

NO manufacturer is going to produce British stuff with a correct gauge/scale ratio, for the reasons I outlined earlier, at least in TT or larger. They can get away with something like it in N because they happily do things like shift cylinders and valve gear outwards and at the scale nobody really notices. In larger scales they will. All commercially produced models are going to be a compromise; the only question is do you compromise on the track gauge or the body?  12mm gauge, 1:100 scale would be appeal to those who aren't fussed about buying OO but appreciate the appeal of the smaller scale.

 

Produce British stuff at 1:120 and it's not far off N. Do it at 1:100 and it sits nicely between N and OO.  A commercial offering in 3mm would have the advantage of a healthy group of modellers and  a large range of kits already in existence.

 

Nigel

Absolutely agreed, as I said about the 3mm kits etc, but I'm sure you're right about the reasons for under-scale gauge with commercial models as well.

If decent RTR models did appear in 3mm maybe you could also get the equivalent of the 4mm combination of Bachmann body on Comet chassis for those who do care about the gauge, with etched chassis from Brynkits or someone.

 

As some have suggested 1:120 might work for more modern prototypes (but pretty pointless unless modern enough to run with continental stock), but even there where are the British scenic bits and pieces to go with them in that scale?

[Revolution Ben]

 

Hi Nigel,

 

I understand that in the 60s and 70s there were issues around fiting then technology into smaller sized British prototypes, though I would be very surprised if those issues could not be overcome nowadays. Having said that, I know very little about steam prototypes and accept that I may be in a position of ignorance there.

 

As to the scale, I accept that in there is a logic to having nominal 4mm, 3mm and 2mm to the foot scales; though of course in volumetric terms these are not evenly spaced and 1:100 is far closer in physical size to 4mm. The arithmetic half-way point between 1:76 and 1:148 is 1:112, which is closer to 1:120 than to 1:100, though I feel these are slightly tangential points.

 

John,

 

I agree - there may well be 1:100 scale scenic items, kits etc that could be of use, which is why I was wondering what the size of the current market is. I suspect that if a new 1:120 were produced, and showed signs of being a success, those producers working in TT would be quick to produce suitable components; even generating new sales on existing research.

 

I still think that for an RTR manufacturer coming into the scale, the sales required to justify the investment are going to come almost entirely from new customers lured from OO or N; existing TT enthusiasts, while very welcome, would not be a deciding factor.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.