NEW OO gauge Crowdfunded Class 92 initiative

[sorabain]

It seems a shame for the small operators to be treading on each others toes like this. Electric traction has a bad enough reputation for failing to make money without making it harder like this.

[Ouroborus]

2 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

I've had some rhetoric and ... deposit is staying put.

 

As mentioned above, loose comments help nobody.

 

If you need any extra details and clarifications, I would suggest you contact Dave yourselves.

 

Al.

 

There are details on his website.

 

https://djmodels.co.uk/oo-gauge-class-92-status-update

[atom3624]

I'm reading it now - well done Dave.

 

Al.

[dogbox321]

Firstly, I have no malace towards either DJM or Accurascale.  I would say, that based on past products both are capable of producing a excellent model of the Class 92.  And I wish both the best of luck in producing an excellent model.  Its just unfortunate they will be some duplication, when I'm sure we would all have liked a Class 89, instead of 2 Class 92's!

 

Well, to the credit of DJM he has recently gave quite alot of updates, and should be pretty much ready to start tooling.   Dave has moved production from 1 factory to another, which has caused considerable delay, and whilst this was going on, I can quite understand why he would not be discussing the Class 92 model, until production could progress.  He also has an agreement for the Stobart Model..... 

 

I think if people have already signed up for a crowdfunded model, then they should see that through (If they want extras, well, they have the luxury of  two choices).  Those who have entered into the crowdfunding have done so, with others collectively to produce a specific item, and its required trust.  Regarding some peoples comments that this could bring crowdfunding down, well actually, if it does, it will be because modellers can no longer trust other modellers to see a project through, which ultimately will divide us all.  Certainly I consider what one person has said said to be very unhelpful, and against the spirit of crowdfunding - They have put £30 down on both suppliers  (for the same product), and they say only one will get a second payment - this to me is simply staggering and reckless, never mind disrespectful to all the other modellers who are involved in this crowdfund project - talk about jumping ship!    Is this really the way that railway modelling is progressing in the 21st Century? 

 

Regards,

 

C.  

[atom3624]

I had some pretty healthy communication directly with Dave and together with the recent 'declaration' on his website mean I'm definitely staying put.

 

As indicated above / earlier, if one was already advanced, why did the other consider it necessary to effectively copy / duplicate the model, even if certain details will doubtless vary?  Another 'Class' would have been more beneficial to the keen modeller.

 

That's water under the bridge now, and let's hope no matter which the modeller opts for, that they're both excellent models - that's the 'bottom line' as far as we're all concerned.

 

Let's enjoy our preferred hobby, not bicker because of it!!

 

Al.

[bill_schmidt1]

1 hour ago, Ouroborus said:

 

There are details on his website.

 

https://djmodels.co.uk/oo-gauge-class-92-status-update

 

I find it interesting that he’s effectively been forced into making a response because of the other announcement. Yet when the important people, his customers, ask questions or are after some updates there is little in the way of answers or very slow to respond.. This isn’t taking into account the secret emails... There is still no updates on most the other projects announced by DJM..........

[YesTor]

56 minutes ago, dogbox321 said:

Firstly, I have no malace towards either DJM or Accurascale.  I would say, that based on past products both are capable of producing a excellent model of the Class 92.  And I wish both the best of luck in producing an excellent model.  Its just unfortunate they will be some duplication, when I'm sure we would all have liked a Class 89, instead of 2 Class 92's!

 

49 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

As indicated above / earlier, if one was already advanced, why did the other consider it necessary to effectively copy / duplicate the model, even if certain details will doubtless vary?  Another 'Class' would have been more beneficial to the keen modeller.

