Introducing Revolution Trains

[Revolution Mike]

 

 

As some of you may have already guessed if you have been following the N gauge Pendolino thread, Revolution Trains is a new company created by Ben Ando (Ben A) and myself (Mike Hale).

The idea is that it offers railway modellers the chance to work together to fund the production of models that are too niche – or risky - for the mainstream manufacturers. It grew from the attempt to use the “Kickstarter” crowd-funding website to raise the money required to develop and produce a model of Virgin’s Class 390 Pendolino train in N-gauge.

During our Kickstarter campaign it rapidly became apparent that while Kickstarter has many qualities to commend it, it’s not really optimised for the British model railway market. Among the difficulties encountered were the strict Kickstarter time limits, and its “all or nothing” approach to fundraising.

Revolution Trains offers an alternative – a crowd-funding community where members can support proposals, nominate new ones and watch as these pet projects reach the point of being funded and produced.

We have an enormous respect for the model railway manufacturers and retailers but they quite rightly tend to focus on the “big ticket” items. For models where projected sales are, say, between 1,000 and 3,000, Revolution Trains offers modellers a mechanism by which they can work together to get what they want, not what the trade decides to offer.

So far we’ve worked with Rapido on the N Gauge Pendolino, and we are looking forward to working with Rapido and other manufacturers in the future.

How does it work?

Revolution Trains has created what it called the “4D system"

Every proposed model has a funding goal, based on the total needed to tool and produce a set number of models.

Customers visit the website, look at the ideas and Declare an interest in those they like, though NO MONEY IS TAKEN and they can cancel at any time.

When the project hits 90% of its "interest" target, a Deposit is requested.

Those deposits then fund Development and customers can follow the progress of the 3D scans and CAD work and have a say in the production of the models.

Finally, the models are manufactured and shipped, the balance is collected, and the customer takes Delivery via secure courier.

Unlike Kickstarter there is no time limit, and work can begin before the full target is reached when it becomes clear that the model is viable. Of course, if a model stays on the site for several months without generating support it can be taken off and replaced with another.

It is Revolution’s intention to have around 3-4 models under consideration at any time, and in any era or scale.

Hopefully with our N Gauge Pendolino we proved that the British model railway consumer is more sophisticated and less conservative than many believed. The market is changing, and so are modellers: more connected, more savvy, and more willing to make things happen than ever before.

We've got quite a few ideas of potential future projects which we hope to announce in a few weeks once the Pendolino design is well under way.

www.revolutiontrains.com (our website which we will continue to update and improve!)

[Revolution Ben]

Hello all,

 

There are some FAQs on our website but of course we will try to answer any queries here too.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Kris]

Great idea guys.

 

Are you more likely to concentrate on models that are of interest to yourselves (modern image?), or do all ideas have a chance?

[Revolution Ben]

Hi Kris,

 

I guess initially there is bound to be a bit of a bias towards the things Mike and I are interested in, but if we reach the point where we have brought 2 or 3 items to market (or at least under development) beyond the Pendolino then we will certainly want to encourage our "community" of modellers to come up with ideas themselves, and that need not preclude anything.

 

We would see future models having a named sponsor who would make the case for the model, help with some of the basic research work (ie getting permission to use photographs, maybe obtaining access to laser scan the prototype, getting any licencing permissions sorted) and those models could in theory be anything.  Having said that, it does make sense to follow basic principles:

 

*  Model not already available RTR

*  Model not already available as a kit, unless the kit is vey old, very poor or manifestly does not answer the demand

*  Model complements other items out there

*  Accurate drawings, or a prototype to 3D scan, are available

*  Bearing in mind the mechanical limitations in N, the model is technically feasible, and customers can accept necessary compromises (ie motor inside saloon.)

*  There is a realistic market for 1000 units.

*  Potential backers willing to pay realistic prices

 

With this in mind, what did you have in mind?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[mercig studios]

This is a great idea and fantastic to see two proactive guys actually doing something really positive for the scale.

