Jump to content

DJM Dave

NEW OO gauge Crowdfunded Class 92 initiative

Recommended Posts

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 by BR(S)
  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

BBE085DE-351E-451E-9772-55BD529EFDBA.jpeg

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

......The face of the CS sleeper is the 92, with mk5’s.

 

Unless you're modelling The Highlander, then 73/9's it'll be North of Edinburgh....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a separate point on the funding of the project, at least Hatton's and Rails of Sheffield have ordered these off DJM to sell. While these retailers are not involved in the crowdfunding AFAIK, surely their orders and the future money they'll bring to DJM must have a positive effect on the production of these models?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ajax50046 said:

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 would be interested in knowing what 'real innovation' of DJM's, Accurascale have followed. Also, Accurascale are also a small company themselves, who are also bringing models to the market with a degree of risk attached. Just because someone doesn't go on about it, doesn't mean they haven't taken as many risks to get their products to market.

 

I don't doubt that this is a challenge for Dave, but I am not hugely surprised someone else has come into the market with a class 92, and Accurascale's rationale for doing so has been explained. 

 

I wish Dave luck with the 92, but it has been a bit of a cursed project from the very beginning. The ball is very much in his court now.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although we are not  privy to the detail of CS’s thinking, it seems they have opted for a linked Mk5 sleeper/ class 92 deal so they have access to models of the whole train which they can possibly market in some form in the future. They may have needed confidence that they would have a high spec 92 for that to work for them.

 

On the plus side the prematurely announced  Accurascale/RevolutioN trains announcement has prompted DJM to make two announcements on the Class 92 00 gauge project in a couple of days. Keeping momentum on the Class 92, and possibly attracting more crowdfunders with some spirited marketing, are probably the best routes to delivering the locomotives viably.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bob Reid said:

 

Unless you're modelling The Highlander, then 73/9's it'll be North of Edinburgh....

 

I find the idea fascinating of an electro diesel operating so far away from a 3rd rail.

  • Like 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

 

I find the idea fascinating of an electro diesel operating so far away from a 3rd rail.

When I took this in 1991 with my cheapo camera as a teenager, at Preston station..of the Southbound TPO..

 

IMG_0013.jpg

 

i never thought The 86’s would be gone, the TPOs would be gone, Royal Mail private, as would British Rail too, and instead standing in the exact same position would be a pair of equally old class 73’s on a rake of mk1’s.

 

IMG_4041.JPG

Edited by adb968008
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the 86's were old, and I grew up with them, and latterly the 87's, but 73's .... still going?

Says something for the original design!!

 

Al.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, letterspider said:

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. 

 

 

 

 

I believe that your anger is misplaced. If the DJM 92 goes down the pan, then it's the decisions that DJM have taken that will be to blame. From time to time I've read the hard luck stories and excuses for delays, but others work with the same range of choices and manage to deliver models in a reasonable time frame.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get that impression so far anyway.

 

There is another Theresa May influenced occurrence which may or may not happen in a couple of months' time which could have an additional influence in proceedings here ....

 

Al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, letterspider said:

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. 

 

 

 

Regrettably yes, your pocket could be hurt.  But if you decide, as an individual,  to invest your money in a crowdfunding project you are taking on part of the risk associated with that project - something we looked at and discussed a long while back in the thread on crowdfunding,.  No doubt with a resurgent Hornby there was perhaps also a risk to your investment because they might well have decided, as part of a continuing process in their range, to do a major re-tooling of their own Class 92.

 

This sort of duplication (in this particular case triplication) is not new nor is it new or unusual that different manufacturers should be developing models in parallel - with one or the other being ahead.  Just as Hornby were ahead on both the 'King' (duplicated but then dropped by Hattons), or the Q6 (duplicated but then dropped by DJM), or the Class 71 (duplicated by DJM but not dropped).  Similarly we have two Brighton Terriers charging towards the shops in parallel just as we've had various other things in the past.

 

In many respects the winner is always likely to be the one who gets to market first (assuming an equal selling approach) and not necessarily the one which is considered 'best' or offers the highest fidelity to prototype or the lowest price.  For anybody putting money into crowdfunding all of that must inevitably be part of your decision process - you are risking your own money by taking on the developer's/commissioner's/manufacturer's financial risk for them.  That is what crowdfunding means and it will never necessarily involve a guaranteed return. However in this case Dave has stated very clearly that he intends to continue with the the project so assuming others who are funding it maintain their commitment then it will, according to Dave, happen.

 

Equally of course if other crowdfunders back out, for whatever reason, and are not replaced by new funders then any project can fail; it isn't just down to competition appearing but also to the faith of crowdfunders in the project they are financing.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   (duplicate post)

Edited by JSpencer
dupliacte post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Regrettably yes, your pocket could be hurt.  But if you decide, as an individual,  to invest your money in a crowdfunding project you are taking on part of the risk associated with that project - something we looked at and discussed a long while back in the thread on crowdfunding,......

 

.....  For anybody putting money into crowdfunding all of that must inevitably be part of your decision process - you are risking your own money by taking on the developer's/commissioner's/manufacturer's financial risk for them.  That is what crowdfunding means and it will never necessarily involve a guaranteed return.

In my case, with the 71, there was not a decision process surrounding it. I wanted one, DJM offered it, I joined the crowdfunding - which was backed by Kernow.

