Class 88/93

[newbryford]

10 minutes ago, 313201 said:

I have only started reading this topic again tonight and just had a thought being, if the 93s are almost identical to the 88s, would it not have made sense to number the locos in consecutive numbering 88011 - 880xx depending on how many locos would make the entire fleet or number them as 88101 - 881xx.

 

My basis for this point was if the new locos are to be class 93s, they could have purchased any out of seevice 92s and upgraded the locos with more powerful transformers and motors ( depending on what is available ), turning the pantographs around so that they are opposite to the way they are currently set up for example.

 

The othervway to look at the new locos is that if they are foing to be based on the current class 88s then to distinguish the 2 classes, why not have the built longer than the 88s therefore giving more internal room for the parts required and 2 x 3 axle bogies.

 

 

 

As the 93 hasn't materialised yet, there is no way of knowing - or even speculating - what they will actually look like yet.

[speculation mode on]

If, as reported previously, DRS "own" the design rights to the 68/88, then at least the minimum difference will be in the cab end profile - in the same way that Virgin Voyagers - 220/221 - differ from the later 222 builds.

 

See my previous comment a few weeks ago (page 1) re:  the 93 being a 6-axle loco.

 

[spec mode off] Not quite sure what effect that turning round the pantographs on a 92 would do.......

 

[adb968008]

28 minutes ago, 313201 said:

I have only started reading this topic again tonight and just had a thought being, if the 93s are almost identical to the 88s, would it not have made sense to number the locos in consecutive numbering 88011 - 880xx depending on how many locos would make the entire fleet or number them as 88101 - 881xx.

 

My basis for this point was if the new locos are to be class 93s, they could have purchased any out of seevice 92s and upgraded the locos with more powerful transformers and motors ( depending on what is available ), turning the pantographs around so that they are opposite to the way they are currently set up for example.

 

The othervway to look at the new locos is that if they are foing to be based on the current class 88s then to distinguish the 2 classes, why not have the built longer than the 88s therefore giving more internal room for the parts required and 2 x 3 axle bogies.

 

A diesel engine which would be bigger and more powerful than the engine fitted in the 88s along with a bigger fuel tank could allow more mileage to be done in the event of an ohle failure or possibly for rescuing failed trains if no other locos are available at the time.

tri-mode is a big difference from a bi-mode.

look at Thameslink units... they didnt become 319/5.. became 769 and 799.

in todays privatised world, even class and subclass are determined by ownership.. look at gbrf’s 66’s.. i’m surprised we havent had class 92/1 and 92/2 yet.

 

[adb968008]

9 minutes ago, newbryford said:

 

 

If, as reported previously, DRS "own" the design rights to the 68/88,

 

I thought Stadler (vice Vossloh) would own it, as afterall its part of the Euro light / dual family.
 

If DRS had a claim i’d imagine it's their specific configuration, but not the whole intellectual property of a design seeing service in several countries and continents, with multiple different gauging, software, prime mover and other configurations.

 

If you want hours of entertainment, just google Afro4000... the family connection and lineage is clear, but its definitely the elephant in the kitchen.

Edited October 26, 2020 by adb968008

[newbryford]

47 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I thought Stadler (vice Vossloh) would own it, as afterall its part of the Euro light / dual family.
 

If DRS had a claim i’d imagine it's their specific configuration, but not the whole intellectual property of a design seeing service in several countries and continents, with multiple different gauging, software, prime mover and other configurations.

 

If you want hours of entertainment, just google Afro4000... the family connection and lineage is clear, but its definitely the elephant in the kitchen.

 

Probably, but as per the previous poster, if the 220/221 v 222 is anything to go by, then at least the cabs will be a slightly different shape - thus nullifying any model manufacturer simply "tweaking" the tooling - or calling the proposed 93 an 88/1.

[frobisher]

20 hours ago, 313201 said:

why not have the built longer than the 88s therefore giving more internal room for the parts required and 2 x 3 axle bogies.

 

As I recall, the Class 67 (with which the 68 and 88 share a heritage) was originally meant to be a C0-C0 (like some of its European brethren) but a suitable licensing agreement couldn't be reached for the desired UK 125mph cleared bogies (those under the Class 89...), so there is likely room for suitable 3 axle bogies under there already

[TomScrut]

20 hours ago, adb968008 said:

I thought Stadler (vice Vossloh) would own it, as afterall its part of the Euro light / dual family.
 

If DRS had a claim i’d imagine it's their specific configuration, but not the whole intellectual property of a design seeing service in several countries and continents, with multiple different gauging, software, prime mover and other configurations.

