Where is British outline model railway manufacturing heading?

[Jeff Smith]

13 hours ago, rue_d_etropal said:

That would be American OOI think, which was around a few years ago before HO took over.

Going back to 19mm, this has been discussed at length before but I'm afraid 4mm British outline is stuck with 16.5mm for just the reason we are discussing Hornby and train sets, it's called incompatibility.  Lets say Hornby/Bachmann produced a loco in two gauge versions - which one does Uncle Jack buy for the nephew?  How many of each should be the shop stock, and so on!

[PatB]

I suspect that 3D printing, rather than being used directly for volume production models, will first make an impact in streamlining the manufacture of traditional, injection moulded items. 3D printed masters have already been mentioned. As 3D printing in metal develops I can see it being used to print the tooling itself, possibly as consumable inserts in the main blocks of a mould. As tooling still remains an area where many expensive hours of highly skilled labour is required, I can see this bringing down capital costs significantly. 

[tomparryharry]

7 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

Going back to 19mm, this has been discussed at length before but I'm afraid 4mm British outline is stuck with 16.5mm for just the reason we are discussing Hornby and train sets, it's called incompatibility.  Lets say Hornby/Bachmann produced a loco in two gauge versions - which one does Uncle Jack buy for the nephew?  How many of each should be the shop stock, and so on!

 

A simple response to that, if I may. It's called marketing, desirability, fidelity, that sort of thing. Will Uncle jack buy 00 for his young nephew? Undoubtedly so. However, would Uncle Jack buy something a bit different for his own layout? 

 

I agree that we're working with 00 for the foreseeable future. After all, it's easy to achieve. The two largest manufacturers will sit back and say:- "That's yer lot, I'm alright".  However, I think we will all agree that 4mm RTR is fast approaching saturation point. Where next? A company needs to keep introducing  new product. 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we do indeed have a new gauge. The rise of Irish railway modelling is a potential new market. Like many, I've always taken 16.5 mm for granted; it's always been there. But, if I was domiciled in Ireland, I'd be looking for something better. 

 

This brings me back to my hobby horse about 19mm. It's a darn sight closer to 21mm, which where our hypothetical new gauge 'might' hail from. The numbers game starts to stack up when the volume of demand increases. 

 

Peco are a classic example (with all due deference to said company). They have introduced Bullhead for RTR, with a partial range in progress. Give it a few years, before RTR EM makes its debut. Move on a decade,... What's next?

 

Finally. Please, please don't tender the argument that RTR P4 is unobtainable, or unachievable.  3.5 (H0) has been about in RTR for quite a while now.....

 

Cheers,

Ian.

[Andy Hayter]

20 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

 

A simple response to that, if I may. It's called marketing, desirability, fidelity, that sort of thing. Will Uncle jack buy 00 for his young nephew? Undoubtedly so. However, would Uncle Jack buy something a bit different for his own layout? 

 

 

 

I agree with the sentiment and indeed we actually have the example in Maerklin.

 

16V AC system based on three rail operation it sits outside all of the modern norms*.  A few other manufacturers will produce a third rail version for the Maerklinists, but it is by no means universal.  Yet in DACH**, Maerklin is very much the market leader.

 

Simply put Uncle Jack (or should that be Johannes?) does buy his nephew Maerklin, because that is what he has always bought.  Possibly with a comment to said nephew, "One day all of this will be yours".   And does Uncle Johannes buy anything else?  No.  He buys what is compatible with what he already has.

 

It is the reason why I don't indulge in DCC or change to EM/P4

 

* In fairness M have done a lot with their track to make the middle contacts less obvious, but the studs are still very visible from many angles, as is the pick up skate under the loco.

 

** DACH = D (Germany), A (Austria), CH (Switzerland) - from the vehicle international identification

[grahame]

28 minutes ago, tomparryharry said:

 

It's called marketing, desirability, fidelity, that sort of thing. Will Uncle jack buy 00 for his young nephew? Undoubtedly so. However, would Uncle Jack buy something a bit different for his own layout? 

 

 

As far as I can see there are two main issues with that.

 

Firstly, even if marketing could generate interest and sales in a new gauge by far the majority of those sales would simply be switch sales especially if the scale was similar. In your example instead of buying two OO models, one for his own layout and one for his grandson, Uncle Jack would buy one OO for his grandson and one new gauge for himself. The total volume sales hasn't changed but the manufacturer now has to produce and support two product lines. 

