RMweb Gold papagolfjuliet Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2015 Another possibility from the Bluebell stable is of course the Terrier, since the Hornby offering is now very long in the tooth. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locoholic Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I know they're a minefield for detail differences, but I would love to see a Bachmann unrebuilt Merchant Navy, especially in blue. Hornby have had the chassis for years but instead have done far more obscure models like the P2, Clan, Duke of Gloucester, so I think they have indicated that they're not interested, and the Bachmann range does lack some of the "glamour" compared to Hornby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2015 I'll just pretend they electrified to Dungeness :-) No need to fit internal lighting then. They would glow naturally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold papagolfjuliet Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2015 I know they're a minefield for detail differences, but I would love to see a Bachmann unrebuilt Merchant Navy, especially in blue. Hornby have had the chassis for years but instead have done far more obscure models like the P2, Clan, Duke of Gloucester, so I think they have indicated that they're not interested, and the Bachmann range does lack some of the "glamour" compared to Hornby. I would think that, having done a Grafar one, there would be those at Barwell who would think that they had given Hornby more than enough time to do the obvious thing and produce an as-built MN. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if they announced one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poor Old Bruce Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Personally, I don't understand those urging manufacturers to re-make something (like the Manor and Terrier alluded to above) when there are reasonably good models already available and lots more prototypes to go at which have not been modelled yet. I know different folk like different things but if there was a choice between a re-hashed Terrier or a new North London 0-6-0T / LSWR G6 / Caley Beetlecrusher / Buckjumper / Johnson 0-4-4T (many other types are available), I know where my money would go. Edit: Tin hat ready Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Talking about new models, what locos are missing from the standard range? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tetsudofan Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2015 ....and looking at smaller gauges the Welshpool & Llanfair "Earl" and "Countess" to go with the W&L ex-Zillertalbahn 2-axle coaches that have been announced for this year by Liliput. There's a great picture one of the locos and coaches on page 68 of the recently published "Narrow Gauge Lines of the British Isles" by Peter Johnson. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonC Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I heard that rumour, though I heard it associated with another blue box producer. I guess a few people have, as much of last year there was very few on ebay and prices were quite good, but between December and now they've been streaming out there...3-4 a week and prices have crashed. Would love someone to do it... then re-use the cab ends and other parts to produce a 303 EMU. How much would a 5 Car Transpenine be though.. £400 - £500 price mark though ? would that not be an expensive way to get a Class 303? Is the DC Kits option not better? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkSG Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Personally, I don't understand those urging manufacturers to re-make something (like the Manor and Terrier alluded to above) when there are reasonably good models already available and lots more prototypes to go at which have not been modelled yet. I know different folk like different things but if there was a choice between a re-hashed Terrier or a new North London 0-6-0T / LSWR G6 / Caley Beetlecrusher / Buckjumper / Johnson 0-4-4T (many other types are available), I know where my money would go. Edit: Tin hat ready From a business perspective, a popular prototype that has been done successfully in the past but is now very much in need of a revamp is probably less of a commercial risk than an entirely new model of a prototype that hasn't been done before. That's not an argument for never doing new prototypes, but there does have to be a balance. I don't think Bachmann would want to do the steam equivalent of Heljan's diesel range and become a niche manufacturer of oddities and low volume prototypes. Keeping a decent number of up to date models of popular mainstream prototypes in the range is important. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold papagolfjuliet Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2015 Personally, I don't understand those urging manufacturers to re-make something (like the Manor and Terrier alluded to above) when there are reasonably good models already available and lots more prototypes to go at which have not been modelled yet. I know different folk like different things but if there was a choice between a re-hashed Terrier or a new North London 0-6-0T / LSWR G6 / Caley Beetlecrusher / Buckjumper / Johnson 0-4-4T (many other types are available), I know where my money would go. Edit: Tin hat ready Oh, hardly urging. More sort of informed speculation based upon previous trends. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poor Old Bruce Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Talking about new models, what locos are missing from the standard range? See the annual Wish List. Or do you mean the 'BR Standard' range? From a business perspective, a popular prototype that has been done successfully in the past but is now very much in need of a revamp is probably less of a commercial risk than an entirely new model of a prototype that hasn't been done before. That's not an argument for never doing new prototypes, but there does have to be a balance. I don't think Bachmann would want to do the steam equivalent of Heljan's diesel range and become a niche manufacturer of oddities and low volume prototypes. Keeping a decent number of up to date models of popular mainstream prototypes in the range is important. I take your point Mark as the makers would not need to do much prototype research to re-hash an existing model but how many punters would say "I've already got one of them, why should I buy another" (notwithstanding the Mainline type of chassis of course). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locoholic Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 From a business perspective, a popular prototype that has been done successfully in the past but is now very much in need of a revamp is probably less of a commercial risk than an entirely new model of a prototype that hasn't been done before. I disagree. For example, I can't see myself buying a single DJ Models J94. I have a couple of Hornby ones, and they're plenty good enough for me. I also haven't bought a single revamped B1 from either Hornby or Bachmann, as my old Bachmann ones are still going. I think novelty is a very powerful incentive to purchase (the Hornby P2 springs to mind), and there are still plenty of locos begging to be done as RTR - just flick through an Ian Allan ABC from 1960 or thereabouts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poor Old Bruce Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Oh, hardly urging. More sort of informed speculation based upon previous trends. You call it what you want and I'll call it what I want . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaneofFife Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 ha......heres one.......EM or P4 ready to run versions of existing models? theres a whole new couple of gauges to fill catalogues with there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 See the annual Wish List. Or do you mean the 'BR Standard' range? I did mean the B.R. Standard range. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonC Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I disagree. For example, I can't see myself buying a single DJ Models J94. I have a couple of Hornby ones, and they're plenty good enough for me. I also haven't bought a single revamped B1 from either Hornby or Bachmann, as my old Bachmann ones are still going. I think novelty is a very powerful incentive to purchase (the Hornby P2 springs to mind), and there are still plenty of locos begging to be done as RTR - just flick through an Ian Allan ABC from 1960 or thereabouts. .... or pick a later one and start with the AC loco pages Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2015 I did mean the B.R. Standard range. OzzyO. On that note, I wonder if part of the delay with the chassis upgrade of the Ivatt 2-6-2T announced years ago is because Bachmann is developing an 84000 at the same time. Last I saw was that the Ivatt had progressed to the drawing office, but that was a few months ago. Otherwise, the 77000s are not yet available RTR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombatofludham Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 In terms of DMUs I would have thought the most obvious low hanging fruit is the BRCW Class 104. It would use the existing 57ft underframe as recycled under the 105/101/Original Derby Lightweights, it had a wide regional distribution, and included some interesting livery variations ("Mexican Bean", NSE and the Blackpool "white stripe" units). Ran in 2, 3 and 4 car versions as well. Must be a shoo-in soon before they start tooling up for a 64ft underframe. I also think that the 172 might be forthcoming, although which flavour of 172 to make - LM gangwayed units or the London/Chiltern non-gangway variant - would be an interesting conundrum. I can't help thinking that, given the 170 is still not DCC ready, if they move to re-engineer the 170 to make it DCC ready as they did the 158, it could be that would be the moment they tool up for the Class 172 as well, although the underframe details would vary as well as the more obvious bodyside window differences. Can't help thinking an Electrostar must be somewhere in the planning miasma, the most numerous class of electric unit with similar designs operating both north and south of the Thames, and lacking such fiddly gimmicks as dual lighting circuits, table lamps and multi coloured interiors as in the Blue Pullman, not as expensive to produce as people think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2015 Can't help thinking an Electrostar must be somewhere in the planning miasma, the most numerous class of electric unit with similar designs operating both north and south of the Thames, and lacking such fiddly gimmicks as dual lighting circuits, table lamps and multi coloured interiors as in the Blue Pullman, not as expensive to produce as people think. Now that would make a happy Budgie :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonC Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 In terms of DMUs I would have thought the most obvious low hanging fruit is