 

If you want hours of entertainment, just google Afro4000... the family connection and lineage is clear, but its definitely the elephant in the kitchen.

 

I believe it is the "face" of the loco. I think this was discussed at length in the previous "we want a class 88" thread. I think the context there was that all the negotiations regarding image usage for the Dapol model were with DRS, not Vossloh.

[adb968008]

39 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

 

I believe it is the "face" of the loco. I think this was discussed at length in the previous "we want a class 88" thread. I think the context there was that all the negotiations regarding image usage for the Dapol model were with DRS, not Vossloh.

If I want to make a model of a Transit Van need to talk to Ford.

If I want to make a model of Uncle Bobs Carpet Bagging Transit, including the dead rotting teddy bear cable tied to the front  grill I need to talk to Uncle Bob as well as Ford.

 

 

Edited October 26, 2020 by adb968008

[TomScrut]

9 hours ago, adb968008 said:

If I want to make a model of a Transit Van need to talk to Ford.

If I want to make a model of Uncle Bobs Carpet Bagging Transit, including the dead rotting teddy bear cable tied to the front  grill I need to talk to Uncle Bob as well as Ford.

 

Exactly. But as I said it is mentioned in that thread somewhere words to the effect of "DRS own the design rights so all negotiations were with them".

[Dixie Dean]

All we want is for Dapol to take a punt or let someone else have a go.  I'd just like an 88 or 2 on my layout.   It will involve a different body and some alterations to chassis from the 68, but pretty much everything else would be identical.  Must be worth something in the cost to develop it for Dapol. 

[adb968008]

54 minutes ago, Dixie Dean said:

All we want is for Dapol to take a punt or let someone else have a go.  I'd just like an 88 or 2 on my layout.   It will involve a different body and some alterations to chassis from the 68, but pretty much everything else would be identical.  Must be worth something in the cost to develop it for Dapol. 

i’d have imagined Dapol would have been best placed for a 73/9, but thats gone to Accurascale.
 

If that was a missed oppourtunity, the chances of a Dapol class 88 i’d wager to be lower.

With the churn of cheap 68001 bodies about, to me they are good fodder for a class 88 kit of 3D printed parts, even if they old fashioned way of sitting on a slightly wrong chassis was the compromise.
 

It gives a low cost way of modelling, if it fails.. you've still got a good 68, and youve only lost a scrap body, a kit and some time, whilst learning a bit.

if it is a success, you've a decent 68 body to pass on and lower your class 88 cost, and of course a market of people looking for them to do their own.

 

 

 

 

 

[TravisM]

I think personally that for the moment the Class 93 should be discounted as for now, it’s just a concept.  Unless something thing substantial appears, such as mock-ups, technical drawings etc, I’m going to dismiss it and concentrate on hopefully someone will produce a OO scale model of a Class 88.

[njee20]

2 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

All we want is for Dapol to take a punt or let someone else have a go.  I'd just like an 88 or 2 on my layout.   It will involve a different body and some alterations to chassis from the 68, but pretty much everything else would be identical.  Must be worth something in the cost to develop it for Dapol. 

So apart from the body and the chassis everything else is the same...? Erm... 

[Dixie Dean]

26 minutes ago, jools1959 said:

I think personally that for the moment the Class 93 should be discounted as for now, it’s just a concept.  Unless something thing substantial appears, such as mock-ups, technical drawings etc, I’m going to dismiss it and concentrate on hopefully someone will produce a OO scale model of a Class 88.

 

Indeed, it may never get built.

[TravisM]

1 hour ago, njee20 said:

So apart from the body and the chassis everything else is the same...? Erm... 

Wiper blades........

[mdvle]

3 hours ago, Dixie Dean said:

All we want is for Dapol to take a punt or let someone else have a go. 

 

I think we need to remember that we don't know what the terms were/are, and thus assuming Dapol is blocking a Class 88 could be unfair to Dapol - there have in the past been reports on here that the Class 68 agreement only covered the Class 68.

 

But even if we ignore the issue of whether there is a market for a Class 88 model or not, all of the manufacturers will only have so much budget for new tooling (or even partial new tooling) in any given year and thus won't be able to make every model they may wish they could.

 

[adb968008]

17 hours ago, mdvle said:

But even if we ignore the issue of whether there is a market for a Class 88 model or not, all of the manufacturers will only have so much budget for new tooling (or even partial new tooling) in any given year and thus won't be able to make every model they may wish they could.

 

The cynic in me would re-write it as

Some of the manufacturers will only have so much budget for steam era tooling (or even partial new tooling) in any given year and thus won't be able to make any modern model unless theres a bit of budget leftover.

psycho-analysis..