 

Secondly a new gauge would need a massive investment to generate the supporting infrastructure (track, locos, coaches and wagon ranges, etc.,) for what is essentially the same scale, to get established and provide a return. 

 

It could be done but it would take time to bring onboard sufficient new adopters to make it worthwhile for manufacturers and cost money. Also they'd need to take care not to discourage those who have invested in an OO set-up over many years feeling they have to ditch and replace it or fear that support for what they have will diminish and dwindle making them resentful.  

 

Surely the manufacturers aim is to increase the size of the market rather than simply switch sales. They really need products and innovations to attract new participants in to the market - I'm not so sure a new gauge would do that. Consequently I see manufacturers investing in making more new products that include features that improve play value and desirability such as sound, computer control, opening doors, raising pantographs and animated accessories, etc., and diversifying the ranges they have within the scale/gauge environments that currently exist.  

 

[MAURICE040947]

10 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Consequently I see manufacturers investing in making more new products that include features that improve play value and desirability such as sound, computer control, opening doors, raising pantographs and animated accessories, etc., and diversifying the ranges they have within the scale/gauge environments that currently exist.  

 

so at the risk of opening a whle new can of worms what will be the next big development, (following on from DCC on board sound). I have been into model railways for 68 years and have seen steady progress and a few dynamic leaps in that time. So what is the next big thing prediction?  Proper sound to include the following train and not just the loco would be good but would it drive neighbouring operators at exhibitions mad listening to it all day.

[Talltim]

On 12/09/2020 at 18:13, johnofwessex said:

My oldest sons grandfather made an interesting point that there are a lot fewer 'skilled' people these days - engineers, mechanics etc who might want a hobby that utilises their skills while my brothers who are both into 'General Aviation' - light aircraft say that numbers active in that field are a fraction of previous years.

I like modelling because it gives me a chance to do something physically skilled (I work in IT).

[grahame]

11 minutes ago, MAURICE040947 said:

 So what is the next big thing prediction?  Proper sound to include the following train and not just the loco would be good but would it drive neighbouring operators at exhibitions mad listening to it all day.

 

Small sensible progress steps I suspect, rather than a one big panacea thing.

 

Sound is a two edged sword marmite thing. To those not directly engaged with the layout eminating the 'sound' it can be very annoying and seem like noise, especially at a distance. One thing that I find amusing is why do those who make and post videos on model railways usually add music over them rather than add the sound of the trains and environment if 'sound' is so desirable and helpful in making it believable?

 

;-)

 

Edited September 15, 2020 by grahame

[Paddy]

28 minutes ago, MAURICE040947 said:

so at the risk of opening a whle new can of worms what will be the next big development, (following on from DCC on board sound). I have been into model railways for 68 years and have seen steady progress and a few dynamic leaps in that time. So what is the next big thing prediction?  Proper sound to include the following train and not just the loco would be good but would it drive neighbouring operators at exhibitions mad listening to it all day.

Not sure the innovation will come from the UK market due to its size.  Look to the large model railway markets (USA, Japan etc.) to see what we might inherit.  For me, the game changer would be self powered models and to get rid of all wiring.  This may not benefit the high end modellers so much but it could transform everything else.

 

Someone who wants “play trains” can simply lay their track down in all manner of configurations including return loops.  Plonk their favourite models on, download the app and away they go.  You get bored with a particular track layout you can easily rip it up and start again.

Edit: You would not even have to enter your track layout in to the app.  Fire up the camera, point it at your masterpiece and boom.

 

All the fun of Brio with proper trains. 
 

It really would be the ultimate table top railway system.

 

Kind regards

 

Paddy

 

Edited September 15, 2020 by Paddy

[tomparryharry]

55 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

As far as I can see there are two main issues with that.

 

Firstly, even if marketing could generate interest and sales in a new gauge by far the majority of those sales would simply be switch sales especially if the scale was similar. In your example instead of buying two OO models, one for his own layout and one for his grandson, Uncle Jack would buy one OO for his grandson and one new gauge for himself. The total volume sales hasn't changed but the manufacturer now has to produce and support two product lines. 

