Jump to content
 

APT Resurrection?


Crewlisle
 Share

Recommended Posts

With the demise of DJModels Ltd and its crowdfunding scheme for an 00 gauge APT, could this help to bring Hornby's 1980s APT back to production?  The APT was scanned at Crewe Heritage Centre last summer so I would think any discrepancy in the scan and production of usable CADs would be complete.  In DJM's last newsletter at the end of March this year, a number of discrepancies had been rectified and everything appeared to be progressing well towards tooling.  On the 7th May I received this reply from Dave to my query about progress:

 

Although its proceeding quite slowly, i would hope something tangible would be ready for production later this year. Production and shipping should take 4 months so i would think we could have something before Chinese New Year 2020, if not before then.

 

Would it be commercially viable to buy the progress so far off the liquidators and get the DJM selected Chinese manufacturers to manufacure it?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When Hornby did the APT it was the future, I doubt they would be looking to the past to resurrect this one.

 

The 91 Mk4 combo had more legs for an upgrade and has a future with open access operators for more sales and Hornby resisted that upgrade.

 

Theyre still updating the HST and have the IEP for the future, not sure they would want a third big train on their books.

 

It is a model for crowdfunding I think, Dave got that bit right, his motives for doing the APT might though have blinded him to the pitfalls of such a large model.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Sorry, I just carn’t see any of the main RTR manufacturers tackle this one.

 

Its a multiple unit train requiring several different vehicles to be tooled up to produce an accurate rendition of it yet it only ran for a short timeframe on a single route and in one livery (with minor variations).

 

By contrast a 91 + Mk4 rake has had loads of livery variations in the past plus what with various open access operators seeking to use them away from the ECML then there is plenty of opportunities for the future. Given most of these planed services will see short formed sets the potential for space constrained modellers to produce prototypical formations will be a plus.

 

Similarly the HST not only has loads of liveries + widespread usage in the past, the advent of short formations in Cornwall and Scotland means prototypical formations will be readily achievable for modellers.

 

The IET / class 800 series has multiple liveries, has a wide sphere of operation plus comes in modeller friendly 5 car sets.

 

Yes I know Bachmann did the Blue Pullman eventuallly but the Midland variant only required three vehicles to be tooled up and the real thing remain3d in service longer than the APT-E did. Similarly there is a word of difference in terms of economic viability between doing a ‘oddball’ locomotive and an ‘oddball’ train several vehicles long.

 

 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trains4U said:

I would have thought the tools have disappeared - scrapped along with hundreds of other old tools.

 

Mr Kohler did say in one of his "Simon Says" blogs that the tooling had been badly stored at the back of the old Margate building on semi-collapsed staging and the opinion was that it wasn't safe to retrieve it.  After Hornby left Margate for their (brief) sojourn at Sandwich, it would have been cleared and sent for scrap.  Even if saved, it would probably have been completely unusable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Or a 304 or a 310, even a 305.

 

Trans Pennine or Swindon Inter City (although you can purchase these in lo fi RTR)

 

My personal opinion is that Dave did the APT for personal reasons because he had lost the race to do the Pendolino in N and it snowballed from there.  Because the market for it wasn't really there he had to come up with all kinds of options and we are where we are now.

 

Instead of a 92 and an APT,  a 91 and MK4 stock might have been an inspired choice but someone else has that now.

Edited by woodenhead
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Or a 304 or a 310, even a 305.

 

Trans Pennine or Swindon Inter City (although you can purchase these in lo fi RTR)

 

My personal opinion is that Dave did the APT for personal reasons because he had lost the race to do the Pendolino in N and it snowballed from there.  Because the market for it wasn't really there he had to come up with all kinds of options and we are where we are now.

 

Instead of a 92 and an APT,  a 91 and MK4 stock might have been an inspired choice but someone else has that now.

I’d love all the above to, but they are the past.

 

if you want railway modellers in the future you need to give them what they see today.

