2021 hopes

[Craig1989]

Hoping that there some obscure engineering stuff like the railvac or point carrying wagons. I can bet people there will still be seacows and China clay wagons 

 

cheers craig 

[TomScrut]

10 minutes ago, Craig1989 said:

some obscure engineering stuff

 

Rail grinder would be cool, but given the MPV doesn't seem to have made a comeback from Bachmann maybe this sort of stuff is a step too far into a niche? I don't know.

[Les1952]

I can predict with absolute certainty that

 

Whatever particular model I think is an absolute certainty won't be on the list!

 

Les

 

Edited January 3, 2021 by Les1952

[The Johnster]

20 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Perhaps those asking for yet another Pannier would be happy to have the Railroad half cab pannier return once again ?

No; or at least I would not be happy.  I've got a Railroad half cab 2721, and live with it's many faults and inaccuracie; don't want to do all the work on another one thank you!.  It runs on a spare Bachmann 57xx chassis which, while correct for some 'Collettised' 2721s, has the wrong type of fishbelly coupling rods for my prototype, 2761 (which should have fluted parallel rods), has incorrect wheel spacing for the Hornby 2721 body which was tooled to fit the generic Jinty derived chassis, itself not correct for a Jinty or any other body it was ever put under AFAIK (unless you include Thomas as nobody has ever said what his wheel spacings are).  So, I have a loco which has an incorrect roof, plastic skirts beneath the boiler which have been cut away leaving the Bachmann mech visible, incorrectly spaced splashers that don't properly match up with the wheels, plastic skirts, and the wrong coupling rods, and which I have worked up as much as I can to correct. 

 

She has a new chimney, dome, and safety valve cover, glazed cab spectacles, real coal, lamp irons, a new smokebox dart, and new buffers (from the 57xx that donated the chassis), planked cab floor, crew, and has been repainted to 1942-5 black austerity GWR 'Grotesque' livery and lettering, as repainted in 1942 at Caerphilly.  The canvas weather sheet is modelled in the 'deployed' position, giving her a rather racy drop head coupe look...

 

I've put quite a bit of effort into her and am fond of her, so tolerate her shortcomings, but would retire her in a heartbeat for a retooled version to modern standards.  The Bachmann chassis gives the correct wheel spacing and very considerably improved running but the model is fundamentally wrong.  A poorly detailed model that is dimensionally accurate can at least be worked up into something good, but 2761 will never be right whatever I do to her.

[Jack P]

 

6 hours ago, Big James said:

After recently servicing majority of most of my SR tender locomotives I had a thought and trawling through this thread no one mentioned it. What about the LSWR H15’s. Long lived, multiple liveries, can be turned out in LSWR colours for the pre-grouping colours, survived to the BR period and there was 26 of them. 
But what goes against them is none have been preserved and they look quite similar to the n15 (but I don’t think that’s a drawback like it used to be).

 

The 'Class similarity' with the N15 and S15 could be avoided by doing the "Chonker" H15's? Surely (at least from the front) they couldn't be confused for any other maunsell/ex-LSWR 4-6-0's!

 

 

[Big James]

1 minute ago, Jack P said:

The 'Class similarity' with the N15 and S15 could be avoided by doing the "Chonker" H15's? Surely (at least from the front) they couldn't be confused for any other maunsell/ex-LSWR 4-6-0's!

I agree with you. But it was the excuse given by Bachmann and Hornby for not doing the U class, because it was similar to the N class already produced by Bachmann. But I feel like we’ve moved on from that and Hornby releasing the S15 has finally put that to bed. 
 

big james 

[mdvle]

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

If so why does steam still generally dominate when it comes to RTR offerings.

 

Does it?

 

It seems to be that almost every diesel loco class has been produced at least once in RTR, with many have more than one version available, and the mainstream electric locos are all now available/available soon.

 

But you conveniently ignored my next point where I said steam would never disappear - steam era layouts simply offer too many advantages whether it be the excitement of moving parts or the operational benefits of the proverbial branchline terminus.

 

So what we essentially have are 2 "main" eras of interest - steam/early diesel and the floating bubble of whatever was the teenage years of the 50+/- x year olds.

 

 

 

 

[The Johnster]

6 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

 

Thank you Phil. I also forgot the I3 class atlantics. I reckon there's an era-1 model on its way, but we'll have to wait until Tuesday,...