 

I was thinking along these lines too.  It does seem kind of crazy in that for all the seemingly great efforts made by manufacturers to avoid duplication that we end up with some of the more obscure/less common prototypes duplicated, eg. Class 71, LMS 10000/10001 and now Class 92.  While I'm sure the Class 92 will be popular, will it indeed be popular enough to support two models released simultaneously?  Somehow I doubt it.  If anything could survive duplication as far as electric locomotives go then perhaps (and only perhaps) a Class 86 or 87, but even those types would surely be a great risk.  The same applies to diesel models, whereby perhaps duplicates in the market of Class 37, 47, 66 etc might stand a fighting chance, but instead we ended up with Dapol and Bachmann going head-to-head on the LMS twins.  Strange times.

[cooley_boy]

This is not the first time this has happened in modelling history. It certainly makes things interesting and competition should be a healthy thing.

 

I share the main sentiment in that abandoning ship would be a unfair thing to do. Sure we have been waiting awhile but this means I have been able to save up for these locomotives. I have no doubt they will be a fine locomotive having seen the detail on the 71 class and the effort Dave is putting into these locomotive will pay off.

 

What we can say is thank goodness someone is doing the Mk5s so we can run the trains prototypically. 

I will certainly look at getting the Mk5s from AS but I will stick by Dave for his 92's. 

 

    

[black and decker boy]

For those wanting to know why they have opted to duplicate the 92, this was in the launch email

 

“Part of the deal for securing the Mark 5 models was the proviso we have to provide a up to date locomotive to match the sleeper stock. Enter the Class 92.”

[adb968008]

7 hours ago, YesTor said:

 

 

.  While I'm sure the Class 92 will be popular, will it indeed be popular enough to support two models released simultaneously?  

 

Well it worked for Lima and Hornby in 1993.

The Hornby one is still with us, and competing in 2019, making it 3 not 2.

 

8 hours ago, atom3624 said:

 

As indicated above / earlier, if one was already advanced, why did the other consider it necessary to effectively copy / duplicate the model, even if certain details will doubtless vary?  Another 'Class' would have been more beneficial to the keen modeller.

 

From the horses mouth on the Accurascale thread...

So...

No 92 no mk5’s

 

 

 

Edited February 12, 2019 by adb968008

[adb968008]

10 hours ago, JSpencer said:

 

 

But he is then left with only the APT and King to float on. Unless those secret projects for other parties come to the fore (maybe GT3 is one of these). 

And DJM too announced a HUO only a short while before Accurascale, though the DJ version too seems to have gone very very quiet. Ive assumed this has gone the same place as the 59,king, Q6 etc.

 

There is also supposed to be a follow up run of J94’s, one would have thought this wouldnt be that hard considering its been done already, not sure why the silence on this, its not a secret crowd funded one, if its lack of sales, then some promotion would surely make sense ?

 

My MSC J94 has been on order a few years now, my money is waiting. Wait too long you never know, someone else may step in and make a J94 ?

Edited February 12, 2019 by adb968008

[atom3624]

Is the Class 92 the only locomotive to haul these fabled Mk 5 coaches then?

 

2' research on my mate Google found Class 73- and Class 68-hauled sets ... 

 

Decent DMU, DEMU, EMU sets would be interesting as well - something which permits scale speed without 'turning to 11' like Bachmann 221's!!

 

Al.

[letterspider]

As a DJM Class 92 crowdfunder this announcement actually makes me 'quite angry'. Accurascale must be well aware that there could be serious consequences not only to the manufacture but also to the pocket of the modellers who are trying to keep this project afloat. They are not doing the crowdfunders a favour at all if DJM 'goes down' and will seriously hurt the pockets of backers like myself to hundreds of pounds.

Thanks Accurascale. 

 

 

 

[Claude_Dreyfus]

4 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

Is the Class 92 the only locomotive to haul these fabled Mk 5 coaches then?

 

2' research on my mate Google found Class 73- and Class 68-hauled sets ... 

 

Decent DMU, DEMU, EMU sets would be interesting as well - something which permits scale speed without 'turning to 11' like Bachmann 221's!!

 

Al.

