Rapido dangles Class 13 RTR carrot...

[D9020 Nimbus]

If his articles in Model Rail are anything to go by, RF models the M&GN in BR days — could there be an N gauge Ivatt 4MT?

[Anadin Dogwalker]

Another angle is to ask what models were done poorly enough to warrant a re-tool by the original maker or by the competition- AND aren't already in the pipeline? I'm struggling to suggest anything other than intra-class variations (like sliding window 27/0s with  the tablet recess plated over). Any ideas?

[Mel_H]

2 minutes ago, Anadin Dogwalker said:

Another angle is to ask what models were done poorly enough to warrant a re-tool by the original maker or by the competition- AND aren't already in the pipeline? I'm struggling to suggest anything other than intra-class variations (like sliding window 27/0s with  the tablet recess plated over). Any ideas?

 

Class 50, but I'll wager that Accurascale will announce that soon...

[mdvle]

3 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Why would it be any less risky for 'others like Accurascale'?

 

I didn't say it was less risky - though it is apparent that Accurscale (and others) perhaps views the risk differently.

 

There have been comments, we have been told, for the last 10+ years that there was no need for any of the major diesels to be done again because they had already been done.

 

Yet Accurascale have tooled up a brand new Class 37, Heljan have gone for the 45 and 47, and Hattons went for the 66.

 

3 hours ago, dibber25 said:

The toolmaking costs for any new locomotive are now heading towards half a million pounds. A manufacturer needs to be pretty confident to spend that kind of money especially when, during the months of development, foreign exchange rates can blow original cost estimates right out of the water. (CJL)

 

ScaleTrains has indicated tooling costs are in the $200,000 range for a loco, which is (today) £150,000.

 

It is a big leap to get from that to $700,000.

 

But at the end of the day the cost is irrelevant - if Rapido (or anyone else) want to enter the UK market then there will be risks - even in the steam market there aren't a lot of sure things that will sell a lot of models in.

 

As noted by D9020 Nimbus the Class 28 isn't exactly risk free, another industrial steam loco isn't risk free (EFE has the Austerity, Hornby has several, Planet Industrials is bringing one, Hattons have one - that's a lot of smaller industrial themed steam for a niche part of the hobby), and while the 15xx should do reasonably well being GWR there is still a substantial amount of competition in the small pannier style loco market.

 

All of which demonstrates that if you want to make a loco in OO, you are either going to need to do better tooling than an existing model (which still has opportunities) or go for the less popular prototypes - which inherently have risks - because the UK market is already generally being well served by a variety of companies tooling new product.

 

Or you roll the dice, and see if there is a market for a 3 or 4 car DMU at a price many assume the UK market won't support.

 

Or maybe Rapido tries to renew the interest in N - but that too is risky.

 

[russ p]

I can sort of see a 13 appealing to collectors of model locos but as a useful loco on a layout not much use at all . Three locos that that did one job at one location.  

Whilst having a hump yard layout would be fantastic very very few people have room for one.

So on t1he whole I can't see it being a financial sucess

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, Anadin Dogwalker said:

Another angle is to ask what models were done poorly enough to warrant a re-tool by the original maker or by the competition- AND aren't already in the pipeline? I'm struggling to suggest anything other than intra-class variations (like sliding window 27/0s with  the tablet recess plated over). Any ideas?

 

The obvious one (to me) is the Class 50 - the louvers on the Hornby model make it a no-no for me despite a desperate need for it.

 

Another frequent request is the Class 31, and I believe at least some still have issues with the existing Class 33 option.

 

 

[Mel_H]

6 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

I didn't say it was less risky - though it is apparent that Accurscale (and others) perhaps views the risk differently.

 

There have been comments, we have been told, for the last 10+ years that there was no need for any of the major diesels to be done again because they had already been done.

 

Yet Accurascale have tooled up a brand new Class 37, Heljan have gone for the 45 and 47, and Hattons went for the 66.

 

 

ScaleTrains has indicated tooling costs are in the $200,000 range for a loco, which is (today) £150,000.

 

It is a big leap to get from that to $700,000.

 

But at the end of the day the cost is irrelevant - if Rapido (or anyone else) want to enter the UK market then there will be risks - even in the steam market there aren't a lot of sure things that will sell a lot of models in.

 

As noted by D9020 Nimbus the Class 28 isn't exactly risk free, another industrial steam loco isn't risk free (EFE has the Austerity, Hornby has several, Planet Industrials is bringing one, Hattons have one - that's a lot of smaller industrial themed steam for a niche part of the hobby), and while the 15xx should do reasonably well being GWR there is still a substantial amount of competition in the small pannier style loco market.

 

All of which demonstrates that if you want to make a loco in OO, you are either going to need to do better tooling than an existing model (which still has opportunities) or go for the less popular prototypes - which inherently have risks - because the UK market is already generally being well served by a variety of companies tooling new product.

 

Or you roll the dice, and see if there is a market for a 3 or 4 car DMU at a price many assume the UK market won't support.