 

Wait! There's someone at the door...  "Not you again! Crash! Bang! Wallop! Gerrof! Ouch! Arrgh! Ouch...."

 

New  announcement. 

 

"Due to circumstances beyond our control, Mr. Smith met with an 'unfortunate accident' as he appeared to fall down the stairs..... 37 times......

You've been inside Penarth Police Station, then, Ian?  Can't park outside for the tanker delivering the grease for the steps...

[mdvle]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

We have already established that models DO NOT share tooling!

 

Have we?

 

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

Remember Hornby etc do not manufacture the models themselves - they contract it out to lots of different factories in China and having one set of tooling that has to be passed around is going to massively restrictive.

 

Sorry, but no.  Nobody is going to spend $100,000+ on tooling for every variant of a model they may want to offer - that is a quick way to go out of business.

 

All of the North American manufacturers (who are much more open in answering questions about doing stuff) make it clear that decision making is based in a large part around sharing components/parts - because that reduces the tooling costs, thus increasing the profit.

 

They talk about, when deciding what new project to pursue, about "platforms" that allow tooling to be shared across multiple different but similar models, thus spreading the tooling cost risk across multiple models.

 

Which is why Athearn has stated if they make the SD9, then they would make the family - SD9/SD18/SD24

 

Or why ScaleTrains said no to a request for the SD70ACe-T4  - because the prototype is so unique that it would share no tooling with any existing models (and the prototype was a failure).

 

Or this behind the scenes tour of Bowser, where he shows all the interchangeable parts that can be combined into making different models

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud6mesWoako

 

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

As such if Hornby wished to model the new EMT variant then they would create a complete set of tooling for the model!

 

The only reason Hornby would create new tooling was if the existing tooling could not be used to make the model - and given the shorter length of the carriages this is likely the case.

 

And given that it likely needs new tooling, and given that the only operator (hence livery) is EMR, and given the existing Class 80x models, it is most likely that the Class 810 won't be made (at least as an accurate model) unless more operators (and hence liveries) pick up the class.
 

[The Johnster]

19 minutes ago, mdvle said:

If so why does steam still generally dominate when it comes to RTR offerings.

One of the reasons for this might be that the RTR producers are constantly looking for new locos to model that the competition hasn't already had a go at, and there are more types of steam locos produced in, let's say the 1900-1960 period than there are diesels and electrics combined including multiple units in the 60 years since 1960.  By and large, the railway industry has, over the 120 total years I am mentioning, increasingly tended towards standardisation within the many pre-grouping companies, then further within the Big 4 period, further still under BR, and the current scene of a variety of TOCs use the same standard products in different liveries.  Of course the trend to standardisation was stymied by the Grouping and then again by Nationalisation.

 

This is clearly not the only reason, because of course the more mundane steam locos are becoming forgotten now, so would be diffiult to sell in the volume that RTR producers require.  I might be aware that there was such a thing as a Taff Vale 04 class, or a Rhymney K rebuilt by the GW into an outside framed 0-6-2 pannier, but I doubt if anyone from a younger generation would be, or interested for that matter.  Glamour puss locos like Gladstone or Cardean would alway sell predictably if someone produces them; look at the success of the Stirling Single and the newly announced 'Precedent' is assured of a following, but the bread and butter stuff might not be so easily cleared from the shelves.. 

 

I believe I am correct in stating that every diesel loco that saw service on BR from 1948 onwards has been produced as an RTR model with the possible excpection of 10800 and the North British D84xx, even the one off prototypes, and coverage of diesel traction for post BR layouts is pretty extensive.  There are gaps in dmus, some of which are surprising (120s got everywhere, and 116s were produced in large numbers but have been twice ignored in favour of 117s), electric locos, and emus.  The general problem with emus is that they tended for many years to be specific to local areas, and, outside of the hobby, unknown elsewhere, and the same might be said for the earlier electric locos. 

[Mr chapman]

If you want something that will really stand out but also tick the work a day locomotive box... How about a C2x with a double dome! 

[TomScrut]

22 minutes ago, mdvle said:

All of the North American manufacturers (who are much more open in answering questions about doing stuff) make it clear that decision making is based in a large part around sharing components/parts - because that reduces the tooling costs, thus increasing the profit.

 

22 minutes ago, mdvle said:

The only reason Hornby would create new tooling was if the existing tooling could not be used to make the model - and given the shorter length of the carriages this is likely the case.