 

We have to accept in any business, justification is based on research, which is based on experience, which ultimately comes down to human mindsets.

If those mindsets are older, the risk will be perceived to be lower on past experiences, than current ones, unless its a “no brainer”.
So its only natural longer term experience will preference older models, especially if those decision makers are also guided by like minded, like aged mindsets.

 

Conversely, more youthful mindsets need (and want) to take greater risk as experience is both less, but also more current. Even youthful new comers to the hobby predominantly pick prototypes that are middle-aged.

 

The world only changes when you take a big risk on youngsters... the last time that happened was the mid1990’s... The WWW & Mobile devices were the result...dot commers in the 90’s were often teenagers (and they did nearly blow it in 2002).

 

if our hobby selected a bunch of teenagers to make a model, I doubt it would be an unpreserved steam 0-6-0 freight loco with models of unbraked vans, and stations with farm animals and milk churns.

 

 

Edited October 28, 2020 by adb968008

[159220]

Can I squash this 88/93 synergy, please? If and ONLY IF the class 93 is ever ordered for ROG/Orion hire. Though the 93 shall share a lot of components in common with the 88. It shall not be of the same design (due to IP rights and Stadler design)! See attached the proposed class 93. I want to strongly note, the chances of this actually being ordered are slim!!! I suggest, if the 88 model is going to happen, it is not dependant on the 93. 

 

 

[TomScrut]

19 hours ago, mdvle said:

thus assuming Dapol is blocking a Class 88 could be unfair to Dapol

 

Yes especially given it was reported on the other thread that when the deal was done for the 68, it was just for the 68.

[mdvle]

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Some of the manufacturers will only have so much budget for steam era tooling (or even partial new tooling) in any given year and thus won't be able to make any modern model unless theres a bit of budget leftover.

 

I agree for the most part, there is at least one and maybe two of the manufacturers that probably are focusing on the steam era too much (though I don't think I am as negative to the demand for steam as you are).

 

That said I think the UK market is at an interesting point where the march of progress means the loco is dead and the multiple unit is king, and that is a problem for the manufacturers.

 

Quote

psycho-analysis..

 

We have to accept in any business, justification is based on research, which is based on experience, which ultimately comes down to human mindsets.

If those mindsets are older, the risk will be perceived to be lower on past experiences, than current ones, unless its a “no brainer”.
So its only natural longer term experience will preference older models, especially if those decision makers are also guided by like minded, like aged mindsets.

 

There is some of that, but I suspect it is more driven at the moment by a need for "sure things" given the financial circumstances around the dominant player (with the other dominant player not having financial issues but being essential MIA due to circumstances beyond their control for the last several years).

 

Quote

Conversely, more youthful mindsets need (and want) to take greater risk as experience is both less, but also more current. Even youthful new comers to the hobby predominantly pick prototypes that are middle-aged.

 

This is a reflection of where the majority of the market is - as always dominated by people in their 40s/50s

 

That said, if the modern railway was still loco dominated things might be different given how much modellers like buying locos.

 

Quote

The world only changes when you take a big risk on youngsters... the last time that happened was the mid1990’s... The WWW & Mobile devices were the result...dot commers in the 90’s were often teenagers (and they did nearly blow it in 2002).

 

That would be the 35 year old "youngster" who invented the WWW?

 

The 35 year old who founded Palm.

 

The 40 year olds who created the Blackberry.

 

The 30 year old who founded Amazon.

 

Or the 40+ year old Steve Jobs who drove those mobile devices - music player, then smartphone, to the masses (and his mid-30's designer in Jony Ive)

 

Or the much older venture capitalists who funded all those dot.com ventures.

 

I am sure there were some teenagers, and the founders of Facebook would have been close, but usually more the slave labour who if they bet lucky got in on an IPO but otherwise got nothing.

 

Quote

if our hobby selected a bunch of teenagers to make a model, I doubt it would be an unpreserved steam 0-6-0 freight loco with models of unbraked vans, and stations with farm animals and milk churns.

 

But the bigger question is would they still be in business in 2 years, and I suspect the answer would be a resounding no given that they likely would not be aiming at where the money is - it isn't in the teenage and 20 year olds market.

 

Unless of course the perceived wisdom that people won't pay the money for a 4 or 5 car dmu/emu is wrong (which would be great).

Edited October 28, 2020 by mdvle

[33052]

3 hours ago, 159220 said:

Can I squash this 88/93 synergy, please? If and ONLY IF the class 93 is ever ordered for ROG/Orion hire. Though the 93 shall share a lot of components in common with the 88. It shall not be of the same design (due to IP rights and Stadler design)! See attached the proposed class 93. I want to strongly note, the chances of this actually being ordered are slim!!! I suggest, if the 88 model is going to happen, it is not dependant on the 93. 