Others do haul them, but that isn't what is being said. In order for permission to be given to produce the Mark 5 sleepers, Accurascale also have produce the 92. Presumably that is the stipulation from Caledonian sleeper.

 

Another side factor, I have seen so many variations in the same 'correct' colour, it will be interesting to see if the Caledonian sleeper livery on the DJM version matches the Accurascale carriages.

[Ouroborus]

Well, its like this.  They wanted to make the Mk5 coaches to go with the Class 68.   Caledonian said you can only do this if you make a matching Class 92.  As RevolutioN trains were making an N scale 92, seems they got together and pooled resources.  The alternative would seem to be no Mk5 stock.   

As for the 'crowdfunding' argument, i have some truck with this.  My understanding with crowd funding was that pledges were sought and only when a specific amount was reached, the project went ahead.   The DJM model seems to be more of a straightforward investment - putting money down and hoping for a return.  Like all investments, sometimes it might not work out.   You took the risk rather than the manufacturer.

[Legend]

8 hours ago, YesTor said:

 

 

I was thinking along these lines too.  It does seem kind of crazy in that for all the seemingly great efforts made by manufacturers to avoid duplication that we end up with some of the more obscure/less common prototypes duplicated, eg. Class 71, LMS 10000/10001 and now Class 92.  While I'm sure the Class 92 will be popular, will it indeed be popular enough to support two models released simultaneously?  Somehow I doubt it.  If anything could survive duplication as far as electric locomotives go then perhaps (and only perhaps) a Class 86 or 87, but even those types would surely be a great risk.  The same applies to diesel models, whereby perhaps duplicates in the market of Class 37, 47, 66 etc might stand a fighting chance, but instead we ended up with Dapol and Bachmann going head-to-head on the LMS twins.  Strange times.

 

I think its worth pointing out that Accurascale are doing the 92 because it was part of deal to do the Mk5 Caledonian Sleeper coaches .   No 92 would have meant no Caledonian Sleepers as I understand it. They didn't have a choice of doing an 89 instead.   As you have to make a 92 it obviously makes sense to offer it in as many liveries as possible to dilute the development cost .   So I'm looking at the duplication as more of a consequence of doing the Mk5s rather than a direct decision to compete for a 92

[BR(S)]

For what it's worth, I'll be continuing to make my payments for my 3 x DJM 92s. There is still nothing to a HIGHLY risk-averse person like me to suggest these won't be produced. My therapist confirms I'm not just in denial.

[Hilux5972]

If the market can support multiple A4 locomotives and god knows how may doubled up diesels then I’m sure 2 92’s can manage. 

[JSpencer]

35 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

And DJM too announced a HUO only a short while before Accurascale, though the DJ version too seems to have gone very very quiet. Ive assumed this has gone the same place as the 59,king, Q6 etc.

 

There is also supposed to be a follow up run of J94’s, one would have thought this wouldnt be that hard considering its been done already, not sure why the silence on this, its not a secret crowd funded one, if its lack of sales, then some promotion would surely make sense ?

 

My MSC J94 has been on order a few years now, my money is waiting. Wait too long you never know, someone else may step in and make a J94 ?

 

He lost the factory for the J94 and maybe the tooling with it.  Agree he stuck too many stakes in the ground which he could not defend (though the King was a Hattons project).

Edited February 12, 2019 by JSpencer

[adb968008]

The new mk5’s will only be pulled by selected Dellner fitted GBRF class 92 and 73/9.

 

The selected ones in this fleet are fitted with Dellner couplings for this stock. (I wonder if we will eventually see a new sub-fleet for CS compatible locos .. a class 92/1 ?).

 

 

The past is the past..

and you can still see 86/1, 86/4, 87, 90, 92, 67, 73/9 until March/May 2019.

 

and exceptionally occasions in recent memory its had 37, 66 and 47 too.

 

but with the new mark 5’s even the 86/87/90’s weve seen recently will not be usable, unless they are conventionally coupled to the 92 or 73/9 thats on the front.

