APT Resurrection?

[njee20]

1 hour ago, Andy W said:

APT never ran in the south east at any point in history? Are you sure? Euston is in the south-east of England by any possible definition, and the several journeys I had on APT-P between Euston and Preston were all my imagination? There was a regular Friday afternoon departure which effectively acted as a relief. I even have the boarding card for one of these journeys. You can't even say that APT never saw the 3rd rail network, because Euston had and still has 3rd rail electrification into some platforms.

Not quite sure why you feel you need to be aggressive about it, but actually in the Government definition London is not the South East, so actually arguably the most official definition excludes Euston from the South East of England. See here.

 

I think it was perfectly clear what melmoth meant, but don't let that get in the way of your uber-pedantry, particularly when it's wrong.

[atom3624]

My Geography teacher used to tell me it was in the South East as well ...

 

Did appear a little confrontational, but I suppose for somebody with personal experiences and memories of it, you can understand ...

 

Imagine if it had worked - been more successful?

Would we have had so many HSTs?

 

Would we have relied so much on 'foreign' imports - Pendolino for example?

 

Al.

[Andy W]

37 minutes ago, njee20 said:

Not quite sure why you feel you need to be aggressive about it, but actually in the Government definition London is not the South East, so actually arguably the most official definition excludes Euston from the South East of England. See here.

 

I think it was perfectly clear what melmoth meant, but don't let that get in the way of your uber-pedantry, particularly when it's wrong.

If you're going to throw insults at what was intended as a mere factual correction, at least read what you linked to before posting. On your wikipedia definition, London is not in the South East, on a common sense one it is, since the areas wikipedia says comprise the South East almost entirely surround it. But the same wikipedia definition includes part of the route of the WCML within the South East, so the APT did in fact run in the South East by this definition too. Are you in fact telling us that Melmoth's (and your) definition of the South East is actually BR Southern, Eastern or Western Region territory within the SE? That might be a perfectly reasonable definition of the area of one's modelling interests, and then would indeed exclude APT-P. My concern was and is that the way the original post was worded might put people off who might have modelled an APT because they would be led to believe they were never seen on the southern WCML, whereas my personal experience is that they were, and indeed operated over the entire line between London and Glasgow. Now did they get to Birmingham, Liverpool, or Manchester? I don't know.

[njee20]

Calm down dear, I didn't insult you at all. 

 

I'm well aware that parts of the WCML run through the South East, but that isn't what you said (that "by any possible definition" London is in the South East), and again, it was patently obvious from melmoth's comment what he meant by "the south east", ie the bit south of the Thames; which you even know as you referenced the third rail at Euston. I don't think anyone who knows anything about the APT would think they never made it to London.

Edited June 28, 2019 by njee20

[Fenman]

2 minutes ago, njee20 said:

Calm down dear, I didn't insult you at all. 

...

 

Not sure using a wilfully patronising catch phrase reinforces your denial...?!

 

Paul

[melmoth]

Quick point of order, it was JSpencer who made the original point about the South East that Andy W responded to. I'm just sitting here with the popcorn.

[njee20]

Apologies, just not a fan of the needless aggression. He could have made the original post:

 

"If you want to be really pedantic, London is in the South East, and Euston even had third rail to some platforms, so you can definitely stretch rule 1 ;-) "

 

No need for the rest of it.

 

Edit: and apologies for the mis-attribution, too busy being pedantic to check facts!

Edited June 28, 2019 by njee20

[dibber25]

16 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Want, not need.

 

Hornby has just made a 1940s DMU for £136 RRP... A Terrier for £89 retail, and a Bulleid coach for £47.

 

they could made a 2 car DMU / EMU for a similar amount if they kept the detail the same, the electronics at bay and the coupling as standard hook/loop.

 

My little one would love a modern image EMU, and she doesn't care for wanting through wiring, sophisticated electronics and a fancy coupling. An accurate render with a good paint job will do.