 

A railroad Electrostar (there’s very little extra external pieces anyway on these units),  they cover half the country, chances are in the future they will cover the other half. Just have it adaptable to the different variants / liveries, ditch the super dooper electronics & fancy couplings to keep it to a price everyone can afford... it can always be upgraded in the future.

 

I’d love a 304, but no one under voting age has seen one, you’d have to be nearly 40 to remember riding them.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I’d love all the above to, but they are the past.

 

if you want railway modellers in the future you need to give them what they see today.

 

A railroad Electrostar (there’s very little extra external pieces anyway on these units),  they cover half the country, chances are in the future they will cover the other half. Just have it adaptable to the different variants / liveries, ditch the super dooper electronics & fancy couplings to keep it to a price everyone can afford... it can always be upgraded in the future.

 

I’d love a 304, but no one under voting age has seen one, you’d have to be nearly 40 to remember riding them.

Hi rdb,

 

So why then are the commercial companies that produce models still yet supplying steam locomotives to the market ?

 

I have several Hornby APT's ready for a cut and shut and I'm part way through a Swindon 123, if its not available I adapt or build it. A class 310 is on the thinking about list along with cut and shut Manchester Pullman MK II coaches.

 

The idea that any new model is of Railroad standard appeals to me because I can detail it to my own pleasing, the more modern models would end up worse from my attentions !

 

Gibbo.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Gibbo675 said:

So why then are the commercial companies that produce models still yet supplying steam locomotives to the market ?

The 'romance of steam'?

Heritage railways?

Steam days out?

 

I don't remember steam from my childhood. If it was only about what you remember from your youth, my collection would be all oil drums and sparkies, nary a kettle to be seen. As it stands, the reverse is true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Gibbo675 said:

Hi rdb,

 

So why then are the commercial companies that produce models still yet supplying steam locomotives to the market ?I

Are you sure..

 

The question I would ask is why are so few making steam locomotives in OO.

 

Heljan / Kernow / Hattons / Accurascale / Cavalax / Locomotion / Rapido and Realtrack all have 0 in their current announced pipeline.

 

Dapol has 2 in the pipeline (both duplicates of older toolings)

Bachmann has just 2 tank engines. (Plus a rerun of the v2)

Rails has 2* (1  tank engine - A triplicate tooling), plus the 812

Model Rail has 2 tank engines.

TMC has 1 tank engine.

Oxford has 1 (N7) plus the J27.

 

The last tender engines from Bachmann have both been discounted (H1/2 and Stanier mogul), the Nelson from Hornby can be had for nearly 50% off, and that was a duplicate, the Duchess was also a re-tool, even the 47xx hasnt set the world on fire.

 

steam isnt in as strong a place as you claim, against a new 07, 24,24/1, 25,45,55,87,90, 91,92,117, 142,156,158,171, Bep, Hap, IEP and a 121,122, 68 not so long ago.

 

The only strong steam counter arguments are tank engines.. H, P, Barclay, Terrier, Pecketts, 61xx, USA and B4 slightly further back.

 

*(Edited to add the Caley).

 I’m not sure what to class the NER railcar or GWR steam Railmotor  as ... are they “modern” as they are 21st century preserved types that almost certainly would never be tooled otherwise, or historic based on archaeological history ?

 

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that is true - but part of the explanation may be that most of the popular or more numerous steam classes running in the BR period have already been produced.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, jonny777 said:

Well, that is true - but part of the explanation may be that most of the popular or more numerous steam classes running in the BR period have already been produced.  

 

 

Same is true for diesels though...

of that list i recited.. only the 07, Bep, Hap, IEP and 68 arent duplicates.

 

The option for greenfield EMUs exists, with untapped potential everywhere, but all manufacturers save for Bachmann have skipped it... cost / benefit mustn't be there, I’d guess the bep/Hap are only there based on past tooling commonality.

 

if manufacturers are going heavy on retooling modern image but tip toeing steam with cute preserved tank engines and selective duplications, skipping the plethora of others available.. there must be a reason... and I think these companies only exist for £££.