 

Secondly a new gauge would need a massive investment to generate the supporting infrastructure (track, locos, coaches and wagon ranges, etc.,) for what is essentially the same scale, to get established and provide a return. 

 

It could be done but it would take time to bring onboard sufficient new adopters to make it worthwhile for manufacturers and cost money. Also they'd need to take care not to discourage those who have invested in an OO set-up over many years feeling they have to ditch and replace it or fear that support for what they have will diminish and dwindle making them resentful.  

 

Surely the manufacturers aim is to increase the size of the market rather than simply switch sales. They really need products and innovations to attract new participants in to the market - I'm not so sure a new gauge would do that. Consequently I see manufacturers investing in making more new products that include features that improve play value and desirability such as sound, computer control, opening doors, raising pantographs and animated accessories, etc., and diversifying the ranges they have within the scale/gauge environments that currently exist.  

 

I won't counter you view, but I will say that advertising & marketing is exactly what it sets out to do. Do you think that everyday items, such as vacuum cleaners, cars, alcohol, tinned beans got there by magic? Advertising works on commission, so if there is a profit, then someone's working on it.  Company directors are required to find new markets, and exploit and/or develop said markets. Bachmann are working with EFE, Peco have acquired Parkside; the list goes on. 

 

Investment is a bit of a red herring. If there is profit to be made, then it'll be a go situation. Peco produce track for the EMGS society. With the best will in the world, it's not a charity; Bread & milk cost money. 

 

profitability will dictate how these sorts of thing pan out. Desirability by enthusiasts (like you & I) are only indicators about the likelihood of profit; nothing more.  

[grahame]

1 minute ago, tomparryharry said:

I won't counter you view, but I will say that advertising & marketing is exactly what it sets out to do. Do you think that everyday items, such as vacuum cleaners, cars, alcohol, tinned beans got there by magic?

 

I know what marketing is all about, having been a professional and qualified senior marketing manager for 20 years, and its limitations. There is a litany of heavy marketed and promoted 'new' products that have spectacularly failed. Individual's hobby-horses don't always make the grade. 

 

Oh, and I don't believe in product placement by magic, not sure why you think I would.

 

[SD85]

The time to introduce British HO would have been in the 70s TBH, Airfix and Mainline missed a trick there. If they'd concentrated on the higher end of the market with more detailed HO models then Hornby might possibly have switched scales eventually, particularly when they moved production to China. Then again they might not have done, so who knows.

 

Peco are already making EM gauge track aren't they?

 

RTR P4 would be possible, although I think it's unlikely to happen. (Actually, don't SLW offer their Class 24 in 00, EM and P4?) On a related note the main problem with P4 seems to be the hair's width wheel flanges requiring careful track laying and running to avoid derailment. I've often wondered why you can't just compromise a little by having slightly coarser 18.83mm gauge track and EM/00 wheel flanges, so stuff doesn't derail. I've heard that this leads to clearance issues in wheel splashers etc (less of a problem in diesel and electric outline modelling, though), but if the Americans could do 19mm gauge with no problem....

 

The game changer for me, though, would be practical radio control for 4mm scale. The only problem is that the battery packs would require charging, and where do you store them in smaller locos? But the idea of just doing away with conventional layout electricity supply would be very interesting.

Edited September 15, 2020 by SD85

[tomparryharry]

1 minute ago, grahame said:

 

I know what marketing is all about, having been a professional and qualified senior marketing manager for 20 years, and its limitations. There is a litany of heavy marketed and promoted 'new' products that have spectacularly failed. Individual's hobby-horses don't always make the grade. 

 

Oh, and I don't believe in product placement by magic, not sure why you think I would.

 

 

Not for you Grahame, I'm sure, I don't doubt you for a second. But this is thread drift from where it all started. I thought of the progression into the future. Hobby horses don't always make the grade, and you're right.  However, enough ideas do indeed move things forward. Mine is just one of them.

[Jeff Smith]

3 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

Finally. Please, please don't tender the argument that RTR P4 is unobtainable, or unachievable.  3.5 (H0) has been about in RTR for quite a while now.....

RTR HO is definitely not P4 equivalent, that would be P87.....HO has similar wheel and track standards to OO.

[tomparryharry]

1 hour ago, Jeff Smith said:

RTR HO is definitely not P4 equivalent, that would be P87.....HO has similar wheel and track standards to OO.

