Bachmann pre-announcement thread

[davidw]

Somebody mentioned Thompson Suburbans - oh yes please

Others, upgraded Bulleids - oh yes please and a Bulleid BCK - oh yes please

Loco's - I predict an LMS tank, a Standard 2.6.0. and a LNER/BRER K1 & I think there might be a big LNER/BRER Pacific in the 'wings'.

However I predicted that Argyle would return to the Championship this season so take no notice!

36E

 

Not just Thompson Suburbans. Retooled to modern standards - Thompson corridor stock would go down a treat - and the iconic Elizabethan could be built. Ooh I can hope

[Guest LNER Tom]

LNER/BRER K1 & I think there might be a big LNER/BRER Pacific in the 'wings'.

 

You know something we don't Phil

[coachmann]

If there is a Thompson Pacific in the wings, then either Bachmann knows a good 'un when it sees it, or the company considers it can score an equalizer over the opposition for doing the A1...

 

This year the A2/3

Next year the A2/2

Year after the A2/1

 

They are locos than can be kept alive with trickle modifications like the 04. And no, I don't believe those who say they can't be done. This is the 21st Century!

[Karhedron]

Do we know who, in the various companies, makes the decisions on new projects and do we ever hear the logic behind the choices after release? I know we make out own minds up about why, for example Falcon or Lion etc., but is there ever a chink in the curtain, Wizard of Oz style?

Not beyond the press-release I think.

 

I do not know about railway modelling specifically but I do know a bit about the decision making process in wargames modelling. Basically designers come up with ideas for models they would like to make. They then present these ideas to a committee stage. Ideas judged promising by their peers aer taken forward to a proposal stage.

 

At this stage the accountants (or "bean counters") get involved. Each proposal has to include a cost-benefit analysis. Small projects (e.g. new liveries) do well at this stage due to low cost. More ambitous projects must generate synergy with the rest of the range such as the ability to drive sales of associated stock.

 

Strategic planners may also have a say at this stage. Bachmann have shown a fondness for producing "workhorse" units that will sell in large numbers. Hornby tend to focus more on complete trainsets and often go for the Wow factor.

 

Once projects have been through this process they come out in a prioritised list of which will generate the best return on investment. This list will then be matched up with available production capacity over the next 12-24 months to determine what goes forward and when (important dates like Christmas can play a role here). Finally when models are close enough to production for the manufacturers to feel confident they announce their new releases. Ideally this is timed far enough ahead to give people a chance to save up but not so far that the hype starts to dwindle before the models hit the shelves.

 

I suspect the process is broadly similar for railway modelling.

[Pennine MC]

I'm not sure quite what I've said to justify such condescension. I simply said that Hornby had so far shown no interest in updating the model. This is factually correct.

...

 

"We"? Do you work for Hornby? Assuming you mean on this forum, then why not if that's what some of us want?

 

All I did was ask you a question Andrew, it's called debate. I wanted to know why, in your opinion and in the interests of that debate, Hornby would have any inclination to retooling its ex-Lima acquisitions. I was interested in whether you had an answer to that, other than 'I want them to'.

 

As for asking and wanting, have you, or anybody else approached Hornby direct? - the OP did say he didnt want a wishlist

 

I would perfectly happy if Hornby updated its model - ... and on the body a gutter added at cantrail level.

 

Another one? It has a gutter already, the problem is that it needs removing for pre-refurb days

As to other first generation DMUs, yes it would be good to see some. But there never seems to be any major consensus in the annual wish list results, so how commercially successful would they be?

I'd dispute that, although it may not be reflected in wish lists (one reason to set less store by them, perhaps). Until Bachmann announced the 105, the 104 was regularly mentioned in the same breath. Assuming at some point a manufacturer makes the jump to long frame units, then the smart money is and always has been on either a cl. 116 suburban unit or a cl. 120 Cross-Country, for longevity and geographical spread.

 

Fair enough, but try telling a small child that you want to chop about with the bright new model he's just seen in its box...

 

I dont know how old this small child is, but why exactly would he be bothered that his Met Cam's underframe isnt as good as the new Cravens? Is he really that discerning, or is it a vicarious judgment on your part?

 

Others have commented on your assertion that the hobby is being 'held back' by the Limby models, you can think me as condescending or antagonistic as you like. I am actually ready to be convinced but in my view your arguments aren't holding much water.