 

Or maybe Rapido tries to renew the interest in N - but that too is risky.

 

 

Or TT 3mm 

[Markwj]

16 hours ago, Anadin Dogwalker said:

Another angle is to ask what models were done poorly enough to warrant a re-tool by the original maker or by the competition- AND aren't already in the pipeline? I'm struggling to suggest anything other than intra-class variations (like sliding window 27/0s with  the tablet recess plated over). Any ideas?

The pendolino was once done by Dapol (poorly) then with a retool by Hornby so this would fit your criteria although I can’t see it myself!

[Oldddudders]

14 hours ago, russ p said:

Whilst having a hump yard layout would be fantastic very very few people have room for one.

 

I recall a US layout back in the '80s which had one. Getting the slope right so cars rolled far enough, but not too fast, took an age - the builder said the risers for the hump were like Swiss cheese where they had tried various heights. Then there are the retarders. He used compressed air jets from under the baseboard. Not a concept for the faint-hearted, nor those in a hurry to get things working. 

[Mel_H]

27 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

I recall a US layout back in the '80s which had one. Getting the slope right so cars rolled far enough, but not too fast, took an age - the builder said the risers for the hump were like Swiss cheese where they had tried various heights. Then there are the retarders. He used compressed air jets from under the baseboard. Not a concept for the faint-hearted, nor those in a hurry to get things working. 

 

That sounds like fun! And complicated. In real life, of course, wagons roll at different speeds for a variety of reasons, hence the retarders. I'm almost inspired to have a go. All I'd need would be a Cl13 with good gearing so it creeps happily (I know Hornby's is good for this, but one that's even better would be needed for a hump 13)

[russ p]

I think a decent 31 is the last bit of low hanging fruit. The refurbished ones Hornby do are ok and green is passable with small panels but unrefurbrished blue and  green with full yellow ends looks awful. 

Basically its because they have never bothered to model the central band just painted it.

Then of course there's the masak rot aswell 

[Mel_H]

1 hour ago, Markwj said:

The pendolino was once done by Dapol (poorly) then with a retool by Hornby so this would fit your criteria although I can’t see it myself!

 

The re-tool, I understand, was done at the requirement of Virgin Trains which had licensed Dapol, but was unhappy at the quality. It didn't want the Virgin brand to be sullied by a poor model. Hornby was happy to take up the mantle.

 

[C126]

Well, I will be daft enough to put my head above the parapet and say I would buy a B.R. blue T.O.P.S. '13', assuming I had saved the cash, etc.  However, I would rather a few other models of more common prototypes were available before: a 4CIG, and a 33/0 with attractive glazing for a start, a 74, and several wagons reissued that are now sold out.  I will look out a few articles about model hump yards I collected over the years, and post the refs. to-morrow, if of interest.

Edited February 9, 2021 by C126
Insert comma.

[dibber25]

16 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

The obvious one (to me) is the Class 50 - the louvers on the Hornby model make it a no-no for me despite a desperate need for it.

 

Another frequent request is the Class 31, and I believe at least some still have issues with the existing Class 33 option.

 

 

So, you just need to find another 4,999 people who have those same issues, (and who don't have something else they would prefer to spend their money on) otherwise you have to decide whether it's really worth risking your (rapidly approaching) half a million quid. And then, what if Hornby retools the louvres just as you've committed your investment? It really isn't as easy as just looking at which models you think you can do better. (CJL)

[Michael Hodgson]

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

I recall a US layout back in the '80s which had one. Getting the slope right so cars rolled far enough, but not too fast, took an age - the builder said the risers for the hump were like Swiss cheese where they had tried various heights. Then there are the retarders. He used compressed air jets from under the baseboard. Not a concept for the faint-hearted, nor those in a hurry to get things working. 

Disconnect the compressor from your airbrush and connect it to plumbing under the basebpard?

I can see some wagons becoming airborne with that approach, eg Slaters kits if you haven't added any weight.

 

I think a more practical technology would be magnetic braking -  sort of like Powerbase in reverse, where the metal plates (or neodymium magnets?) in the wagons and you fit powerful electromagnets under the baseboard switched on/off under electronic control.

 

I have always fancied the class 13, though I can't possibly justify it.  Many years ago I did convert a pair of the old Triang 08s (the ones with the dreadful Jinty chassis).

 

What would anybody use one for?  Well, not for shunting a GWR branch terminus obviously, but perhaps if you shunt a big fiddle yard rather than just using it for storage.  It might also fit in if the layout is one of those big MPDs?

Edited February 9, 2021 by Michael Hodgson

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, C126 said:

Well, I will be daft enough to put my head above the parapet and say I would buy a B.R. blue T.O.P.S. '13', assuming I had saved the cash, etc.  However, I would rather a few other models of more common prototypes were available before: a 4CIG and a 33/0 with attractive glazing for a start, a 74, and several wagons reissued that are now sold out.  I will look out a few articles about model hump yards I collected over the years, and post the refs. to-morrow, if of interest.