 

Hello Jeff. A slight crossed wires. methinks. An oft-quoted  mantra is that P4 is unachievable in RTR. My thought is why not?  Apologies to you if I've misdirected you. 

 

Cheers,

Ian.

[Jeff Smith]

Ok, not sure I quite understand the HO reference....but, moving on, I have a Bachmann 57xx re-wheeled with a pre-gauged and quartered set of P4 wheels from Ultrascale - not cheap but excellent quality.

 

I use Gibson wheels for kits and find the BtoB quite sensitive for correct running through my pointwork.  Nevertheless with correct tooling and consistent assembly I believe RTR P4 would be achievable - but at what price?  The most likely route would be an arrangement with Hornby/Bachmann etc to have a business arrangement with a wheel supplier for conversions to be done and marketed under another brand, EFE?

Edited September 15, 2020 by Jeff Smith

[letterspider]

On 13/09/2020 at 16:22, bmthtrains - David said:

I’ll accept the wager - it just be a mass produced 00 model, made in qtys of at least 1000 models and completely 3D printed in colour with only glazing etc added afterwards.

 

If such a model exists by then, I’ll buy you one! 

 

David 

 

Hi David, I forgot to follow this topic and didn't see your answer.

I don't accept those conditions you have added - the minimum run at this time is around 504? Also why does it have to be 3D printed in colour - the current technology for applying livery is perfectly fit for purpose - there is no economic or technical need for that process to develop.

The same can be said to be true of etched parts.

I don't envisage Sander Kan will be producing 3D models because of the scale of investment in injection moulding, the existent distribution network and pre existent world wide markets.

What I see happening is the increasing cost of new models will cause the emergence of smaller manufacturers, smaller production runs of

much desired but neglected classes. However it may well be that we will have the stick the details on ourselves - as was the case with Vitrains models

 

[PatB]

Something to remember about both H0 and US 00 is that American r-t-r manufacturers have a long history of being fairly elastic about scale dimensions. Either scale may have a nominally correct scale:gauge ratio, but I'd bet quite heavily that many models, at least in the past, have been dimensionally compromised, particularly in width, to accommodate over width wheels and chunky valve gear. 

[Jeff Smith]

This is an oft cited argument for OO.  The outside face of OO wheels, particularly noticeable in steam locos, is only slightly underscale.  It's the large flanges and tyre width that brings it to 16.5mm and the narrow gauge look.  This in turn means a relatively easy conversion to EM or P4.

 

American standard gauge O scale runs on 5' track, great if you are modelling railroads of the 1860s!

[Steamport Southport]

5 hours ago, letterspider said:

 

Hi David, I forgot to follow this topic and didn't see your answer.

I don't accept those conditions you have added - the minimum run at this time is around 504? Also why does it have to be 3D printed in colour - the current technology for applying livery is perfectly fit for purpose - there is no economic or technical need for that process to develop.

The same can be said to be true of etched parts.

I don't envisage Sander Kan will be producing 3D models because of the scale of investment in injection moulding, the existent distribution network and pre existent world wide markets.

What I see happening is the increasing cost of new models will cause the emergence of smaller manufacturers, smaller production runs of

much desired but neglected classes. However it may well be that we will have the stick the details on ourselves - as was the case with Vitrains models

 

 

And where is the ViTrains range now? I think I saw it next to a Dodo.

 

All what happened was a few people got reasonably priced models to detail. The average "modeller" didn't buy them as they didn't like having to add the parts. They bought the Bachmann version instead and the ViT models were dumped in the bargain bins for £30.

 

Not a good idea to follow ideas that have failed. What next? Models with no numbers? Always suggested, but has failed every time it's been tried.

 

People want finished models not half finished. If they want to build things themselves, they are usually already doing so.

 

 

Jason

[TrainMan2001]

On 14/09/2020 at 07:35, Jeff Smith said:

Having built a small 3D tank loco in 4mm I can attest to a currently unacceptable finish compared to injection molding.  I picked the 'fine' more expensive finish (about 3 years ago) but the material was very fragile and hard to get smooth.  It came with a chassis that could have been used for un-compensated OO.  I complicated things by adding compensation for P4 - I like a challenge.  However it needed as much weight as I could fit in.  Interestingly it did come with brass 3D printed connecting and coupling rods!

