So How about a Class 88 Dapol?

[Dixie Dean]

Only just found this thread, but yes I would have a couple as well.  Could easily be developed into a class 93 as well.  That would give a couple of liveries.

[adb968008]

10 class 82’s - 8- liveries Blue, Blue HYE, Blue FYE pre-Tops, Post Tops, w/headcodes, w/oheadcodes, Intercity, Large Logo blue

 

15 class 83’s - 8- liveries Blue, Blue HYE, Blue FYE pre-Tops, Post Tops, w/headcodes, w/oheadcodes, w/Headcode, blue white spots, Intercity

 

10 class 84’s - 8 - liveries Blue, Blue HYE, Blue FYE pre-Tops, Post Tops, w/headcodes, w/oheadcodes, w/Headcode, white spots, RTC Red/Blue

 

1 class 89 - 3 / 4  liveries Intercity, Intercity Swallow, GNER + Gbrf someday ?

 

so far null interest in any of these, except Triang with its 82 chassis on an 81 body.

 

indeed theres more interest overseas.. the Class 83 was a parent ancestor to Polands EU06 and 900 locos hence, classes available in HO include EU06 (20) , EU07, (480), ET41 (200 ‘A’ units + 200 ‘B’ units) , EP07 (100 rebuilds) all of which have been modelled.

 

As the hobby has existed the entire duration of these classes lifetimes, and never been of interest, why would an 88 be different ?

 

my guess liesdown to the ability to produce 71000 Duke of Gloucester.. 1 livery, 3 variants (early/late logo, plus variations in OHLE warning flashes)..  Steam sells well enough to give an ROI, Electrics dont give that same level of confidence.

Edited February 12, 2019 by adb968008

[The Black Hat]

On ‎12‎/‎02‎/‎2019 at 22:07, adb968008 said:

10 class 82’s - 8- liveries Blue, Blue HYE, Blue FYE pre-Tops, Post Tops, w/headcodes, w/oheadcodes, Intercity, Large Logo blue

 

15 class 83’s - 8- liveries Blue, Blue HYE, Blue FYE pre-Tops, Post Tops, w/headcodes, w/oheadcodes, w/Headcode, blue white spots, Intercity

 

10 class 84’s - 8 - liveries Blue, Blue HYE, Blue FYE pre-Tops, Post Tops, w/headcodes, w/oheadcodes, w/Headcode, white spots, RTC Red/Blue

 

1 class 89 - 3 / 4  liveries Intercity, Intercity Swallow, GNER + Gbrf someday ?

 

so far null interest in any of these, except Triang with its 82 chassis on an 81 body.

 

indeed theres more interest overseas.. the Class 83 was a parent ancestor to Polands EU06 and 900 locos hence, classes available in HO include EU06 (20) , EU07, (480), ET41 (200 ‘A’ units + 200 ‘B’ units) , EP07 (100 rebuilds) all of which have been modelled.

 

As the hobby has existed the entire duration of these classes lifetimes, and never been of interest, why would an 88 be different ?

 

my guess liesdown to the ability to produce 71000 Duke of Gloucester.. 1 livery, 3 variants (early/late logo, plus variations in OHLE warning flashes)..  Steam sells well enough to give an ROI, Electrics dont give that same level of confidence.

 

Agreed, but part of the limiting factor is that electrics should also have wires and that in turn limits the sphere of interest as you model a line that would have had the infrastructure. However, some will still buy the engine and run it without it as they can use imagination or run what they want.

 

With steam, the engine can still go anywhere and the DOG also has an example that has run recently, meaning it hits todays operation as well as transition period. It is also a BR standard, so people will buy it to get examples of all the types. These are extra reasons why DOG has worked, not just livery variations.

[TravisM]

5 hours ago, The Black Hat said:

 

Agreed, but part of the limiting factor is that electrics should also have wires and that in turn limits the sphere of interest as you model a line that would have had the infrastructure. However, some will still buy the engine and run it without it as they can use imagination or run what they want.

 

With steam, the engine can still go anywhere and the DOG also has an example that has run recently, meaning it hits todays operation as well as transition period. It is also a BR standard, so people will buy it to get examples of all the types. These are extra reasons why DOG has worked, not just livery variations.

 

Surely the same could apply to a Class 88 as they are now starting to spread their wings.  A pair were recently noticed on the GEML and heading towards Ipswich.

[Markwalker67]

Dapol are going to class 88

then said it will be announce this year

[No Decorum]

I wonder if the servo-operated pantos on Bachmann’s Class 90 and Accurascale’s 92 are giving Dapol nightmares. 