 

The experience of it being a long drawn process, duplicated and eventually sold in the bargain bins, did influence my descision making process for later projects (which don't have Kernows backing). The experience was further compounded by his lack of replies to my e-mails and PMs regarding spare parts for my sadly defunct Well tanks (he did reply on the forum once I put it there). Because of these, I did not join the 92 (though he did not do the first livery they appeared in which was the one I wanted. Now fortunately offered by AS) nor the APT - as much as I would love to have had either.

I suspect most joining the 92 project, did so because they wanted one and I would be surprised if many weigh up the pros and cons before joining.

 

Compare that with Accurscale. Ordered a bunch of Cemflos, expected last year. They had a delay and I will now get them in a few months time this year. Overall wait, about 1 year which is no skin off my nose. Despite this, they offered a small credit because of the delay to be used elsewhere. They had absolutely no need too - I was happy at just being advised of the small delay. I also had a small issue on one invoice. Sent a mail, they resolved it and replied in less than 15 minutes! Do these positive experiences influence me to spend more with them? You bet. When my wife asked what I wanted for Christmas, I pointed her to the Accurascale gift cards.

Edited by JSpencer
missed the quote
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted 19th August 2016, Dave declared the EWS locomotive to be Victor Hugo 92 001.

 

Why the #$% is Accurascale creating the exact same one?

Surely it's a perfect opportunity to provide the enthusiast / modeller with not only an alternative manufacturer, but an alternative model.

Accurascale are creating their EWS rendition as 92 001 as well - that's a bit lacking somewhere which requires something I reckon!!

 

Sorry if a little harsh, but there are enthusiasts who may want more than one EWS rendition, and this could have been a perfect opportunity for them.

 

Al.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair Lima and Hornby have also done Victor Hugo; might as well have a full house.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

Posted 19th August 2016, Dave declared the EWS locomotive to be Victor Hugo 92 001.

 

Why the #$% is Accurascale creating the exact same one?

Surely it's a perfect opportunity to provide the enthusiast / modeller with not only an alternative manufacturer, but an alternative model.

Accurascale are creating their EWS rendition as 92 001 as well - that's a bit lacking somewhere which requires something I reckon!!

 

Sorry if a little harsh, but there are enthusiasts who may want more than one EWS rendition, and this could have been a perfect opportunity for them.

 

Al.

 

That was 2 1/2 years ago.  

 

Just because DJM stuck a flag in the ground and 'claimed' it doesn't mean that another manufacturer can't produce it.  Lets face it Hornby have had a 92 (of sorts) for years but no one complained when DJM drove over their lawn.

 

Whatever happened to modellers renumbering stock.......or does it all have to come from a box ready made now.

Edited by chris p bacon
  • Like 5
  • Agree 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 92001 and 92031 were ever in EWS maroon, so there are only two to choose from. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, atom3624 said:

Posted 19th August 2016, Dave declared the EWS locomotive to be Victor Hugo 92 001.

 

Why the #$% is Accurascale creating the exact same one?

Surely it's a perfect opportunity to provide the enthusiast / modeller with not only an alternative manufacturer, but an alternative model.

Accurascale are creating their EWS rendition as 92 001 as well - that's a bit lacking somewhere which requires something I reckon!!

 

Sorry if a little harsh, but there are enthusiasts who may want more than one EWS rendition, and this could have been a perfect opportunity for them.

 

Al.

 

I really don't know what you're upset about.  48 hours ago, you were quite happy to have your DJM 92.  Nothing has changed since then to affect this - the model is still going ahead.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy.

 

I just think a little initiative could have helped some of the more-serious modellers permitting them to trial both, yet have different numbers - seemed a no-brainer that.

 

Did EWS only run one Class 92?

 

Yes, the same 'serious modellers' do know how to renumber / rename correctly.

I've seen so many nice locomotives totally 'botched' on a certain auction site, considering the the doubtless detail of the pending products, I'm not one of them ....

 

That was the point.

 

Al.

Edited by atom3624

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they had 30 or so IIRC, but most just got EWS beasties vinyls over the EPS blue/grey. Only 001 and 031 actually got repainted, as I said. Think 5 were repainted into DB Schenker red. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

92001 had some extra embellishments not found on 92031 including flags on the cab side. Removing those from 92001 and replacing a 0 with a 3 at each number position might be within the skill level of those who want both. Maybe Hornby will make the plainer 92031 for those who must have both EWS maroon locos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of 92s carried plain triple grey for almost all of their careers to date, whenever you saw one, it’d be a grey one...funny how these new fancy coloured ones are wrongly grabbing all the limelight! 

 

If all else fails and you’re still unhappy with your DJM 92s...just renumber them to the Eurostar examples and park them in a grotty siding at the back of your layout! :jester:

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always want to say triple grey, as it just sounds right, but didn't they all have blue roofs? And were thus "blue and grey", which clearly they weren't, so they were two-tone-grey-and-blue, which sounds clumsy. Not that anyone will misundestand if you say "triple grey" :wacko:

 

The grey with EWS beasties was always my favourite livery, for a bodge I think it looks spot on! Great on 60s too.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mike Harvey said:

92001 had some extra embellishments not found on 92031 including flags on the cab side. Removing those from 92001 and replacing a 0 with a 3 at each number position might be within the skill level of those who want both. Maybe Hornby will make the plainer 92031 for those who must have both EWS maroon locos.

 

I would like that livery too but is there much interest out there for 92031?

I am sure either manufaturer would do it if there were 100+ expressions of interest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.