 

I cannot see 3D being used for mass production.

Do you have any pictures of the loco?

[Mel_H]

On 10/09/2020 at 16:34, Joseph_Pestell said:

My only comment on this would be look across the Channel and North Sea. Large numbers of new small producers (commissioners) have thrived there since the last recession and made the historic manufacturers look rather flat-footed.

 

And in Australia Accusion Models is doing a nice line in high quality items too (modern traction)

[Steamport Southport]

15 minutes ago, TrainMan2001 said:

Do you have any pictures of the loco?

 

In the link in his signature.

[Mel_H]

On 13/09/2020 at 13:03, bmthtrains - David said:

Where is UK manufacturing going? Where it now now for a while probably - the old, formerly dominant big boys no longer leading the pack as many small, dynamic, but probably short lived start ups take a bigger combined chunk of the market.

 

By short lived I mean 10 or 20 or so years as their proprietors commission/manufacture models. These firms are disrupting the market in a very welcome way, but long term, Hornby and Bachmann will still be here in 40 years time, long after the smaller ones have gone.

 

Not because they fail, but because they are the work of specific individuals rather than large companies. For example (not presuming to know anything about their plans), will Revolution or Cavalex continue once the talented people behind them eventually retire?

 

I see a slow shifting carousel of these small disrupters continuing for decades, all the while the big names carry on as now.

 

David

 

Most industries, and model railways are little different, show that when the founders retire they either sell the business or pass it on. 

 

Growth by acquisition is a common method. Most recently we've seen FTG Models' SPA wagon pass to Kernow, and DJM tooling pass to Kernow.

 

We've also seen this in the 'cottage industry' sector where volumes are relatively small.

 

Smaller suppliers aren't mainly motivated by profit per se, but by a passion to produce something that won't otherwise be produced - generally due to the risk and perceived small market volumes. 

 

RevolutioN is possibly the best example of this, although there are others, including Model Rail, which has brought a number of models through (despite being relegated to the 'Smaller Suppliers' section of RMWeb, due to it being a competitor, when it's produced more than KR Models (just an observation).

 

It's only the likes of Hornby or Bachmann that have a big enough range to have a catalogue and product longevity. Smaller supplies tend to be 'one shots' for many of their models, although EFE Rail has the potential to change that.

 

With regards to the future, in our little inward-looking world, we can all get excited about TT, P4 and other details, but most of the people, most of the time buy RTR from a model shop and play trains (young and old).

 

Boys are fascinated by movement (a bit like cats) and want to build bigger and better things, hence the continuing popularity of Brio et al. 

 

As long as manufacturers keep innovating - of these Hornby is the most innovative - then the younger market will continue to be engaged.

 

Hornby's innovations, such as TTS (twin track sound), TTS van, forthcoming bluetooth control, etc are in the 'affordable' end of the market.

 

What people on here generally are is in the niche, specialist, low volume end (I include myself in this). Where we get our 'play value' costs a lot more...

 

For the younger market, having a physical catalogue (or chart like Hornby used to do) is key (it's about aspiration) and showing what can be done.

 

Hornby's brand is so strong, that it's recognised and trusted by the general buyers/entrants. And, it offers a complete range.

 

Finally, additive manufacturing (aka 3D printing) offers huge potential as the costs fall and quality improves. This is being driven by manufacturing where small runs - or products called off as they are needed by customers - obviates the need to hold inventory for slow-moving lines. For example, Mercedes-Benz trucks now provides some parts that are 3D printed for exactly this reason.

 

It's got huge potential - probably on the same scale as the explosion of growth in plastic injection moulding did, replacing die-cast/tinplate, in the 1950s/60s.

 

It's an interesting discussion. Let's come back in 10 years and see how wrong we all were?!

 

 

Edited September 15, 2020 by Mel_H

[brianusa]

Over the years, topics such as this have been avidly discussed amongst enthusiasts as well as members of the general public who might be future customers, but the great divide remains the same.  Enthusiasts wouldn't be caught dead with a train set and the GP are unlikely ever build a brass model.  Both parties will have some crossover but it will be insignificant.  The  long term viability of the train set remains in question except as a possible source of parts, only to be replaced by suppliers of scale parts demanded by those to whom absolute fidelity is paramount and whose side of the hobby will most likely endure.  How long though, remains in question.

      Brian