 

I thought the old Lima 117 tooling got 'modified' to produce the 121 body, so it doesn't actually exist as such any more?

That's right - IMO if anyone was looking afresh at high-density units, they'd be better looking in the Derby direction

[Guest Belgian]

One possibility I would venture, in 00, would be a 2-HAP unit. This could be done by using the driving trailer from the forthcomong Kernow Hampshire unit together with the powered driving car from the 2-EPB. A new model, but no new tooling! (I await corrections from those who know their SR units!)

 

JE

[Downer]

As far as the transition era is concerned, what I'm most struck by is the paucity of remaining options when it comes to new (i.e. not upgraded) locos and units that should be commercially viable as mass-produced models. I've no doubt missed the odd one, but the following seems a fairly inclusive list:

 

1. The ex-GWR Western panniers of the 54xx/64xx/74xx family and 94xx class.

2. The ex-LMS Fowler and Stanier 2-6-2Ts and, at a push, the Stanier mogul.

3. Nothing from the Southern - all the 0-6-0s and tanks are too area-specific, and the original MN is too time-specific

4. The ex-LNER K1, J50, J68/9 and, again at a push, B12. Everything else is too area-specific.

5. The 78xxx mogul.

6. No diesels at all (much as I'd like a Class 16, somehow I don't think so).

7. A high density DMU is the one huge gap in transition era motive power, but which one? I'd love a 125 or 127, but wouldn't buy a 104 or 116/7. And the reverse would doubtless be true for others.

8. Early generation EMUs - I don't know enough to say. I'd love an Oerlikon unit or a 501, but not that many people model London.

 

So that's about a dozen viable subjects for mass production. Iconic oddities like the P2, Brighton Atlantic, Director, Great Bear, etc, will probably be viable as high price limited editions, but more and more mass-produced locos are bound to be upgrades or duplicates.

 

As for Bachmann this Sunday, I'm hoping they've completely lost the plot commercially, and opted for a late 50s GE fest - J15, N7, J69, Class 16, and the Enfield-line EMU whose TOPs classification I've forgotten. Plus Thompson suburbans. And as a bonus, the Class 28 with wraparound windows which Heljan aren't making. Think how happy some people would be!

[Guest Max Stafford]

I'd concur fully with Jamie and James' observations regarding the 101 although it was the presence of the N gauge model that made me consider the possibility of this being 'up-sized'. To be honest though, since I already have a pretty packed build/bash programme, I think I'd rather welcome a 'boil in the bag' 101. I'd prefer a 100 though! :-)

Does anybody have a spare copy of the MRJ concerned or at least the issue number?

 

Dave.

[richandhiscatagain]

I don't know if it is significant but at the Glasgow Model Rail show last week Bachmann had a prototype of a resin RTP Caledonian Railway signal box on display with a note saying it was coming soon . I have not seen it advertised elsewhere but maybe missed it.

 

g45

 

It makes a lot of sense to theme new releases so hope fully we might see some Scottish stock :

 

LNER Fish vans

Caley 0-6-0

K1 (not Caledonian though!)

Class 24/1

Standard 3MT 2-6-0

 

And another 1st generation DMU, Class 120 would be very universal, from the Highlands to Cornwall - don't forget they have a long wheelbase chassis from the 4CEP.

If they do a Director, would it not be an NRM release and so not announced with the main releases?

 

Rich

[Tatty]

As a returning modeller, just rebuilding his stock levels, an EWS liveried 66 would be nice again. The last one (66068) is really hard and expensive to get.

 

A 450 Desiro would be very nice.

 

Don't know much about steam. Will leave that to those you do.

[Jenny Emily]

If Bachmann want to consolidate and concentrate on reissues and reliveries of existing models, then there is a lot of scope.

 

* ex LNER type all steel opens as TOPS OHV.

* More weathered 16t mineral wagons to the same standard that 37-377F recently appeared.

* class 03 and 04 to turn up in industrial liveries.

* More livery variations of the humble class 08 including industrial liveries.

* Perhaps a LNWR liveried Super D for the NRM special model.

* S&DJR liveried 7F (no doubt some enterprising retailer has most likely already enquired about this for a commission).

* Rerelease of that particular Mk2 coach that everyone keeps complaining is hard to find (I can't remember which one, but it crops up a lot in various threads).

* Lots of private owner wagons in as yet untapped colourful liveries that always seem to sell well.