 

But don't these two snippets of your post contradict each other, unless you mean tooling for some new components rather than ground up? I'd expect quite a lot of the components to be common, just the bodies, chassis and a few other bits not to be. I'd expect thousands of pounds worth of existing moulds to be applicable to an 810 if it is just the differences already discussed. New tooling would most likely be needed but it wouldn't need to be* from square one I don't think.

 

*Whether they voluntarily double everything up "as has already been established" is another matter entirely

 

Either way I would expect the WCML ones to be done as models first if they are the same shape as the 800, easier to do and also on a more popular line. I agree in that I expect the EMR ones would be a hard sell I just don't think it would be a completely new project.

[adb968008]

EMR (ex-LNER) HST sets could be easy pickings.

 

Also extends sales of LNER mk3’s and gives excuse to re-run EMT livery mk3’s which are rare as anything.

 

Castle HSTs could be another.

cant be many more turns of the handle left in HSTs now...everything's done.

Edited January 4, 2021 by adb968008

[mdvle]

4 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

But don't these two snippets of your post contradict each other, unless you mean tooling for some new components rather than ground up? I'd expect quite a lot of the components to be common, just the bodies, chassis and a few other bits not to be. I'd expect thousands of pounds worth of existing moulds to be applicable to an 810 if it is just the differences already discussed. New tooling would most likely be needed but it wouldn't need to be* from square one I don't think.

 

So the Class 810 Wikipedia page says that the class has a different nose, different headlights, and are shorter.

 

So what exactly is there to share?  The bogies and the pantograph (and its associated details), which in the grand scheme of things isn't much.

 

You need a new body, a new nose, a new underframe, new interiors - which essentially is 90% of the model.

 

While EMR may have valid reasons for requesting a train with shorter carriages, it creates a problem for those wanting a model of it.

 

 

 

[wombatofludham]

41 minutes ago, mdvle said:

So what we essentially have are 2 "main" eras of interest - steam/early diesel and the floating bubble of whatever was the teenage years of the 50+/- x year olds.

 

 

 

 

I've said this before, so I'll say it again.  There is a danger Hornby will increasingly be seen as irrelevant by any post steam modellers if they don't start to up their game.  Heljan and Bachmann are really going for the D&E market, and whilst Bachmann sometimes rightly get criticised for tardiness, model fidelity and pricing, there's no doubt they've committed serious investment, at a time they are under financial pressure, to satisfying the market.  Then there are the newbies - people like Accurascale have launched with primarily D&E projects, and although they have said they will do some water boilers, the fact they started with D&E, at the point where the business needs to have some certainty of sales to make sure the company generates income to survive, suggests that others are seeing the market shift away from steam towards D&E.  That Hornby is so heavily invested in steam must be a concern long term, and whilst steam will never disappear as a modelling subject, the fact I'm the only one in my modelling fraternity planning a steam themed layout (out of over half a dozen active modellers) must suggest the hard nosed business decisions of a lot of of Hornby's competitors are noticing a similar trend.

When Hornby do D&E they can do a good job, but then louse it up with lackadaisical quality control and poor decision making - why go to all the expense of tooling up very nice HST power cars then stick with a mix of own design and 1980s Lima Mk3 toolings?  Would the steam fans be happy with a retooled Coronation but only the Railroad LMS coaches to pull?  Why two types of superdetail LNER suburbans but only ex Lima and 1980s Hornby design DMUs?  As for the 50 shades of Pullman compared to the Mk2e with a fictional solebar (the visible panty line) and you can begin to see why those of us who can look beyond the rose-tinted spectacle plates of the steam obsessives fell Hornby are at best lacklustre in the post steam market, or at worst indifferent.  Which will come to bite them very squarely on the backside, very soon.

[scottrains29]

2 hours ago, Craig1989 said:

Hoping that there some obscure engineering stuff

I'd love to see them do an accurate, highly detailed 07-16 or 08-16 single car track tamper. They've been around since the 70s, received various liveries, and can be seen across the whole network. Anyone modelling the 70s onwards could justify having at least one on their layout.

[60800]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

From what I remember of the old Hornby 58, rehashing the tooling to produce a new even half-fat model would not be an option.

 

Pre-owned Light pacific prices have firmed up quite noticeably of late, with many of the less common ones fetching at least what they cost new. The days of seventy quid Wiltons for renaming seem well and truly over, possibly because so many have been thus treated as to make unmolested ones scarce.