Edited by adb968008
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Heljan / Kernow / Hattons / Accurascale / Cavalax / Locomotion / Rapido and Realtrack all have 0 in the pipeline

 

Heljan are working on Lyn, Lew & Lyd in OO9. Kernow are working on the GWR Railmotor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

...

The option for greenfield EMUs exists, with untapped potential everywhere, but all manufacturers save for Bachmann have skipped it...

...

 

No, Hornby have done some, too. Including a rather nice 2BiL. Plus more modern ones like the Javelin and IEP. 

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
26 minutes ago, Fenman said:

 

No, Hornby have done some, too. Including a rather nice 2BiL. Plus more modern ones like the Javelin and IEP. 

 

Paul

Theyve done a 2hal and Belle too, but all of them are a good few years old, the Javelin dates back to the Olympics, the bil/hal are 6 years back already.

Bachmann did the 350/450 but they too arent “new” at 9+ years.

 

Nothing wrong with that, but if you look post Olympics (yes 7 years now), forwards the trend hasnt been to follow that path.

 

only the IEP is recent, ie 5 years or less, or into the future as we know of from big H.

 

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Are you sure..

 

The question I would ask is why are so few making steam locomotives in OO.

 

Heljan / Kernow / Hattons / Accurascale / Cavalax / Locomotion / Rapido and Realtrack all have 0 in their current announced pipeline.

 

Dapol has 2 in the pipeline (both duplicates of older toolings)

Bachmann has just 2 tank engines. (Plus a rerun of the v2)

Rails has 2* (1  tank engine - A triplicate tooling), plus the 812

Model Rail has 2 tank engines.

TMC has 1 tank engine.

Oxford has 1 (N7) plus the J27.

 

The last tender engines from Bachmann have both been discounted (H1/2 and Stanier mogul), the Nelson from Hornby can be had for nearly 50% off, and that was a duplicate, the Duchess was also a re-tool, even the 47xx hasnt set the world on fire.

 

steam isnt in as strong a place as you claim, against a new 07, 24,24/1, 25,45,55,87,90, 91,92,117, 142,156,158,171, Bep, Hap, IEP and a 121,122, 68 not so long ago.

 

The only strong steam counter arguments are tank engines.. H, P, Barclay, Terrier, Pecketts, 61xx, USA and B4 slightly further back.

 

*(Edited to add the Caley).

 I’m not sure what to class the NER railcar or GWR steam Railmotor  as ... are they “modern” as they are 21st century preserved types that almost certainly would never be tooled otherwise, or historic based on archaeological history ?

 

Hi adb,

 

Calm yourself, I wore out my last anorak in about 1978 !

 

My AC electrics are mostly bashed from Trix body shells, most of my DMU's are either bashed Hornby 110's or DC kits which I still buy if I see them on Ebay, as for EMU's I built my own Brighton Belle set despite it being a good 200 miles out of place.  I may yet build an APT-E out of my APT-P left-overs and all of my cranes are scratch built or bashed, stuff out of boxes is rather too easy for my liking so lists of Chinese stuff that comes out of boxes is mostly irrelevant to me.

 

Steam wise I'd like 6202 Turbomotive, I note that Hornby did its replacement not too long ago.

 

Gibbo.

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, truffy said:

The 'romance of steam'?

Heritage railways?

Steam days out?

 

I don't remember steam from my childhood. If it was only about what you remember from your youth, my collection would be all oil drums and sparkies, nary a kettle to be seen. As it stands, the reverse is true.

Hi Truffy,

 

You may well be right with the points you note, I'm a 1970 product and so have no recollection of "real" steam working either my first steam loco ride was 80002 at the K&WVR in the about 1973.

 

Gibbo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, adb968008 said:

...

all manufacturers save for Bachmann have skipped [EMUs]

...

 

9 hours ago, adb968008 said:

[Hornby has] done a 2hal and Belle too, but all of them are a good few years old, the Javelin dates back to the Olympics, the bil/hal are 6 years back already.