* TTA tanker in post TOPS guises (we seem to have lots of the pre-TOPS versions released at the moment with only special commissions by model shops covering the post TOPS era).

* more BR blue/green releases for the 03 as they seem to have sold pretty well. Perhaps 03079 will appear to make use of the cut down roofed version.

 

We've all been a little spoiled over the last ten years. It seems that we're never content with what is coming out and always want more.

[buffalo]

...S&DJR liveried 7F (no doubt some enterprising retailer has most likely already enquired about this for a commission)....

 

IIRC We did speculate about this in the 7F thread. Think about it, there were only five (of this second batch), they have released three of them, of the others, one (53807) has a different smokebox saddle and the other (53808) is painted blue in preservation. On this basis, I'd guess that 53808 as preserved is a near certainty.

 

On the other hand, if you really meant S&DJR livery, then that would be black. However, none of them received small boilers before the LMS took over. LMS livery might be possible, but only for two of them...

 

Nick

[Roy P]

If this is really a question of what we think Bachmann may announce rather than what we are hoping for then the Original Fowler Royal Scot seems an obvious thing but seems to have slipped under the radar. There are other things I'd rather see but that is not the point is it? All I ask for is a nicely diverse 2011 catalogue that indicates that all is well on the investment front.

 

Roy P

[queensquare]

IIRC We did speculate about this in the 7F thread. Think about it, there were only five (of this second batch), they have released three of them, of the others, one (53807) has a different smokebox saddle and the other (53808) is painted blue in preservation. On this basis, I'd guess that 53808 as preserved is a near certainty.

 

On the other hand, if you really meant S&DJR livery, then that would be black. However, none of them received small boilers before the LMS took over. LMS livery might be possible, but only for two of them...

 

Nick

 

Unfortunately the tender is completely wrong for 88 (53808) which has a hybrid of Deeley frames and Fowler tank.

The 7F has been an excellant seller in OO so I wouldn't be surprised to see one in N, which would give them a Fowler tender which opens up all sorts of posibilities (Compound, 2P,4F etc).

 

Jerry

[buffalo]

Unfortunately the tender is completely wrong for 88 (53808)...

Yes, I was trying to keep it short. Doubt if it will stop people painting them blue, though

[Ozexpatriate]

* S&DJR liveried 7F (no doubt some enterprising retailer has most likely already enquired about this for a commission).

 

IIRC We did speculate about this in the 7F thread. Think about it, there were only five (of this second batch), they have released three of them, of the others, one (53807) has a different smokebox saddle and the other (53808) is painted blue in preservation. On this basis, I'd guess that 53808 as preserved is a near certainty.

 

On the other hand, if you really meant S&DJR livery, then that would be black. However, none of them received small boilers before the LMS took over. LMS livery might be possible, but only for two of them...

 

Unfortunately the tender is completely wrong for 88 (53808) which has a hybrid of Deeley frames and Fowler tank.

Early on there was some speculation that even with technical inaccuracies, Bachmann might consider issuing the 7F as No. 88 in Prussian Blue in a limited edition for their Collectors' Club. My guess is that even if it had the wrong tender, a run of 504 (or however many they usually do) or so would sell out really fast. Would I purhase one? Why yes I would - so long as I wasn't too late to fill in the form!

[wombatofludham]

Coo, what a lot of debate about dmus...

 

If - and it has to be a big if - Bachy are about to announce another DMU, given they have focussed so far on 57ft long prototypes (Class 108 of both flavours, Cl 105 and the "Glasshouse" Derby Lightweights) I suspect they will target other 57ft types before tooling up (or modifying their existing Mk1 underframe) for a 64ft dmu chassis. This would be logical, cost effective and sensible. Of the remaining 57ft types, only the Class 101 and 104 really offer any opportunities for longevity and potential sales. The Gloucester 100s had a different construction method without a seperate underframe, and the Park Royal Class 103 was a miniscule batch of units which spent all their life on the London Midland, first around Birmingham then around Chester and North Wales, so would be a very long shot. In comparison the Met-Cam Class 101 was in service from 1956 unti the early 2000s and carried zillions of liveries over the years. It worked from Scotland to Penzance, and even onto the Southern. Commercially, I think we can safely say it would be a no-brainer . However, whilst on the plus side, they've just re-tooled their N gauge model, so data and drawings must be in existance, on the negative side Bachmann might consider the Lima-Hornby 101 to be a bit too good to be seen off by a new, more expensive model particularly if Hornby aggressively price the ex-Lima model (the moulds probably owe them nothing by now). So, I would suggest the 101 must be doubtful, especially when they have publicly claimed an OO upscale of their new N gauge model is "not on the cards".