 

John

 

Hi John,

  Sorry I should have been clearer - the rehashing was referring to the Heljan 58, with regards to marketing, not physical changes. Bachmann have pushed it like it's something new and given it a price to match. 

 

As others have said, modifying the Hornby 58 to produce a railroad model would be pointless, unless of course people are happy for it to be of equal or slightly worse quality than the railroad 47's, which look to be selling well.

 

Cheers,

  60800 

[66738]

12 hours ago, InterCitySpud said:

2021 Hopes, as I don't need these until 2022! Hornby or anyone..

 

Class 81, ACs are cool now.

Class 310/312 AM10 EMU - zillions of liveries but I'll have a blue and a blue grey please, 4 car sets, I'll pay anything you want.

MK2Bs. Nothing since Lima FFS! To include TSOT thank you.

MK1 RKB.  From steamers to today so everyone's a winner. (Babe)

Oh and some decent drop in place MK1 multi track portals and catenary to run it all under, but hopefully that's on its way!

 

Good luck all..

I agree about the MK 2B/C coaches. They are a major gap in the market, and I for one would like some Blue/Grey and some NSE. But I think I’d like Bachmann to do them instead of Hornby. At least Bachmann would get the colours correct, so they could run and look good with the 2A’s.
I’ve not much faith at the moment in Hornby’s colour variations. The RB for example. What’s that blue all about!? 
66738

Edited January 4, 2021 by 66738

[60800]

One suggestion which I haven't seen is a Mk2F RFB - Yes I know Bachmann do one, but it's expensive for a coach, sits too high and doesn't match the colour of the cheaper Hornby stock. Honestly the gap between bogie and body on the Bachmann RFB is ridiculous, and I suspect that thanks to the lighting connections it can't be lowered.

 

I'll save my £60 and see if Hornby do one this year, fingers crossed. 

 

Cheers,

  60800

 

Edit: To 66738's comment above - the Hornby livery may be a bit off, but when the coaches are half the price (and can be found at nearly a third of the price in places), I'll take the slightly dodgy blue. I'm building up a rake of the Burton based Mk.2 stock for BR blue hauled railtour duties from the Hornby F's and it's going to cost me a shade under £190 for a six car rake (if Hornby do the RFB) - the same in Bachmann stock would sit around £340

 

Another way of looking at how pricing has gone is I can pick up a six car rake for the same cost as the express loco to haul it, which.... Isn't too bad really. I remember the days of £20 Mk.1 coaches. Should have bought more 

Edited January 4, 2021 by 60800

[dogbox321]

6 hours ago, adb968008 said:

I wonder if Drax wagons are being re-released afterall.

 

Ebay is completely flooded with them, despite being rare as rocking horse.. the last few years, they've rapidly emerged in the last few days.

 

 

 

When I spoke to Drax, they said that it was a one run job and would not permit it to be done again.  (I asked before parting with £85 per wagon!)  I believe Drax also own the tooling.  With the newer Powerhouse liveries that may have scope.....

 

However my main thought would be that with Rails/Revolution doing an N gauge version - then people are banking on a new OO gauge one.  But would Drax permit that when they have done a limited run.....  The other thought is with Accurascales Biomass Hopper, maybe people are thinking sell their Drax, purchase a cheaper and more detailed HYA derivative and have a few extra quid for something else too?

 

Best Wishes,

 

Chris.

[mdvle]

2 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

I've said this before, so I'll say it again.  There is a danger Hornby will increasingly be seen as irrelevant by any post steam modellers if they don't start to up their game.

 

I would disagree - based on posts on RMweb (in general) I would say many/most of the post-steam era modellers already see Hornby as irrelevant.

 

Whether it be the hit/miss nature of many of their diesel locos or the random nature of their Railroad line of models many have already moved on to the others.

 

2 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

Then there are the newbies - people like Accurascale have launched with primarily D&E projects, and although they have said they will do some water boilers, the fact they started with D&E, at the point where the business needs to have some certainty of sales to make sure the company generates income to survive, suggests that others are seeing the market shift away from steam towards D&E.

 

Like the newbies to the UK market, Rapido(*), have chosen two D&E projects to launch with - oops, make that 2 kettles and a pre-BR wagon.

 

Or the nice people at Planet Industrials, who have chosen a nice little diesel loco - oops, again a kettle.

