Jump to content
Ben A

Revolution Trains proposes Class 92 in N

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

 

Revolution Trains are offering the powerful Class 92 electric locomotive as our next model.

 

30112401866_17d709ba59_k.jpgimage (photo courtesy Tom Smith)

 

This project has been in development for some time and we have secured the cooperation of Brush Traction, who have already supplied us with complete drawings and other assistance.

 

29852549870_fc90d94289_b.jpgimage1 (10)

 

The Class 92 is a logical follow on from our Pendolino, class 321 and has even hauled our TEA tank wagons.

 

7856675018_0f0ca36b05_k.jpg92032 23/08 by wetbag, on Flickr

 

These locomotives were originally built by Brush Traction for Channel Tunnel freight and sleeper trains in the early 1990s, and while some of the traffic did not materialise, in the years since they have proved to be stalwart performers on intermodal, steel and general freight traffic both in Britain and abroad.

 

29518966094_172a1e219f_k.jpgimage (photo courtesy Tom Smith)

 

Some have recently been introduced onto Caledonian sleeper services. Brush have advised us on minor alterations being made to the class for this and where appropriate these will be incorporated into the model..

 

30148176515_baf59f25b2_k.jpgIMG_5701 (photo courtesy Tom Smith)

 

We have in place permissions and licences from all major operators and we are proposing models in original Railfreight, EWS, grey with EWS branding, DB Cargo red, GBRf and Caledonian sleeper. Details about the specific loco identities, and why they have been selected, are our website. Images are shown below, but these are illustrative artwork only and not to scale.

 

post-420-0-55167400-1475747345_thumb.jpg

 

post-420-0-40584800-1475747347_thumb.jpg

 

post-420-0-45039000-1475747349_thumb.jpg

 

post-420-0-35030100-1475747351_thumb.jpg

 

post-420-0-64742000-1475747353_thumb.jpg

 

post-420-0-76073400-1475747355_thumb.jpg

 

The model will feature an injection moulded body with, where appropriate, etched components, detailed poseable pantographs, working switchable lights, flywheel drive, DCC Sound and DC options and some exciting and new additional features that will be revealed in due course.

 

/Having seen deliveries begin this week of the UK's first crowd-funded models - the Revolution TEA tankers - and with progress well underway on our Pendolino, KFA flat among others - we feel we have proved that our crowd-funding methodology works and that Revolution Trains are best placed to deliver a high quality model in a timely fashion.

 

We will be opening the order book in the next few days, and are investigating a staggered payment system as feedback is that this will help our supporters and will give more information on this, and the expected prices, in due course.

 

We will be attending this year's Warley National Model Railway Exhibition with Rapido Trains and look forward to meeting supporters and discussing our plans there.

 

cheers

 

Ben A

Edited by Ben A
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At risk of duplicating my sentiment from the other forum...

 

This is awesome. I'm far more excited than any 30 year old should be about a toy train.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice I would've loved to have seen what those "exciting and new additional features" are...I've already supported and backed the first announcement! If you reveal the rest of the features soon along with a good estimated price tag I will surely support yours too.

 

+1 for actually have some livery art drawings up!

 

Cheers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Sara,

 

There are two issues around revealing the extra features now. The first is that, as they haven't been done before, we need to be confident they can be delivered at reasonable cost in N.

 

The second is that, for obvious reasons, we are reluctant to give too much away at these very early stages.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sara,

 

There are two issues around revealing the extra features now. The first is that, as they haven't been done before, we need to be confident they can be delivered at reasonable cost in N.

 

The second is that, for obvious reasons, we are reluctant to give too much away at these very early stages.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Thanks once I am aware of prices and features, I'll probably put in a vote!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok you twisted my arm! :yes:

 

I think I could be tempted to get a DB Schenker one.

 

Alistair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The second is that, for obvious reasons, we are reluctant to give too much away at these very early stages.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

 

Sorry to be picky but Red Death said, in another thread, that you had been working on this since September 2015. Is it still very early stages?

 

Fortunately a Class 92 is very much in the 'nice to have but only under rule one' so its not something for me to get to worked up about as some are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be picky but Red Death said, in another thread, that you had been working on this since September 2015. Is it still very early stages?

 

No need to apologise. We have been working on a number of unannounced projects for some time now, though obviously not all with the same intensity as we prioritise to fit our time and when we want to fit things into our production schedule.

 

As I mentioned, we were talking to customers at TINGS in Sept 2015 about doing a 92 (so it hasn't come as a surprise to many people despite the unfortunate events of last weekend) and have been doing our research and getting cooperation and permissions from Brush and FOCs for a good number of months.  We weren't prepared to formally announce it until we had started to deliver models.

 

Obviously we could announce a long list of things that we are planning to do but I'm not sure that helps anyone until we fit things into logical release schedules.

 

Cheers, Mike

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sara,

There are two issues around revealing the extra features now. The first is that, as they haven't been done before, we need to be confident they can be delivered at reasonable cost in N.