 

Some very quick ideas:

 

class 92 would seem an obvious first punt.

 

A little more left field would be to actually do bodies that could fit on existing manufactures chassis, like a 45 plated over/split headcode or a correct 56 body for the Dapol chassis.

 

Commission Farish to do shorter bogie towers for the 37/47/55 etc, to reduce the gap between body and bogies.......this one modification, that could be just clipped in, makes more difference to the look of a loco than any amount of detailing and may be a relatively cheap tooling cost with a high uptake once people see the visual difference.

 

M

[Kris]

Hi Kris,

 

I guess initially there is bound to be a bit of a bias towards the things Mike and I are interested in, but if we reach the point where we have brought 2 or 3 items to market (or at least under development) beyond the Pendolino then we will certainly want to encourage our "community" of modellers to come up with ideas themselves, and that need not preclude anything.

 

We would see future models having a named sponsor who would make the case for the model, help with some of the basic research work (ie getting permission to use photographs, maybe obtaining access to laser scan the prototype, getting any licencing permissions sorted) and those models could in theory be anything.  Having said that, it does make sense to follow basic principles:

 

*  Model not already available RTR

*  Model not already available as a kit, unless the kit is vey old, very poor or manifestly does not answer the demand

*  Model complements other items out there

*  Accurate drawings, or a prototype to 3D scan, are available

*  Bearing in mind the mechanical limitations in N, the model is technically feasible, and customers can accept necessary compromises (ie motor inside saloon.)

*  There is a realistic market for 1000 units.

*  Potential backers willing to pay realistic prices

 

With this in mind, what did you have in mind?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

Hi Ben

 

I strongly suspect that what I would like (or dear, must avoid wish listing time) would not currently have a realistic market of 1000 units in a kickstarter / revolution trains form, yet, in 3 years time this might well change. This would be the only major limitation based on your list. Other similar locos are manufactured by the major manufactures. 

 

The item in question would be a County class loco. Once the GWR soc's new build gets closer to completion there may well be the market for a model, with interest from those modelling the West Country on possibly current day modellers if it is used on rail tours.  Of course you would have to contend with those who say that all GWR locos look the same 

 

Kris

[Ozexpatriate]

Gentlemen,

 

good luck with your enterprise.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...Revolution Trains has created what it called the “4D system" (Declare, Deposit, Development, Delivery)

 

Of course, if a model stays on the site for several months without generating support it can be taken off and replaced with another...

 

So actually it's a 5D system. Declare or Death, Deposit, Development, Delivery.

 

You need the threat of imminent Death to focus minds, or folks will dither/haver/hum and haw/shilly-shally/swither/vacillate forever. (There's lots of terms for this behaviour because we are so very good at it, those were just a few that immediately came to mind.) All the best with it, the idea deserves to succeed.

[Revolution Ben]

Hi 34,

 

Yes, good points!  Our strategy to mitigate against the dawdling is three pronged:

 

1)  We don't want any money, at least not until the model goes into development.  So it costs nothing to Declare.

2)  Although we don't have the extreme Kickstarter time pressures, we won't leave models listed forever.  If there is clearly little interest after a couple of months we will bin it and put up something different.

3)  If a model does go ahead we will ONLY produce the thousand or so stated.  So if you do delay then you'll be at the mercy of the ebay speculators later.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

[Great Western]

I think a obvious prototype would be the Class 180 units, you could call them the HST replacement that never was.

 

Liveries:

FGW original as delivered.

FGW unbranded or with Northern purple lined addition

Grand Central

Hull Trains

 

Wide operating network:

South Wales to Paddington - Bristol and Worcester FGW.

Kings Cross to Hull and ECML Hull Trains

Kings Cross to Sunderland and Bradford plus ECML Grand Central.

 

Iconic design similar to the 390s.

 

Ideally in OO, but probably more useful in N like the. 390.

 

Excellent development

 

Great Western

[traction]

 

With this in mind, what did you have in mind?