Bachmann did the 350/450 but they too arent “new” at 9+ years.

 

Nothing wrong with that, but if you look post Olympics (yes 7 years now), forwards the trend hasnt been to follow that path.

 

only the IEP is recent, ie 5 years or less, or into the future as we know of from big H.

 

 

Right...

 

So what you’re saying is that, apart from all those EMUs that Hornby has done, not one manufacturer other than the fragrant and marvellous Bachmann has ever done an EMU...?

 

:)

 

Paul

Edited by Fenman
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some things both for & against reproducing a new model of the APT.

 

It is an iconic model so not only WCML modellers will want one in the same way that Duchesses sell really well, being bought by modellers who do not own anything resembling a WCML layout.

 

James May's Trouble in Model Britain mentioned that most of Hornby's older tooling was destroyed by the company's previous management, with the notable exception of the tunnel which had worn beyond its useful lifetime. Whether the P-train's tooling is damaged or discarded is irrelevant.

Any potential manufacturer would therefore need to be looking at new tooling.

 

You could sell the APT-P in several different variations: 5 car, 6 car, 8 car & extra carriages. but having to market several different ones slightly offsets the cost saving of buying it this way.

The Blue Pullman is probably a better comparison than IEPs as mentioned earlier.

Mk4s are not a good comparison because these can be sold as short sets or individual items. Class 90s have run with Mk4 sets before.

 

Anyone considering re-tooling such a product needs to be confident they can sell enough to make a decent return. A few people like us speculating on a forum is just not enough.

Manufacturers may even have already considered & rejected it....possibly even Hornby have been planning it & been holding back with their announcement just like they did the Terrier?

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, woodenhead said:

When Hornby did the APT it was the future, I doubt they would be looking to the past to resurrect this one.

 

The 91 Mk4 combo had more legs for an upgrade and has a future with open access operators for more sales and Hornby resisted that upgrade.

 

Theyre still updating the HST and have the IEP for the future, not sure they would want a third big train on their books.

 

It is a model for crowdfunding I think, Dave got that bit right, his motives for doing the APT might though have blinded him to the pitfalls of such a large model.

 

They already have two more - their Pendolino, and from a more distant era the Eurostar

 

A developed Eurostar, representing the short North of London sets, would make more sense for them - not least because they might be able to spin off an HO version under the Jouef banner (the SNCF used some Eurostars on domestic services - as did GNER)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a matter of a week or two prior the demise of DJM,  Dave was spruiking the changes being made to the APT CAD.  It must have been obvious to him at the time that DJM was on life support and gasping its last breath and yet he seemingly remained confident of the project's eventual success or was it mere bravado or denial?  The CAD's are incomplete and only Dave's word as to how close the project is to tooling is as close as it gets. Given the progress to date on many other projects then the chance of the APT tooling being imminent was pie in the sky dreaming.   Given that tooling is the most expensive part of an extremely complex project I cannot see any major manufacturer coming to the defense of the model.  The APT was a dream that became a nightmare as options and train length grew to uneconomical extremes.  

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I would love to see an APT model in OO made to the latest standards. However it'd be a hugely expensive project as I suspect that if the original Hornby idea of just making a basic five car pack with no additional vehicles was repeated it wouldn't be well received but each additional vehicle would pump prices up. And given how price sensitive many OO modellers are (for what it's worth, I think even the much less price sensitive HO markets would baulk at such a project given the limited market) I'm not sure it'd be viable. If there is a genuine demand and it is possible to satisfy that demand and make an acceptable return then I'm guessing somebody will have a go at some point. I don't think the DJM project was ever realistic, even as a crowd funded scheme, and if a company was to fund it out of their own resources then I think the selling price would be far too high for it to be viable as things are. These things get into a vicious circle of smaller production runs pushing the selling price higher which in turn damages potential sales and so on. Once you get to very small production run niche models then the alternative of small run brass models can become attractive.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...