 

Okay, so maybe the father/son from Calgary went with that obscure diesel for their first crowdfunding - well, at least this one was a bit closer and only looks like a kettle

 

Which merely demonstrates that choosing a model to launch with, or the first X models, depends on a variety of factors - including what the people behind the company are interested in as well as what they think will be a safe "bet", both in terms of sales but also often in not getting duplicated with a competitor also announcing a new detailed model.

 

2 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

That Hornby is so heavily invested in steam must be a concern long term, and whilst steam will never disappear as a modelling subject, the fact I'm the only one in my modelling fraternity planning a steam themed layout (out of over half a dozen active modellers) must suggest the hard nosed business decisions of a lot of of Hornby's competitors are noticing a similar trend.

 

I agree that it would appear for steam to be a long term project at Hornby - that the evidence (to date) is that Hornby doesn't seem to be interested in staking a claim to a modern version of a prototype as Heljan, Accurascale and potentially others all go on proverbial land grabs.

 

But at least some of the decisions by non-Hornby companies to not pursue steam will be done to it being simply easier that way to avoid duplication with Hornby.

 

18 minutes ago, wombatofludham said:

why go to all the expense of tooling up very nice HST power cars then stick with a mix of own design and 1980s Lima Mk3 toolings?

 

Well, some disagree with with the HST power cars being very nice.

 

But more to the point, I would hope they are close to solving the Mk3 issue - I would hope that the new tooling for the slide-door Mk3's would also allow for the various traditional slam-door Mk3's.

 

 

 

* - Rapido's previous items have all been for partners.

[mdvle]

6 minutes ago, 66738 said:

I agree about the MK 2B/C coaches. They are a major gap in the market, and I for one would like some Blue/Grey and some NSE. But I think I’d like Bachmann to do them instead of Hornby. At least Bachmann would get the colours correct, so they could run and look good with the 2A’s.
I’ve not much faith at the moment in Hornby’s colour variations. The RB for example. What’s that blue all about!? 
66738

 

4 minutes ago, 60800 said:

One suggestion which I haven't seen is a Mk2F RFB - Yes I know Bachmann do one, but it's expensive for a coach, sits too high and doesn't match the colour of the cheaper Hornby stock. Honestly the gap between bogie and body on the Bachmann RFB is ridiculous, and I suspect that thanks to the lighting connections it can't be lowered.

 

So, example of the problem - 2 consecutive posts, both essentially asking for the exact opposite because of "colours".

 

The only way out of this is to pressure all the companies to get their colours accurate, even if that means not matching existing models, so that going forward these problems eventually fade away.

[60800]

1 minute ago, mdvle said:

So, example of the problem - 2 consecutive posts, both essentially asking for the exact opposite because of "colours".

 

The only way out of this is to pressure all the companies to get their colours accurate, even if that means not matching existing models, so that going forward these problems eventually fade away.

 

The worst example of this by far is the pair of GBRF 50's - the colours are horrible. They are bad enough that anyone could compare them to a photo and notice it. Yet, they have flown off the shelves. There's no other game in town and a good percentage of the people who want these 50's will not be able to repaint a 50 to the same standard of finish or will not shell out the extra to pay someone to do it. You have to go very high up the ladder to find those of us who will actually kick off, but because all the trainset buyers have wiped the shelves clean of them it will make no difference to Hornby and the next GBRF locos will be just as bad, so that they can match previous stock.

 

The upshot is, if you want decent GBRF 50's you either have to be good enough at painting and decalling to do the job yourself, or have about £250 burning a hole in your pocket to pay someone else to do it. 

 

The flip side is the latest NR HST's - I suspect the price bracket on these meant less trainset buyers and a higher percentage of, without trying to gatekeep the term, modellers buying them and complaining - hence we get a re-run of bodies. 

 

Cheers,

  60800

[newbryford]

1 hour ago, 60800 said:

 

The worst example of this by far is the pair of GBRF 50's - the colours are horrible. They are bad enough that anyone could compare them to a photo and notice it. Yet, they have flown off the shelves.

 

T

 

Not quite - they pretty much flew off the shelves sight unseen according to my local shop. I wonder how many folk, having bought the 50s, are sitting there thinking "next time. I'll wait until I see one?". (When "one" refers to the item on the wanted list.) I know I certainly will and take the consequent risk of missing out.

[9402 Fredrick]

Welp, just one day left then after that, it'll be annoucement time.