 

Which leaves the 104. Contrary to what some have been posting, they did cover a wider area than Manchester and Tyneside over their lives, some having reached Scotland (including the "Mexican Bean" Oban liveried two car unit) and others receiving Network SouthEast livery for use on the "Goblin" Gospel Oak-Barking services, some Paddington locals, and even the odd foray to Gatwick. They were fairly common around East Anglia in the 70s and 80s, and I sampled one on the Heart of Wales line so that's the Western in Wales covered. One unit did get blue/grey livery, some were turned out in NSE livery, the Blackpool line sets got a special "white stripe" livery in the 1970s, and the units carried both malachite and brunswick green, with "cycling lion" and "ferret and dartboard" motifs. That's actually more livery variations than the Cravens unit or the forthcoming original Derby Lightweight. Given one has been preserved (and exquisitely restored), if Bachmann decided not to take on Hornby with a 101 for now, and wanted to release another DMU this year, the 104 would be a reasonable commercial bet. For the allegedly key "transition era" modelling market it complements the 105 and 108 in regional distribution, particularly the main Eastern and London Midland regions substantial chunks of their existing ranges seem to favour, and in later eras, can complement a wider geographical distribution.

 

However, I personally can't see another DMU being launched this year, I suspect any new models will be steam biased, perhaps coaching, and a lot of reliveries. We've got too much D&E new tools already in the pipeline.

[DougN]

I have a left field thought. Would Bachmann take over and add a de speced version of the now superceeded/or about to be superceeded ESU control station?

 

Rolling stock. I think we might see some NE loco's, they are generally high on the wish list. I think we will see further issues of the wagons with new liveries and other numbers. (LNER vans x1 , LNER Wagons x1, BR vans(both versions) x2, BR wagons(both versions) x2

More modern rolling stock.

 

May be a test shot this weekend of the 3F??

 

Pairing of the NRM and Bachmann on other loco's... would the Q7 fall into this?

 

Ummm but I am happy to wait till next week!

[Guest Phil]

It used to be tradition for model railway manufacturers to produce something fairly current and the class 70 is no exception by Bachmann. Although I am not very current on new railway kit, are the class 379 and 172 sufficiently similar to each other to warrant a new, modern railcar offering. I realise the 172/2 and 172/3 are the only versions with end gangways, but mould plugs could allow the non gangwayed bodyshells to be produced too.

 

 

 

http://paulbigland.fotopic.net/p67672831.html

 

http://www.therailwaycentre.com/New%20site%20POD%202011/POD15-02-11.jpg

 

Even doing a "Hornby" and producing non authentic liveries !!!!

 

http://62fx4w.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p7mHkcIjeC4HivDJq5oZ85C-b4bARzjza98cPNCq4R2H9oJcMqVXaF2xzIxv48P0c2Hklhagblf9Zq7ora_z2fzMigq0BAjAR/172-31.jpg?psid=1

[Flying Pig]

The 7F has been an excellant seller in OO so I wouldn't be surprised to see one in N, which would give them a Fowler tender which opens up all sorts of posibilities (Compound, 2P,4F etc).

Hats off to Bachmann if they can engineer a decent powered Fowler tender in N, but I suspect it would prove challenging. If I were them I'd be looking to sweat the mechanisms already developed or go for something easier like the LNER 8-wheel tenders as others have already suggested (A2/3 in N first, perhaps ).

 

In D&E land Class 50 must be a fairly likely candidate (lots of liveries and an inexplicably large following). I wonder if they'll downsize the AL5?

[zigzag]

Im usually so wrong on these prediction type things, but for a bit of fun here are my thoughts.

 

Given the current economic situation (which I believe will get worse before it gets better) I think that we may well see a year or two of battening down the hatches and a reigning back of ambition, which is essentailly what we have got with Hornby, so I cant see Bachmann being very different. Yes if they want to be bold they could be and grab big chunks of Hornby territory, but I cant see that happening this Sunday.

 

D/E

They have grabbed a big area in BP (and a big piece of work and investment), so thats one major announcement already made.

They have also announced the Cl40 retool, which really means new body, so thats half a new loco in cost terms.