 

 

Potential Models aside that looks rather nice - almost Siemens Vectron-like but with cleaner lines.

[Dixie Dean]

35 minutes ago, 33052 said:

Potential Models aside that looks rather nice - almost Siemens Vectron-like but with cleaner lines.

 

I wouldn't mine one of them on my layout either!!

[TravisM]

I was looking at ROG’s Facebook page and they were showing pictures of 37611 undergoing a overhaul and they casually mentioned that it will be set aside after five years as the new Class 93’s will be coming on stream.

 

Looks like the Class 93 might be a “goer”.

[adb968008]

4 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

 

 

 

That would be the 35 year old "youngster" who invented the WWW?

 

The 35 year old who founded Palm.

 

The 40 year olds who created the Blackberry.

 

The 30 year old who founded Amazon.

 

Or the 40+ year old Steve Jobs who drove those mobile devices - music player, then smartphone, to the masses (and his mid-30's designer in Jony Ive)

And Isambard Kingdom Brunel who built the GWR...all on his own, fancy that, must have worked hard.
 

And Winston Churchill, designed, masterminded and executed the defeat of Germany, all on his own a one man army...

Theres no I in team, but history often only records one voice... the inventor, not the team who expanded it.

 

I was in Silicon valley in the 90’s, i was in my younger years, met some big names, but most of us (10’s of thousands of us) were like me.. uni grads, with stock options, coding 20 hours a day, and partying the other 4. 
 

They created more in 5 years then the inventors who invented the idea over the previous 30. 

 

None of the names you mentioned created internet forums, ebay, jpg, mpg, online banking, paypal, CAD, facebook or any number of household things in use for this hobby... without the inventors you mention they couldnt explore the idea, but the world of IT exists due to the efforts of youngsters of the mid-1990’s and their creativity exploring a new technology.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 28, 2020 by adb968008

[TomScrut]

4 hours ago, mdvle said:

That said I think the UK market is at an interesting point where the march of progress means the loco is dead and the multiple unit is king, and that is a problem for the manufacturers.

 

And it will be an interesting thing to see in the future, I know that there are a lot of people who really dislike the fact locos have been replaced by MUs. I don't really care to be honest, a HST or 90/91 with a rake of coaches and a DVT may as well be a MU pretty much hadn't it? Technically they are locos but operationally they are similar to MUs. It's not like years gone by where the loco ran around or got pulled out of the terminal by another loco. I just like modern stuff whatever it is really.

 

But where I am going with that is that because the real life railway is going that way, with the 68/mk5s being about the only loco hauled daily service now with a future, are people going to lose interest with current day and so that acts as a double edged sword against the market given MUs are also generally less popular because people can't for some reason stomach paying £230 for a 2 car DMU when they'll pay £160 for a loco.

 

And so eventually will there end up being a lump of modellers who previously kept bang up to date sticking around 2020 because a) they don't like the newer stuff, b) the newer stuff doesn't exist as a model or c) both?

 

4 hours ago, mdvle said:

Unless of course the perceived wisdom that people won't pay the money for a 4 or 5 car dmu/emu is wrong (which would be great).

 

Exactly. I think most of the problem with the 4/5 car MUs is the selections, for example Bachmann did Desiros but didn't do any that ran anywhere north of the Midlands. TPE 350 I expect would have done well.

 

And then why on earth nobody has done the Electrostar is beyond me. I'd have thought they would have done better than Desiros TBH, they are more prolific.

 

Hornby don't look like they struggle shifting 800s at £300-400 each. I think assuming they can adapt to different classes getting that will work out to be a masterstroke. I think a TPE and/or HT 802 would do well, and then there are WCML and MML variants to come albeit with different front ends and carriage lengths in the case of MML.

 

6 hours ago, 159220 said:

 

 

 

That's cool, SudExpress make a HO version of the EU version:

 

https://www.sudexpressmodels.eu/leaflets/EuroDual_1stRun_p1.pdf

Edited October 28, 2020 by TomScrut

[adb968008]

Lovely models sud express, I picked up this one last year... The Euro 4000, close relative to the class 68..
 

i’m after an Israeli version, but they have completely dissapeared from the market. I bought this thinking of an Afro 4000 in Prasa colours, but no one will take the job on.

 

Interestingly, under the hood, this model seems closer to a Hattons 66 than a Dapol 68.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 28, 2020 by adb968008