 

When we were little, we didn't care either.

 

we are in a loop of being dazzled by the up-sell, that I dont think we as consumers can afford.

 

So if we “must” have it, its because manufacturers dont see a future in the hobby, not just because they see it as too expensive, they aim products at the established market, not a  current one.

 

In reality they also see that we don't want the detail .. how many people are running 8/12 car 350/450’s, I suspect very few,  most pribably have only 1, yet have no problem with a dozen colourful class 47’s...

 

If the DMU/EMU was accurate with a decent paint job, but spec’d down to a price, chances are a few people may be more willing to stock up.

 

I know Ive a big stash of Bachmann DMUs (101/105/108/DLW) when they were cheap, and they don't have fancy couplings and delicate electronics but theres nothing wrong with the detail. 

 

Railroad 66’s show colour and price can trump detail and electronics, and Hornbys already said its volume they need to increase.

 

It is the presumption that the customers know the market better than the major model manufacturers that led to the present debacle surrounding the APT-P. Hornby has done 'basic' multiple units at least twice in the past and on both occasions the market has said "No, that's not what we want. We don't want basic mechanisms (Networker) or dumbed down detail (2-BIL). To tool a new APT to 1980s standards would be disastrous. DCC provision and directional lighting are minimum standard specifications these days. A model without them may well satisfy some customers, but not enough to make it viable - and the inability to attract enough customers to make such a project viable is exactly why a model APT project is where it is today. An all-singing, all-dancing state of the art APT would be too expensive to attract sufficient customers, and a short, dumbed-down 1980s standard model (even if such a thing could be created by today's factories) would simply put off a different segment of potential customers. The Class 66 (never a 1980s model and updated by Hornby to make it DCC-ready) is a very different animal from a 14-car EMU. (CJL)

Edited June 28, 2019 by dibber25

[JSpencer]

6 hours ago, Andy W said:

APT never ran in the south east at any point in history? Are you sure? Euston is in the south-east of England by any possible definition, and the several journeys I had on APT-P between Euston and Preston were all my imagination? There was a regular Friday afternoon departure which effectively acted as a relief. I even have the boarding card for one of these journeys. You can't even say that APT never saw the 3rd rail network, because Euston had and still has 3rd rail electrification into some platforms.

 

I see where you are coming from but Euston for me is North of the Thames, never ever part of the SECR and the passenger trains running out of it where heading more towards Birmingham/Glasgow than to anywhere in Kent. Not easy to justify why one would be overtaking a Victoria/Dover boat train....

 

 

 

[Fenman]

2 hours ago, dibber25 said:

...

Hornby has done 'basic' multiple units at least twice in the past and on both occasions the market has said "No, that's not what we want. We don't want ... dumbed down detail (2-BIL).

...

 

Judging by the number of re-runs, I’d have said the market liked the 2BiL. I think Hornby may have then over-saturated the market with re-runs (though this was at a time when they did that with pretty much every new release). Though the fact they went on to produce another new SR EMU straight afterwards suggests the market was there. 

 

Or are you saying the 2BiL was a sales flop?

 

Paul

Edited June 28, 2019 by Fenman
For some reason autocorrect decided re-run should be the-run

[dibber25]

21 minutes ago, Fenman said:

 

Judging by the number of re-runs, I’d have said the market liked the 2BiL. I think Hornby may have then over-saturated the market with the-runs (though this was at a time when they did that with pretty much every new release). Though the fact they went on to produce another new SR EMU straight afterwards suggests the market was there. 

 

Or are you saying the 2BiL was a sales

flop?