Reliveries aplenty, easy to do and minimal investment.

 

Steam

I predict a few easy wins, at low cost - the 78xxx BR standard, perhaps a rechassis of the Ivatt 2MT on the back of this, and again a good number of new liveries (Tornado BR green), perhaps some loco tender combo changes (Stanier tender Jubilee in LMS red). All these will pep up sales at very low investment.

 

There will be at least one new steam loco however, whilst another 0-6-0 will be welcome I think that may be next year after the sales of the 3F have been assessed (similar argument for a new 25Kv electric loco - 2012 for that announcement). Playing it safe then good bets would be those locos that poll highly in wish lists, and two spring to mind, a big GW tank, and a King. Both will sell well as the GW has been rather neglected in recent years.

 

Rolling stock

Given the current austerity I dont see any major investment being made in new coaching, perhaps added detail and re-release of out of prodcution types. Wagons may well continue to improve thier range, but that area is all a bit of a myster too me so wont go into specifics.

 

Other

There may well be third party collobarations in the offing, USA Tank with Kernow for example, Director with the NRM, I can see both of these fitting nicely.

 

I await Sunday in anticipation just to see how far off I am.

[Sailsbury Hall]

As reflected in the preceding posts my feeling is that there will be far more 'N' gauge releases than 'OO'.

[Hugh Flynn]

Hi Andy

 

Will announcement be after midnight sat night or during Sunday?

 

thanks

 

Hugh

 

 

[brushman47544]

All I did was ask you a question Andrew, it's called debate. I wanted to know why, in your opinion and in the interests of that debate, Hornby would have any inclination to retooling its ex-Lima acquisitions. I was interested in whether you had an answer to that, other than 'I want them to'.

 

As for asking and wanting, have you, or anybody else approached Hornby direct? - the OP did say he didnt want a wishlist

Since Hornby reintroduced the Limby 101, yes I have filled out one of the forms they give out at exhibitions, suggesting an upgrade. As one of the better ex-Lima models, I would have thought it would be a viable option rather than tool up a completely new model. Working lights, NEM couplings and improved underframe detail would go a long way to bringing the model up to the standards set by Bachmann's 105 and 108. But if we keep buying the existing model, then Hornby will understandably have little incentive to do so. But if no other manufacturer steps in with a new model, and considering that Hornby is still producing a number of models from 1960s/70s tooling, I for one don't want to see the Limby Class 101 still the only one on the market 10 years or more from now. For me personally, a 101 to current standards is more important than most of the other first generation DMUs. But I accept I may be in the minority on this.

 

Another one? It has a gutter already, the problem is that it needs removing for pre-refurb days

Thanks for clarifying. I remembered something was wrong with the gutter, but as I said in an earlier reply to Coachman I no longer have my Lima model to check.

 

I dont know how old this small child is, but why exactly would he be bothered that his Met Cam's underframe isnt as good as the new Cravens? Is he really that discerning, or is it a vicarious judgment on your part?

 

Others have commented on your assertion that the hobby is being 'held back' by the Limby models, you can think me as condescending or antagonistic as you like. I am actually ready to be convinced but in my view your arguments aren't holding much water.

I think you may have missed my point. Yes, my son is too young to care about the underframe detail, but I do. What I meant was that he would be very upset if I wanted to chop up a newly bought model to improve it. So to please us both, I would like RTR models to be highly detailed (to please me) and so not need to be chopped about (to please him). And when I see what is now available on some European RTR models, such as internal lighting, seated passengers, automatic doors, I do think we still lag behind and would like to see manufacturers as a matter of routine have a programme of upgrading or replacing existing models, alongside producing all new ones. Bachmann have been much better at this than Hornby. Reintroduction of the Limby models in Hornby's main range (rather than as Railroad items) and our acceptance of them surely makes it less likely that they will be upgraded or replaced and, I would contend, means we are less likely to see, or have to wait much longer for, the innovation found on some European models. This is what I meant by being 'held back'.

 

I hope you and others can now see where I am coming from, even if you don't necessarily agree.

[coachmann]

The reference to the S&DJR 2-8-0 No.53808 having a hybrid tender puzzles me. When was this? This loco is shown on Ivo Peters Volume One ~ 1950-1954 album with large boiler and the small boiler as fitted circa January 1954. At no stage did it have anything other than a standard Fowler 3.500 gallon tender.