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

I've put my idea forward of the HS4000 Hawker Siddeley "Kestrel"

 

I have the Heljan model in OO and it's such a striking livery and a fantastic model.

I would love to see it in N-gauge.

 

As I don't model any era or area and run what I like the look of, it's easy for me to pick something.

Would there be enough demand for a Kestrel though......

I really hope so.

 

Cheers

 

Ian

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Okay, it may be worth mentioning on this thread, bearing in mind an active discussion has been in place on the N Gauge forum. The class 377 'Electrostar' has been a frequent candidate on various wish-lists, so below are some plus-points for such an initiative...

 

Do you think there are 1000 modellers to buy one?

 

If we are talking units (of sale, as opposed to EMUs!), then yes, I am reasonably confident that 1,000 units would be achievable. Whilst some modellers may get a single set, a large number may well be interested in two or three

 

Would they accept a sensible price?

 

Suggestions are that sensible price of around about £175.00 would be acceptable. Obviously the price-point has a number of factors...

 

Do you know where we could get proper drawings, or is there a real one left to laser scan to be confident of accuracy?

 

Presumably plans and blueprints are available from Bombardier, and there are plenty of units out there for scanning. Also, Southern appear to be a very image-conscious company, who advertise quite widely. They may well welcome (or at least be receptive to) an initiative of this nature...don't forget the 171 has been produced both in 00 and N (and due out again this year). Not so sure about First-group however...FCC did not turn out to be the happiest experience for them. The general thrust of the N gauge forum thread is that the 'second-generation' light cluster (377140-164, 377/2, 377/4, 377/5, 375/8, 375/9) design would be a suitable candidate (noting the pantograph on the 377/2 and 377/5 sets); perhaps with the 377/2 (with its wide sphere of operation) being a initial option.

 

Given current N Gauge technology would there be any serious manufacturing compromises

 

No, I don't believe so. In fact there are little or no compromises as far as I can see...for example the tinted glass effectively masks the fact the motor may well fill one of the carriages.

[gelboy45]

I would like to suggest the iconic Southern Electric (flatfronted) 4 Sub emu, long lived, seen on a variety of suburban routes in a number of liveries and only twocarriages to scan/design etc. Just sayin....

 

Gerry

[Karhedron]

I've put my idea forward of the HS4000 Hawker Siddeley "Kestrel"

 

I have the Heljan model in OO and it's such a striking livery and a fantastic model.

I would love to see it in N-gauge.

This is a good point, I think that anything done by Heljan in 00 is potentially a good punt as these items are less likely to appear from one of dual-scale manufacturers.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Best wishes with this venture. Interesting approach.

 

I still have a "disconnect" between the development costs frequently quoted and the numbers of units apparently necessary to make a model viable. I need someone to explain the maths to me. Obviously though, an operation such as this has the advantage of direct selling so no retail margin in the financial mix.

 

Taking out existing rtr and kits, it's quite difficult to find a diesel or electric candidate beyond those already mentioned. But a lot of N gaugers don't  do kits, so perhaps various first-generation DMUs.

[Tim H]

Couple of questions:

 

Is the focus on locomotives & multiple units, or coaches and wagons as well?

 

Will the focus be on all-new items, or will you also consider commisioning livery variants from Bachmann or Dapol?

[Karhedron]

I still have a "disconnect" between the development costs frequently quoted and the numbers of units apparently necessary to make a model viable. I need someone to explain the maths to me. Obviously though, an operation such as this has the advantage of direct selling so no retail margin in the financial mix.

I can help a bit with this as I went through a similar exercise last year when attempting to crowd-fund a streamlined GWR Railcar.

 

Costs for a project are split into 2 parts, fixed costs and unit costs. Fixed costs are things you only have to pay for once, no matter how many models you make. These include things like laser scanning, developing CADs and creating the tooling. For the Railcar project, this was somewhere in the region of £50-60K.