the BRCW Class 104. It would use the existing 57ft underframe as recycled under the 105/101/Original Derby Lightweights, it had a wide regional distribution, and included some interesting livery variations ("Mexican Bean", NSE and the Blackpool "white stripe" units). Ran in 2, 3 and 4 car versions as well. Must be a shoo-in soon before they start tooling up for a 64ft underframe. I also think that the 172 might be forthcoming, although which flavour of 172 to make - LM gangwayed units or the London/Chiltern non-gangway variant - would be an interesting conundrum. I can't help thinking that, given the 170 is still not DCC ready, if they move to re-engineer the 170 to make it DCC ready as they did the 158, it could be that would be the moment they tool up for the Class 172 as well, although the underframe details would vary as well as the more obvious bodyside window differences. Can't help thinking an Electrostar must be somewhere in the planning miasma, the most numerous class of electric unit with similar designs operating both north and south of the Thames, and lacking such fiddly gimmicks as dual lighting circuits, table lamps and multi coloured interiors as in the Blue Pullman, not as expensive to produce as people think. I'd agree with the Class 104 but the Class 120 has got to be an equally low-hanging obvious fruit too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locoholic Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 A Class 104 would also be another lost opportunity for Hornby, who've had the Class 110 for decades, which has been the starting point for many home-made Class 104s. I wonder about Bachmann producing a class A2/3, too. Big, named engines sell disproportionately well - did any of them carry the BR blue livery? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2015 Another possibility from the Bluebell stable is of course the Terrier, since the Hornby offering is now very long in the tooth. Indeed, and from a Bluebell point of view, it is iconic for them as a Terrier was their first and most recognizable locomotive in the form of Stepney. But, I get the feeling Bachmann won't do it off their own back as it is such a physically small locomotive. If another party were to suggest it as either a commission or a joint venture then maybe it could happen with them. I suspect, however, that the NRM probably wouldn't do it for Boxhill, and I can't think of any shops that would take the gamble either. Dapol have done very recent scans and research for their O gauge model, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a 4mm version from them at a later date if only to try and recoup some of the R&D costs. That possibility might be enough to put Bachmann off even if a third party were to approach them. Personally, I'd like to see DJ Models do the 4mm Terrier, if only because I think he would take getting it right more seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R Marshall Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 A Class 104 would also be another lost opportunity for Hornby, who've had the Class 110 for decades, which has been the starting point for many home-made Class 104s. I wonder about Bachmann producing a class A2/3, too. Big, named engines sell disproportionately well - did any of them carry the BR blue livery? Not according to RCTS Part 2A - the A2/3s apparently went from LNER Green to BR Green from July 1949 to April 1951. While I'd welcome one of these from Farish, I seem to remember some debate about National Collection engines being targetted - in any scale I'd have one of these NER beauties: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Legend Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 3, 2015 Didn't Bachmann rule out multiple units last year on grounds they would be too expensive to produce and that they wouldn't have been able to produce the 350 or Blue Pullman at today's prices? So I think an electro star is extremely unlikely, along with anything else that's more than 2 cars long . Afraid that also means the 120,which I would certainly find attractive , but which I think is ruled out because of the above, and the need for special couplings , wiring to enable it to be controlled by one dcc chip. Personally I'd settle for simple couplings if it meant it got produced. It's difficult to build enthusiasm though when items that were announced 2 years ago are still at a very early stage of development. I'm thinking Stanier 2-6-0 here , not that I want one, but can I get excited about something that might appear 3 or 4 years hence? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 3, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 3, 2015 On that note, I wonder if part of the delay with the chassis upgrade of the Ivatt 2-6-2T announced years ago is because Bachmann is developing an 84000 at the same time. Last I saw was that the Ivatt had progressed to the drawing office, but that was a few months ago. How much drawing office time does it take to amend the CAD of the Ivatt 2-6-0 chassis to provide a pivot for the second pony truck and a rear mounting for the body? The differences between the Ivatt version and the BR 84000 are negligible so it doesn't really qualify as an excuse. Unless Bachmann are going further than their announced plan and re-tooling the whole thing, this model could and should have been in the shops inside six months of the announcement. If they are progressing as quickly on the Stanier Mogul and the Brighton Atlantic, we'll be lucky to see either by the end of the decade. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.