The second is that, for obvious reasons, we are reluctant to give too much away at these very early stages.

Cheers

Ben A.

 

 

Sorry to be picky but Red Death said, in another thread, that you had been working on this since September 2015. Is it still very early stages?

With some of extra features that haven't been done before, so they aren't announcing what these extras are until they have got them working and to a reasonable cost first, hence the early stages comment, not that they are in early stages of the project as a whole.

 

If they are announced early there is also the opportunity for them to be copied.

 

Alistair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben, Mike

 

You have just made my bank card cry!

 

Since ordering two 11 car pendolino's at showcase I have been planning a layout which will come after the next layout which comes after Ketton and the 92 fits in nicely.  I'm interested in at least 2, maybe 3.  

 

There's no rush with these, a couple of years will be great ;-)

 

Cheers

 

Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

With some of extra features that haven't been done before, so they aren't announcing what these extras are until they have got them working and to a reasonable cost first, hence the early stages comment, not that they are in early stages of the project as a whole.

 

If they are announced early there is also the opportunity for them to be copied.

 

Alistair

 

The site needs a irony icon. As you imply that while the work on model started in 2015 the development of the 'extras' may have started much later - I don't know, the cynic in me thinks perhaps on 12th August?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just the way that I read it. They could have been started then, I don't know.

 

Alistair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The site needs a irony icon. As you imply that while the work on model started in 2015 the development of the 'extras' may have started much later - I don't know, the cynic in me thinks perhaps on 12th August?

Hi Bomag,

 

There is no mystery or secret about what we have done to reach this point, and the various tasks have been done in between work on our other models, and our full time jobs, at various times over the past year or so.

 

Some of it is around the actual model, but quite a lot is just administrative: eg having time-consuming discussions with those involved in the prototype - manufacturers and operators - to get their co-operation and backing, sourcing and listing drawings, preparing for the launch by securing permission to use photographs, creating graphic images to illustrate the liveries, designing and printing leaflets, obtaining quotes and negotiating over design, tooling and production costs, getting the website ready, carrying out due diligence work on the market, and so on and so forth.

 

In among all of this we drew up a design specification, and as part of that we also suggested some new, or interesting features.

 

Have we been working on this for most of our adult lives? - No!

 

Have we spent a lot of time working up a considered, comprehensive and coherent launch and production campaign - from initial production through to as we have for all our other models? - Absolutely!

 

All of this takes time and effort. Some was done before August 12th (I am guessing - without checking - that's the date DJM abandoned the crowdfunded 86/87 plan and switched to the crowdfunded 92?) and some has been done since.

 

It is a shame that there are two simultaneous projects to produce a Class 92, I agree.

 

Mike and I considered putting our plans on ice, but the overwhelming message we received at the N Gauge International Show (the premier annual show in N attended by many more of our customers than frequent RM Web) and in many private messages we have received, from those who knew the 92 was in our sights, was that they wanted us to go ahead.

 

This was also the message we received from key "wise counsel" figures in the model railway/N Gauge world who've been kind enough to give us guidance before; that has helped us reach this position in barely two years.

 

For whatever reason - perhaps because they had seen clear progress on the TEA tankers (which are now being delivered) and the Pendolino (a complete 11-car train in N with 6 different body mouldings) - they thought we were far more likely to create a project they were prepared to back with money up front!

 

EDIT: One last point - no one needs to feel we are trying to "bounce" them into a decision. Come and see us at this year's National Model Railway Exhibition at the NEC next month. Have a look at our products. Examine the quality of the models we have. Pick them up. Talk to us about our plans. Then decide!

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

Edited by Ben A
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wishing you guys well with the project. As I said, once I get to know the final details of the features and also pricing, I'll probably vote for one. What I did was go for the first one announced (had I known you'll had plans I would've gone this side).

 

However I hope to see things progress. If I'm not mistaken a crowd-funded model means something produced to just a specific quantity. So basically if both projects go ahead both initial runs will sell out simply because it was made to order. In that sense I don't see an issue with two models.

 

However if DJM and RevolutioN plan to make further runs in future you'll need to be careful and not produce same running numbers.

 

And just one suggestion, one of the reasons why I like Arnold's latest N gauge models is because they produce two types of "clip-on" valances/snow ploughs. One has the gap for the coupling and the other is factory fitted with all the cosmetic couplings and brake pipes. This makes it so much easier for the customers to simply clip-on/clip-off whatever they wish to use. It also saves a bit of time trying to fiddle with tiny pipes etc. Can you'll consider doing that?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hi Sara,

 

I know what you mean and for vehicles with a continuous valance surrounding the pipes that is an option.

 

If you look at the top photo in the opening post you'll see this isn't the case for the 92. I think with this loco there will be a plug-in block, to replicate that area, or a coupler. There is no surrounding valance as such.

 

Thanks for raising the point though!

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best of luck with this endeavour!!