 

Unit costs are costs you need to pay for each model you make. These include raw materials, manufacture, decoration, packing and distribution. These costs are directly proportional to the number of models that are sold. Costs depend on the size and complexity of the model, £50 total is reasonable for a single locomotive or railcar.

 

For the project as a whole to be financially viable you need the following to hold true for a production run of N units.

 

RRP x N = Fixed costs + (Unit costs x N) + profit margin

 

So for a model that will have only 1 production run, the Fixed costs need to be divided between N models in order to cover the development costs as well as the manufacturing and shipping etc.

 

This is why popular models can be sold for less than unpopular ones. The fixed costs can be divided over a larger number of models, each sold at a lower price. Let us consider an imaginary model that had fixed costs of £50,000 and unit costs of £50. The sums below assume there is no profit taken and only costs are covered.

 

If you had a production run of 1000 models, that would give a total cost of £100,000 so you would need to sell each model at £100 in order break even.

 

However if you had a production run of 2000 models, that would give a total cost of £150,000.  But you could to sell each model at £75 and still break even.

 

You can see why the total size of the production run is important and why manufacturers normally look for models where they can sell upwards of 3000 units to be commercially viable as the above figures do not include profit margins.

[Joseph_Pestell]

 

I can help a bit with this as I went through a similar exercise last year when attempting to crowd-fund a streamlined GWR Railcar.

 

Costs for a project are split into 2 parts, fixed costs and unit costs. Fixed costs are things you only have to pay for once, no matter how many models you make. These include things like laser scanning, developing CADs and creating the tooling. For the Railcar project, this was somewhere in the region of £50-60K.

 

Unit costs are costs you need to pay for each model you make. These include raw materials, manufacture, decoration, packing and distribution. These costs are directly proportional to the number of models that are sold. Costs depend on the size and complexity of the model, £50 total is reasonable for a single locomotive or railcar.

 

For the project as a whole to be financially viable you need the following to hold true for a production run of N units.

 

RRP x N = Fixed costs + (Unit costs x N) + profit margin

 

So for a model that will have only 1 production run, the Fixed costs need to be divided between N models in order to cover the development costs as well as the manufacturing and shipping etc.

 

This is why popular models can be sold for less than unpopular ones. The fixed costs can be divided over a larger number of models, each sold at a lower price. Let us consider an imaginary model that had fixed costs of £50,000 and unit costs of £50. The sums below assume there is no profit taken and only costs are covered.

 

If you had a production run of 1000 models, that would give a total cost of £100,000 so you would need to sell each model at £100 in order break even.

 

However if you had a production run of 2000 models, that would give a total cost of £150,000.  But you could to sell each model at £75 and still break even.

 

You can see why the total size of the production run is important and why manufacturers normally look for models where they can sell upwards of 3000 units to be commercially viable as the above figures do not include profit margins.

 

 

I know that you mean to be helpful. But I have a background in cost accountancy and a business studies degree, so I already know how the maths ought to work.

 

What I meant to say subtly (and you are not the only one to have misunderstood) is that, on the basis of the data that I have, the maths don't work. Taking into account the supposed development costs, one needs a good deal more than 1000 units to make it wash its face financially (unless price is very high at which point many would-be purchasers will drop out).

 

That either means doing something more popular (3000 units +) or picking something that comes in a lot of varietes/liveries but with many common parts to spread costs.

[mikeharvey22]

I think that it can work, and the N Pendolino is a demonstration of that.

 

Amortising fixed costs over the production run is a good standard applied often by makers of brass and resin kits where the set up/fixed costs are lower than for diecasting or plastic moulding. I have done it myself with replacement coach sides for SNCF Corail coaches in N. I collected the orders for 18 different variants, designed the artwork and tooling to match the demand pattern and produced what was needed to supply all the orders plus my own modest requirements. I covered all the costs incurred except my time which I donated.