 

Paul

The production of the 2HAL suggests that they thought the market was there. The 2BIL wasn't a sales flop as such, though put together the 2-BIL, re-run and the 2-HAL exhausted whatever market there might have been. More importantly the 2-BIL brought 'design clever' to widespread attention and you only have to read back the relevant threads on here to see what the 'market' thought of that. An APT done to design clever standards.......that's effectively what you get if you resurrect the old 1980s Hornby model. I think it would be a monumental disaster but if it wasn't, it wouldn't be the first time that Hornby has proved me wrong! (Incidentally, I know a store where they still have BIL/HAL stock unsold from those days - or they did last time I looked. CJL)

Edited June 28, 2019 by dibber25

[adb968008]

17 hours ago, dibber25 said:

DCC provision and directional lighting are minimum standard specifications these days. A model without them may well satisfy some customers, but not enough to make it viable - and the inability to attract enough customers to make such a project viable is exactly why a model APT project is where it is today. 

DCC yes, lighting No, and to be clear ...APT No.

 

Theres no lights in anything Hornby has newly tooled this year... none in the mk3’s, none in the Bulleids, non in the GW stock.

 

Bachmann has in the mk2fs... and if this is the “must” have you clearly defined... why are they so cheap right now ? - is it the Hornby railroad quality coach coming to market at half the price ?

 

So Why does it “have” to be in an EMU/DMU ?

 

It can be tooled with provision for it, so after market suppliers can fill the gap... that is what Hornby has with its mk2f.

 

The elephant in the tool room is EMUs/DMUs, if the hobby has a future it needs to get a realistic grip of it... Those kids standing on today’s platforms will be seeking something they’ve seen, that they can relate to,rather than something they haven’t... and the parents paying, will want something they can afford and can assemble...

Hornby can do this, whilst I wasn’t originally convinced new New Hornbys approach, back in 2018, I now clearly see they have re-identified with the market, lesser detailed, better painted modern relevant products are doing quite well.....

 

You might say we who buy have no clue about what we want, “wanting” a car and “needing” a Ferrari aren’t the same. 

 

Those railroad 66’s are near sell out, those super detailed Lord Nelson’s are near half price...the s/h Bachmann Nelson’s have held their own.

 

I feel it is price that is the factor.. and from what i’m Seeing a compromise on price for a good paint job trumps an up sell on super details from China, and think that’s why Hornby seems to be turning around... they recognised the markets price limit and are changing to meet it,

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 29, 2019 by adb968008

[njee20]

He said directional lighting (ie head and tail lights), not interior lighting. 

 

I’ve never bought into the “people want to model what they’ve seen”. Hardly anyone will have a good memory of pre-grouping, but it’s still massively popular.  

[Gibbo675]

13 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I feel it is price that is the factor.. and from what i’m Seeing a compromise on price for a good paint job trumps an up sell on super details from China, and think that’s why Hornby seems to be turning around... they recognised the markets price limit and are changing to meet it,

 

Hi adb,

 

You are right on the mark with just this point alone. There is always a degree of if it looks right it is right and a lot of the smaller super detail parts are a compliment rather than a necessity. My own view upon super detail parts is that they do up to a point affect functionality due to being prone to breakage in both handling and incidents such as simple derailments.

 

Also a model that requires the fitting of super detail parts allows for a slight more for a modeler to do than the opening of the box !

 

Gibbo. 

[Fenman]

36 minutes ago, Gibbo675 said:

...

Also a model that requires the fitting of super detail parts allows for a slight more for a modeler to do than the opening of the box !

...

 

After the Second World War, US food manufacturers started experimenting with evermore complex convenience goods. One of the best-sellers was a cake mixture that just required you to add water and an egg, mix, then bake. 

 

Their R&D team worked really hard, and eventually produced a formula that didn’t even need the egg added - just water. It was triumphantly launched - but was a dismal flop. 

 

The market research teams worked hard to find out why and, eventually, discovered it was because the new formula left the housewives felt utterly deskilled. If they had to add an egg, it was “proper” cooking. But just adding water reduced it to a menial task that left them (formerly proud 1950s housewives) feeling embarrassed. 

 

The company reverted to the old formula, and sales shot up again. 