 

N gauge is not my scale so it is not a model I’d buy but it is good to see initiatives like this and hopefully Revolution will do more OO models in the future. As an impartial (by virtue of being a OO/HO modeller) I’d offer a few entirely personal observations about diesel and electric models:

 

• I fully concur with the comment about how the front end around the buffer beam is treated. As well as the good idea of an easy swap pre-detailed pilot/valance I’ve seen a lot of beautifully detailed models left with a rather intrusive NEM coupler pocket which kind of ruins the illusion of a locomotive in miniature created by the lovely details.

 

• I find the bogie – body gap has a far greater impact on the overall impression of a model than using fine etchings for grills and such like. If there is a gaping chasm between the bogie and body where you wouldn’t find one in real life (noting that some designs do sit quite high above their bogies) then it just doesn’t look right regardless of how well done the rest of the model is.

 

• Glazing, again this has a huge impact on how a model looks and if done well it can actually carry certain other faults whilst if done badly it can ruin an otherwise excellent model.

 

• An easy fit DCC socket is hugely attractive and would make the difference between buying a model from manufacturer A or B if there was duplication and both models were good. Make it accessible without being traumatised as to whether the force needed to remove the body and reach the socket is going to destroy the model. I know some are obsessed with under frame detail but my own opinion is that since you don’t look at the underside unless you turn it upside down then I’d much rather sacrifice detail there in order to have an easy access DCC socket as per the Bachmann OO Desiro and the LE Models ETR220 in HO.

 

• Be sensible with detail, a model should be well detailed, but it also needs to be robust enough to operate on a layout and to be handled without shedding bits (unless it is intended for the collector market). I do worry that some manufacturers are taking detail to a point where models may end up as being too fragile and shed some of the details.

 

Again I’d stress these are only my personal opinions, and given I’m not an N gauge modeller feel free to ignore them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic that the Bachman Desiro has an easily accessible DCC socket, the Farish one is a nightmare. I've just about got confident that I'm not going to snap the underframe as I fitted decoders to my 4th unit!

 

Agree that easy accessibility is definitely nice, but someone one only tends to discover after purchase!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best of luck with this endeavour!!

 

N gauge is not my scale so it is not a model I’d buy but it is good to see initiatives like this and hopefully Revolution will do more OO models in the future. As an impartial (by virtue of being a OO/HO modeller) I’d offer a few entirely personal observations about diesel and electric models:

 

• I fully concur with the comment about how the front end around the buffer beam is treated. As well as the good idea of an easy swap pre-detailed pilot/valance I’ve seen a lot of beautifully detailed models left with a rather intrusive NEM coupler pocket which kind of ruins the illusion of a locomotive in miniature created by the lovely details.

 

• I find the bogie – body gap has a far greater impact on the overall impression of a model than using fine etchings for grills and such like. If there is a gaping chasm between the bogie and body where you wouldn’t find one in real life (noting that some designs do sit quite high above their bogies) then it just doesn’t look right regardless of how well done the rest of the model is.

 

• Glazing, again this has a huge impact on how a model looks and if done well it can actually carry certain other faults whilst if done badly it can ruin an otherwise excellent model.

 

• An easy fit DCC socket is hugely attractive and would make the difference between buying a model from manufacturer A or B if there was duplication and both models were good. Make it accessible without being traumatised as to whether the force needed to remove the body and reach the socket is going to destroy the model. I know some are obsessed with under frame detail but my own opinion is that since you don’t look at the underside unless you turn it upside down then I’d much rather sacrifice detail there in order to have an easy access DCC socket as per the Bachmann OO Desiro and the LE Models ETR220 in HO.

 

• Be sensible with detail, a model should be well detailed, but it also needs to be robust enough to operate on a layout and to be handled without shedding bits (unless it is intended for the collector market). I do worry that some manufacturers are taking detail to a point where models may end up as being too fragile and shed some of the details.

 

Again I’d stress these are only my personal opinions, and given I’m not an N gauge modeller feel free to ignore them.

I’d agree with most of that, especially production in 00. I’d add easy installation for speakers, though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ben and Mike,

 

Yet another awesome announcement!! My wallet is still feeling the pain of the Pendolino and the 321!!

 

Cracking effort guys and looking forward to the updates. I'll definitely be ordering one!

 

Just one suggestion, would it be worth offering two running numbers for each livery so buyers can have two locos, same livery, different running numbers without the need to start renumbering. Just a thought.....

 

Best regards,

 

Jeremy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd echo Jeremy's suggestion - I'll be having two beasties at least, so not ruining one by attempting to renumber it would be good!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hello all,

 

It's early days at the moment. There is an MOQ for any specific paint finish based around the cost of creating the paint masks etc, and a smaller MOQ for modifications (such as different numbers or names) that require only a change of tampo print.

 

Once we reach the MOQ for a change of number in any given livery we will very seriously considering offering another. There is no reason not to.

 

Cheers

 

Ben A.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.