[TomScrut]

On 14/02/2019 at 16:51, Markwalker67 said:

Dapol are going to class 88

then said it will be announce this year

 

Looks like they aren't going to be announcing it this year!

 

On 16/02/2019 at 00:21, No Decorum said:

I wonder if the servo-operated pantos on Bachmann’s Class 90 and Accurascale’s 92 are giving Dapol nightmares. 

 

Yeah I think from now on its going to be a "must have" on electric locos carrying a premium price tag. I have just got a Bachmann 90 and I think it's great!

 

I'd probably be keen on an 88, I prefer the livery to the one on 68s and they perform similar duties.

[Legend]

I’d rather have it without servo and at a more reasonable price . I think DCC and DC markets could well diverge here as DCCers want increasingly high spec models eg pantographs that operate whereas DCers are having all these functions and cost built in , and we don’t really need them 

[TomScrut]

9 minutes ago, Legend said:

I’d rather have it without servo and at a more reasonable price . I think DCC and DC markets could well diverge here as DCCers want increasingly high spec models eg pantographs that operate whereas DCers are having all these functions and cost built in , and we don’t really need them 

 

Yes there is that I suppose. I wonder what percentage of the market is DCC?

 

And just because somebody wants DCC it doesn't mean they want the feature, the one on the 90 wasn't a selling point to me but now I have it I like it! If I could have used a normal decoder in it I probably wouldn't have ever used it. Bachmann should really have put a switch in to cut the servo off to protect it.

 

On the other hand I am in a position where as I only have a 8ft X 6ft layout with minimal off layout storage my current fleet of 10 locos doesn't have that much potential for expansion, I'd probably rather have better models than cheaper ones. A bit like the argument of 2 Hornby 66s vs 1 Hattons one!

[Kaput]

Considering Dapol require enough pre orders to confirm if a single livery Class 68 run is feasible when it requires nothing other than name/number changes I think the chances of an 88 are close to none.

 

Just from a casual glance at the prototype next to a 68 it looks like the only part of the tooling they could reuse is the bogies and even thats debatable.

 

Add the fact the compass livery on the 88's is different (and more complex) than on the 68 and of course the whole theres only 10 of them and all in the same livery so little scope for multiple runs.

[TomScrut]

3 minutes ago, Kaput said:

Considering Dapol require enough pre orders to confirm if a single livery Class 68 run is feasible when it requires nothing other than name/number changes I think the chances of an 88 are close to none.

 

Just from a casual glance at the prototype next to a 68 it looks like the only part of the tooling they could reuse is the bogies and even thats debatable.

 

Add the fact the compass livery on the 88's is different (and more complex) than on the 68 and of course the whole theres only 10 of them and all in the same livery so little scope for multiple runs.

 

Yes Dapol wanting to know about the 68 kinda looks like they are being cautious to be honest.

 

I think a lot of it will end up being down to whether the 93 could be done at the same time (I doubt this but you never know). If DRS really own the "design" then the 93 probably will have a different appearance. You'd also expect it may be a bit longer given it will have a larger power plant in there but still all the electric gubbins off an 88? I can't see there being more 93s ordered when there are 90s without work and the 93 will be a lot better without overheads than the 88

[Kaput]

IIRC the 93's are planned to be Co-Co as well so it would be some very creative tooling to allow an 88 from the same tools even if they are otherwise similar looking.

[TomScrut]

9 minutes ago, Kaput said:

IIRC the 93's are planned to be Co-Co as well so it would be some very creative tooling to allow an 88 from the same tools even if they are otherwise similar looking.

 

Ah I didn't know that! I was under the impression that during the development of the 68 and 88 it was deemed not necessary for traction? So A) was that actually not correct or B) does the loading get too high on Bo-Bo or C) am I barking up the wrong tree?

[Kaput]

I'd have guessed for axle loading but I've just checked wikipedia and its claiming the 93's are planned as Bo-Bo so it seems my information was out of date. Could bode well for the model chances.

[Dixie Dean]

I've been considering having a go at the class 88 by buying a used 68 shell and converting it, and then altering the underframe appropriately.  Altering the door handles and top of the door shape wouldn't be easy.

 

Here are the 68, 88 and 93 compared:

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by Dixie Dean

[Dixie Dean]

Would be good to be able to get some line drawings or detailed photos of the sides and roof of each.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Dixie Dean

[TomScrut]

15 minutes ago, Dixie Dean said:

I've been considering having a go at the class 88 by buying a used 68 shell and converting it, and then altering the underframe appropriately.  Altering the door handles and top of the door shape wouldn't be easy.

 

Here are the 68 and 88 compared:

 

I'd be interested to know the reasoning behind the doors being different!