 

Maybe most of us have the mentality of 1950s US housewives...?

 

Paul

[woodenhead]

Why does this thread feel like a recipe for a new APT that has no backer.

 

This sort of everyone throwing in ideas and make it up as you go along was a DJM approach, sadly KR Models has also succumbed with a very late change in the drive style on his GT3 which may yet prove to be an issue.

 

If there is a market for an APT-P you're going to need a company that has been there done that not a new start up.  They will need to propose the model at the appropriate level of fidelity to match the price bracket that will sell enough and do so with the specification and CADs already prepared and ready for tooling.

[Allegheny1600]

 

 

1

8 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

If there is a market for an APT-P you're going to need a company that has been there done that not a new start up.  They will need to propose the model at the appropriate level of fidelity to match the price bracket that will sell enough and do so with the specification and CADs already prepared and ready for tooling.

Exactly!

Unless and until the APT is at the top of annual wishlists, no responsible company is going to risk it.

As has been established, this is a million pound plus project and no reasonable business is ever going to put such a punt on unless it is backed up by very strong public demand.

There is some demand there but simply not enough.

[Roy Langridge]

1 hour ago, njee20 said:

He said directional lighting (ie head and tail lights), not interior lighting. 

 

I’ve never bought into the “people want to model what they’ve seen”. Hardly anyone will have a good memory of pre-grouping, but it’s still massively popular.  

 

I think there is a difference between what modellers want and what will entice a new, young market into model railways. Current scene is good for the latter. 

 

Roy

[phil gollin]

.

 

IF people think there is such a market for a "new" APT they can always commission a new model.

 

.

[melmoth]

12 minutes ago, phil gollin said:

.

 

IF people think there is such a market for a "new" APT they can always commission a new model.

 

.

 

Funny you should mention that, because I'm the CEO of WTF Models and I'm looking for expressions of interest in a model of the iconic BR AHPT (Advanced Hypothetical Passenger Train). Full specification to follow, but it will include ambiguous bi-directional promises and a state of the art unicorn drive.

[Gibbo675]

Hi Folks,

 

I have a stash of Hornby APT's waiting to be appropriately cut and shut in a similar but not quite 1950's housewife sort of a way for it will not involve the use of an egg ! 

 

Gibbo.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

I have been waiting for WonderTrainzFantasie to break cover. I imagine the full spec will include Werewolf Magic Moonbeam Control,  Vampyr Power and Multi-vital couplings as standard? Can't wait. (Well, it has to be more appealing than steam punk...)

[phil gollin]

.

 

But which sort of tilting mechanism will it use (the "Don Quixote" seems best and ecologically soundest)  -  and what colour will the tilt vomit be ?

 

Will a packet of instant "wrong sort of snow" be included ?

 

.

[melmoth]

1 hour ago, phil gollin said:

But which sort of tilting mechanism will it use (the "Don Quixote" seems best and ecologically soundest)  -  and what colour will the tilt vomit be ?

 

Will a packet of instant "wrong sort of snow" be included ?

 

Good questions.

 

1. We are currently in dispute with our suppliers of the Don Quixote mechanism, but are confident of sourcing an alternative upcycled from original Spanish Air Traffic Control coathangers.

2. Tilt vomit will be British Undulating Green.

3. So long as we can sort out the packaging issues, "the wrong sort of snow" will be included, unfrozen, for fitting by the customer. Other vaguely plausible excuses for the late arrival of the model will be fitted as standard.

 

WTF Models: Limboing Under A Very Low Bar

[Vistisen]

20 hours ago, melmoth said:

 

Funny you should mention that, because I'm the CEO of WTF Models and I'm looking for expressions of interest in a model of the iconic BR AHPT (Advanced Hypothetical Passenger Train). Full specification to follow, but it will include ambiguous bi-directional promises and a state of the art unicorn drive.

Will it be released in the full Brexit livery?