 

It seems to me that the Revolution Trains business model is a slightly more sophisticated version of what applies to many of the businesses in the Smaller Suppliers section of RMWeb. The 3000+ production run is for the traditional market. What Revolution Trains is aiming for is much more modest, with niche models that will not satisfy the 3000+ criteria. I would not be surprised to find that there are a couple more Pendolino sized successes in this calendar year.

[Revolution Mike]

Couple of questions:

 

Is the focus on locomotives & multiple units, or coaches and wagons as well?

 

Will the focus be on all-new items, or will you also consider commisioning livery variants from Bachmann or Dapol?

 

Hi Tim

 

All rolling stock.

 

The focus is primarily expanding the choice of models available so really focussing on new items.  That isn't to say that we would never do a re-livery, but it would have to be a fairly compelling case. To my mind there are easier ways to get re-liveries to happen eg try and mobilise the membership and lobbying power of the NGS to better use.

 

Cheers, Mike

[Revolution Mike]

What I meant to say subtly (and you are not the only one to have misunderstood) is that, on the basis of the data that I have, the maths don't work. Taking into account the supposed development costs, one needs a good deal more than 1000 units to make it wash its face financially (unless price is very high at which point many would-be purchasers will drop out).

 

Without knowing what data you have it is hard for us to tell why you don't think the maths works! 

 

The commercial negotiations will differ for each project depending on what the expected sales are, how much a manufacturer wants the tooling etc etc. But at its simplest I think it is a reasonably fair assumption that the prices will be marginally higher or similar to RRP for similar items from Farish or Dapol.  Ultimately if people are not prepared to pay the necessary price to produce something then it doesn't get produced!

 

Ben and I are under no illusions that we are suddenly going to be producing / announcing 15-20 models per year (nor do we want to - we both have full time jobs we enjoy!).

 

Cheers, Mike

[Stu from EGDL]

Hi Gang,

 

I think that I would tend to agree with 'Great Western' in that a 180 would be an inspired choice....with several liveries and a fairly wide geographic area. Also judging by the relative scarcity of Dapol FGW HSTs and 153s, the a modern Great Western unit may be a good seller.

You might be able to use the second part of the argument to justify a 165/166 also....

 

Later,

Stu from EGDL.

[Joseph_Pestell]

I am quite surprised that no manufacturer has tackled the 180 in 4mm given that they cover quite a large part of the country. It is probably the best remaining option amongst current day stock in N.

 

I still think though that some 1st generation units might be a better shout. But there is risk of one of the 4mm companies that already have them doing a "reduction" to 2mm.

 

I am not convinced that there is a sufficient market for EMUs. But there must be, with modern manufacturing techniques, potential to cover the 317/8/9.... variants from one set of tooling.

[Multiple identity account]

Hi Ben and Mike....

First of congratulations on your venture. You've achieved something I'd love to actually do and so my best wishes to you. You'll have proved that there is a market out there for many things and with how close the funding came for the Pendolino. This just goes to show that there is a market out there for such things. I always felt that modern image AC locos had a market, it's just the lack of equipment and proper RTR locos that are missing. 

Projects I'd love to see go ahead in future:-
- N gauge Class 87
The Class 87 produced by Graham Farish is old, outdated and in all honesty is in dire need of new tooling. Furthermore I personally don't think it looks like one. It lacks a lot of detail and certainly deserves another chance. Starting from 1973/75 till present they can still be seen in use on Britain's railway.
- N gauge Class 90
As with the Class 87, the current GraFar offering is not suitable for today's standards. The Class 90's have been around from 1987/90 till today. A wide range of liveries available.
- N gauge Class 92
No manufacturer has done one till date. Dapol's plans were scrapped. CJM's offering is expensive and still not upto date. 

Cheers!
Jeff...

[TomE]

We've had to wait a long time to get a model of the premier train running along the West Coast Mainline. Perhaps with this new way of producing models we might not wait as long for a train which, like it or not, is going to be a large part of our railway scene for a long time to come:

 

 

Just a thought...

 

Tom.