Hi C126

 

While I agree your choices are more common than the 3 master and slaves and also had a wider geographical spread than them. They are not common types seen north of the Thames. Bachmann seem to show there is an interest in Southern motive power other than Bulleid Pacifics so maybe your suggestions should be considered. 

[Clive Mortimore]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Disconnect the compressor from your airbrush and connect it to plumbing under the basebpard?

I can see some wagons becoming airborne with that approach, eg Slaters kits if you haven't added any weight.

 

I think a more practical technology would be magnetic braking -  sort of like Powerbase in reverse, where the metal plates (or neodymium magnets?) in the wagons and you fit powerful electromagnets under the baseboard switched on/off under electronic control.

 

I have always fancied the class 13, though I can't possibly justify it.  Many years ago I did convert a pair of the old Triang 08s (the ones with the dreadful Jinty chassis).

 

What would anybody use one for?  Well, not for shunting a GWR branch terminus obviously, but perhaps if you shunt a big fiddle yard rather than just using it for storage.  It might also fit in if the layout is one of those big MPDs?

Hi Michael

 

Who would be daft enough to want to model Tinsley?

An idea put to one side on moving to our new location and me changing my ideas about a layout.

[C126]

2 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi C126

 

While I agree your choices are more common than the 3 master and slaves and also had a wider geographical spread than them. They are not common types seen north of the Thames. Bachmann seem to show there is an interest in Southern motive power other than Bulleid Pacifics so maybe your suggestions should be considered. 

 

Dear Clive,

 

Sorry, I meant it to be 'all relative'.  Yes, I am sitting in my B.R. blue Southern Region bubble (but still would run a '13' on my goods yard, under 'Rule 1' for aesthetic reasons!).  The whole economics of model production mentioned here looks to be a minefield, of which I am ignorant.  I do not know if the 4VEP sold well (assume so as I can not find one 2d hand).  I just hope 'market forces will prevail' to paraphrase Ma Thatcher, and I may have a reasonably-priced 4CIG one day...

[Mike Buckner]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

What would anybody use one for?

 

 

Shunting heavy trains - or hauling a CMX wagon

 

 

Edited February 9, 2021 by Mike Buckner
poor smelling

[Steven B]

Rapido UK now have a suggestion page:

https://rapidotrains.co.uk/product-suggestion/

 

They're asking for more information than just "Class XYZ" - including dates, liveries and area of operation.

Then there's the final question: outline why you think Rapido Trains UK would be the ideal manufacturer for this model.

 

Steven B.

[Clive Mortimore]

12 minutes ago, C126 said:

 

Dear Clive,

 

Sorry, I meant it to be 'all relative'.  Yes, I am sitting in my B.R. blue Southern Region bubble (but still would run a '13' on my goods yard, under 'Rule 1' for aesthetic reasons!).  The whole economics of model production mentioned here looks to be a minefield, of which I am ignorant.  I do not know if the 4VEP sold well (assume so as I can not find one 2d hand).  I just hope 'market forces will prevail' to paraphrase Ma Thatcher, and I may have a reasonably-priced 4CIG one day...

Hi C126

 

The choices manufacturers make on new models is hard to understand sometimes. I look at the announcements and think that will sell well or want was the developer smoking when he came up with that idea. I am proved right on occasions and other times I am way off the mark. There must be fellow railway modellers who see some the stuff I try to make and think "What is he up to?"

[C126]

1 hour ago, Steven B said:

... Then there's the final question: outline why you think Rapido Trains UK would be the ideal manufacturer for this model.

 

Steven B.

 

I must say on seeing this that my first feeling was similarity to the terror of completing a job-application form.  Never been one to 'sell myself' or argue thus!

[Mel_H]

1 hour ago, C126 said:

 

I must say on seeing this that my first feeling was similarity to the terror of completing a job-application form.  Never been one to 'sell myself' or argue thus!

 

I suppose it's a way of getting people to think about it - rather than just banging anything on the form - and understanding how the brand is perceived? But I understand that for people who are not a wordsmith, it's a challenge. And, as we see on some other forums, sadly there are plenty of people who struggle with written English for whatever reason (and don't wish to go all-American and use 'Grammarly'. If I see one more ad  )

[Legend]

20 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

 

But at the end of the day the cost is irrelevant 

 

 

Funny thats what our marketing guys say . I then take them gently by the neck , sorry,  hand to the profit and loss account  which  in its most basic form is Sales - Cost =Profit .  This is good I tell them .  Sales - bigger cost = Loss . This is bad . We dont like that I say . 

 

Cost is never irrelevant . You don't throw money at something just to enter a market . 

[slg]

If both units come powered and using one DCC chip then I would be willing to part with £250, £300 seems just a tad too much for 2 albeit heavily adapted 08's.

But if they do go ahead with the class 13 then maybe they could investigate using some of the tooling to tool up the cutdown cab 08/9's as well, 5 running numbers 4 liveries and a they eventually spread their wheels far and wide, even working on Metrolink in Manchester.