[Dixie Dean]

I've not seen any particular reason quoted for it, and can only assume it is a development as a result of use of the class 68s.  Might be worth speaking to a driver to see what they say.  Alternatively it could be for an engineering reason.

[TomScrut]

Also you put the 93 pic in while I was replying. The bogies look different, I guess the 110mph top speed is maybe something to do with that (IIRC 68 and 88 are only 100?) 

 

The body, if the pic is accurate (probably just an early concept based on an 88), looks like a lot of commonality with the 88, if the roof was a separate part (maybe a bit like the Bachmann 90) then assuming the 93 was to be done by Dapol an 88 could be (give or take) a 93 body and chassis with 68 bogies and it's own roof. Bear in mind that a lot of the tooling will be the same to a 68 regardless (small component parts which are common to both) and that even if the body is a new tool if the CAD work is only a few weeks to modify what already exists for a 68 (vs several months from scratch) it knocks a lot of cost out there too.

 

Although if they did a 93 I'd probably be more likely to get that than an 88, other than I prefer the DRS 88 livery to the ROG one.

[Dixie Dean]

I'm sure it would cut costs down to do both a 88 and a 93 at the same time as the differences are minimal.

 

7 minutes ago, TomScrut said:

The bogies look different, I guess the 110mph top speed is maybe something to do with that (IIRC 68 and 88 are only 100?) 

 

The bogies are almost identical, maybe some slightly different routing for cables or pipes, but otherwise very close.  Engineering wise, I think they can cope with a maximum of 125 mph, although they may be restricted to a lower speed in practice.  In the end there may not be many differences.  Hopefully some engineering drawings or photos might be available soon.

 

My layout is diesel and electric and I would quite like one or two of each!

Edited December 31, 2019 by Dixie Dean

[Dixie Dean]

4 hours ago, Legend said:

I’d rather have it without servo and at a more reasonable price . I think DCC and DC markets could well diverge here as DCCers want increasingly high spec models eg pantographs that operate whereas DCers are having all these functions and cost built in , and we don’t really need them 

 

It would be good to offer it as an option.  I quite like it as well.  Would be good if it was less clunky noise wise.

[No Decorum]

The Class 68 was a great success. A couple of reasons were the variety of liveries carried and the wide sphere of operations. The 88 doesn’t have those to offer; not yet, at any rate. However, the 68 was a success for other reasons too. A brand new model of the latest thing on the network is very exciting and the model itself was superb. In particular, the lighting was innovative. These, the 88 can offer. It would, I think, be a disappointment if a servo-operated panto were not part of the package. People would be bound to compare it to Bachmann’s 90 and Accurascale’s 92. Dapol is bringing a lot of new stuff to the market now and is probably a bit too busy to work on an 88; especially as a servo-operated panto would require a lot of thought. Perhaps the 88 wouldn’t sell as well as the 68 (I have six 68s but can’t imagine myself buying as many 88s) but I think the excitement factor should help it sell. With 21s, 29s and 59s out of the way, we might get our wishes granted.

 

Dixie Dean’s pics are enough to make me spill my tea. Excitement would mount as the project proceeded.

 

Would it make a difference if a version were to be offered with a plastic, unpowered panto? Possibly. Something like Hornby’s 87 but with room for a speaker and decoder but a “Railroad” version of a model is not the way Dapol does things. What I do reckon is that a full-fat version of Hornby’s 87 would be welcome; at a reasonable price, of course. A few quid extra and you get Bachmann’s incredible 90. Sorry to wander OT.

[Kaput]

One aspect of putting a powered pan in is adding the motor and wiring for it will probably make it less likely they could just reuse the 68's internals without some major mods.

Theres also the question of available functions for the decoder - the 68 already needs a 6 function to handle its normal lights and on the 00 version the cab lights aren't linked to the decoder at all.

[newbryford]

16 minutes ago, Kaput said:

One aspect of putting a powered pan in is adding the motor and wiring for it will probably make it less likely they could just reuse the 68's internals without some major mods.

Theres also the question of available functions for the decoder - the 68 already needs a 6 function to handle its normal lights and on the 00 version the cab lights aren't linked to the decoder at all.

 

Not a problem with the decoders coming through at the moment

Dapol's new Imperium 3 decoder has 8 function outputs.................

 

The ESU Loksound V5 has 10 (possibly more)

Various Zimo decoders are also more than 6.

[YesTor]

2 hours ago, No Decorum said:

However, the 68 was a success for other reasons too. A brand new model of the latest thing on the network is very exciting and the model itself was superb. In particular, the lighting was innovative. These, the 88 can offer.

 

Precisely.