 

if youve not seen the mk3 sleepers with BR era AC locos, i’d make the effort to see it soon, they are in Euston early enough in the evening / mornings and staff are willing to let you go through.

 

Fwiw i’m still betting on the class 89 to make it into the GBRF CS pool, some day when its done.

 

Edited February 12, 2019 by adb968008

[atom3624]

I'm staying put anyway.

 

I hope both versions are as excellent as they are portrayed and its win / win all around ...

 

I opted for an EWS version, which is Victor Hugo ... to go with my Hornby 56, 60 and 67 'Super Detail' locos ...

 

Looking forwards to it as well.

 

Al.

[JSpencer]

17 minutes ago, Ouroborus said:

Well, its like this.  They wanted to make the Mk5 coaches to go with the Class 68.   Caledonian said you can only do this if you make a matching Class 92.  As RevolutioN trains were making an N scale 92, seems they got together and pooled resources.  The alternative would seem to be no Mk5 stock.   
 

 

For the moment that is an assumption, a very good assumption! But please note I believe we have not had any official word that Caledonian themselves were responsible for insisting on the 92 being done by Accurascale. I can imagine someone wanting to sell a complete train set somewhere. Time will tell.

[Ajax50046]

I'm sticking with DJM for some 92's. I've met Dave a couple of times at shows and he's a genuine, hardworking bloke, very skilled at what he does and has brought excellent models to the market at his own risk. He's not a billion-dollar corporation but a one man band who's added some real innovation to the UK market which the likes of Accurascale have followed, and are now putting his own livelihood at risk. I find it a bit disappointing that so many are willing to stick the knife in because a product of his is delayed or customer service isn't as polished as larger companies with specialist such departments.

 

Model railways are a hobby and in the grand scheme of things in life, waiting 4 or 5 years for something when you've been promised it in 2 doesn't really matter. Unless you're Dave - who needs people like us to show faith and be patient or his whole livelihood and home goes. And as far as crowd-funding goes, these aren't life and death sums, but if they are for some modellers then I'd question why they took the risk in the first place. People have short memories - he has a good track record of delivering models to the market; the 71 is excellent, so is the J94...

 

I really hope, for Dave's sake, the numbers still add up. If I lose a bit of money which I knew was a gamble, so be it. 

Edited February 12, 2019 by Ajax50046
spelling error!

[BR(S)]

I don't think Accurascale can be criticised for their announcement; they're just a business doing what they need to do. They've provided "justification" for their choice of loco, but it's not really necessary. People walking away from the crowdfunding they committed to is far more concerning than Accurascale's choices.

 

As Ajax50046 has just posted as I type, Dave is a genuine person with enthusiasm for what he does and we know he has a background that has developed modelling skills and procedural know-how.

 

And he's the only manufacturer I know of who, immediately after sending out product updates, has certain people saying that there are no updates!! If you're worrying about DJM producing these models, look towards those on this forum who are constantly determined to derail this project. Development of the DJM 92 and APT is happening.

Edited February 12, 2019 by BR(S)

[adb968008]

43 minutes ago, Ouroborus said:

Well, its like this.  They wanted to make the Mk5 coaches to go with the Class 68.   

Class 68 is owned by DRS.

Contract for CS is with GBRF.

 

class 68 wont operate on the sleepers.

Transpennine is using DRS for their services (Liverpool - Scarborough) using “standard” day use Mk5 stock.

 

The face of the CS sleeper is the 92, with mk5’s. Theres a lot of rebranding going on at CS, I was given these cards on board the other week, promoting the new mk5’s (and some regulars were moaning that they are expecting big fare rises).

 

 

there is suggestion that DRS wanted the 10 class 88’s for the CS contract... a small fleet of 25kv / Bi-Mode diesel,  but it went to GBRF, I've not seen substance to it, other than logic.

Edited February 12, 2019 by adb968008