Have your say with Rapido

[rapidoandy]

4 hours ago, No Decorum said:

Thinking about model railways seems to me a good use of time when in Dismal World. 🤣 I have posted over the years about the desirability of producing older wagons, suggesting that an accurate model of an RCH wagon of some description would be a steady seller. Lo and behold, Rapido has delivered not only them but other pre-grouping types. Looking in particular at the internal details of the WoR NCB wagons, I’m impressed. When Bachmann has been accused of abandoning steam (all sorts of things may be going on behind closed doors), Rapido is producing one new type after another. I’ve begun to notice how much of my spend is going Rapido’s way and I still can’t quite keep up.

 

Have another think about pick ups please, Andy.

Oh I’m not so sure…. Disney time is family time as it’s they who put up with me thinking about model trains and work pretty much constantly for the other 50 weeks of the year…

[MattR]

3 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Three of them!

 

Although they are three foot gauge diesels. The closest the real ones would have came to African wildlife would have been Blackpool or Southport Zoos!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildlife_Express_Train

 

 

Jason

 

True, but as close as I can get to the real thing here in the U.S.. Just like riding the Hogwarts Express cable-powered replica at Universal Studios back in February was as close as I'll get to seeing a real Hall Class, or even any British locomotive at all!

[Combe Martin]

17 hours ago, rapidoandy said:

I really really really must stop reading this on holiday….

 

A couple of comments.

 

If you think leaving off a couple of bits of detail will save in the region of £10 per unit then, respectively, your in cloud cuckoo land. 
 

You then assume many of the bits that you can’t apparently to see are separate - take a look at any of our wagons and you will see that the underfloor ribs / planks / springs are not separate but actually just part of the floor moulding and require no assembly - and we purposefully don’t decorate them with more than one colour (sometimes steel and wood should be two colours).

 

What you can see are different axleboxes, springs, buffers, vac and non vac, open brake ratchets and a host of other details - all of which with the exception of maybe the brake cylinder can be seen from any normal angle. We do them properly because you CAN see them.

 

This leads me to comment - we do wagons properly and have made ourselves a reputation for that why would we go backwards and make one that’s ’sort of proper’? Your future sales are always off the back of your last product - so if we make a ‘less good’ tank and people buy it and don’t like it - then that hurts my future sales.

 

On the argument of ‘people don’t need all the detail’ then let me please point you towards the 6w milk tank that’s currently available in RTR. Surely that’s good enough? Or do you want something a bit better than that but not as good as our usual stuff? 
 

Turning to the milk tankers specifically. As I understand it from talking to people in the know - there are no ‘identical chassis’ with the same rivet patterns and other visible details. They are close, but not identical - so we could t make multiple versions without doing a ‘close enough’ wagon. Similarly as

these are not anchor mount types they will be fiddly to make. Think of all the strapping, ladders, hatches and tank support braces. All of these would need to be separate parts which means lots of tooling and a higher assembly costs. 
 

Don’t get me wrong - I’d LOVE to do one. But the economics need to be looked at carefully PLUS I’m now very aware

that a package has been given to another manufacturer.

 

As I sit here writing this in the middle of Disney World I have another thought:

 

Im constantly aware of pricing. I’m the head of a business but also a modeller and I see both sides very clearly. However it comes down to value and, importantly, do people like what we produce. I’m sat on a bench whilst the baby is asleep and have been watching THOUSANDs of people walk by enjoying themselves. This place is expensive - but you know what you’re getting and it’s very obvious that people are happy to pay it. I suspect some people

have saved for years whilst for others it’s more in reach financially. 
 

I want Rapido to be the same. I want people to know what they are getting with us - a product that brings fun, enjoyment, benefits to mental health and a feeling of value.

Yes we may be expensive compared to some, but that’s ok if it brings the benefits above. We work within a set of lines and I’m comfortable with the limits Rapido has set itself. 
 

Now I’m going back to my people watching - and maybe a train ride shortly…

 

Happy modelling. 
 

Andy

 

Well when your the Boss, your never on holiday.

 

Now, a few answers to your comments/paragraphs, sorry I cant seem to place them within your text without eventually loosing the lot, so I've had to put them here.

 

I wasn't thinking of just a couple of small bits of underframe detail and I did say 'If', and if you look at a couple of pictures in the Hornby thread you'll throw up you hands in horror when you see what I'm referring to.

 

I'm sorry I cant seem to get them inserted here even though they're JPG files. To see what I mean .. Go to 'Forums', then 'Product and Trade Area', then 'Hornby', Page 1 and a bit up from the bottom, a topic called 'A Plea for Accurate Milk Tanks', go to Page 1 and a bit up from the bottom, a couple of pictures from BROSSARD.

 

They are his 'enhancements' in brass to a couple of Dapol O gauge LMS milk tankers, look at the pictures of the underframe underside, what I'm getting at is if its OO gauge will we be able to see all this from the track level side on view ? . I'm guessing that a GWR underframe would be similarly complicated, but much harder to assemble in the smaller OO gauge, and you surely cant model all this as part of the floor moulding ?.

 

I'm not suggesting that the external frame detail is left off.

 

Regarding the existing 2 RTR models.  The reason they are not good enough is because the external details on the side of the underframe are just wrong !  On the Hornby model the brake lever is the wrong shape and dosn't connect with the V hanger, the brake shoes don't line up with the wheels and are attached to the bottom of the spring dampers, and the end tank supports are attached to the top of the underframe whereas they should be attached to the front of the buffer beam.  On the tank body there are no half tank support straps. To be fair to Hornby, they did inherit this model from Lima and they modified the brake lever, just not enough. 

 

The Dapol model has a wrong shape brake lever and the V hanger is in the wrong position, the spring dampers are aligned with the wheel treads and support the brake shoes. There are no brake cylinders or other underframe bits. The tank body has thick wrap round straps that go all the way round the body as part of its moulding rather than finishing at the underframe edge. It has no number so is difficult to tell what diagram (if any) its based on.  Its just generic.   It came from the original Hornby Dublo/Wren range.

 

We would like something thats a lot better.

 

As far as rivet patterns go, these are on the underframe edge so are small and difficult to see, but when I compare pictures and leaving aside maybe the very early ones and maybe the later BR built ones, the GWR ones all look the same to me.  I'm not suggesting making loads of different diagrams, just one Unigate and one Express dairy.

 

And, I do accept that they'll be fiddly to make and that would be 'costed in', I've agonised over how to modify my Hornby and Dapol ones using etched brass bits from Rumney Models and it's not easy. 

 

If you look at all the different kind of OO Gauge railway models, steam locos, diesel locos, loads of coaches, tons of wagons, vans, brake vans, bogie parcels vehicles, there are good quality accurate models available of everything now, except for milk tankers.

 

Have a nice holiday, and dont forget your still at work !.

[Phil Parker]

3 minutes ago, Combe Martin said:

Have a nice holiday, and dont forget your still at work !.

 

Sorry. No.

 

Andy is on holiday. You know he is on holiday. Generously, he has answered a few questions, but you have decided that your continuing diatribe about tank wagons is more important than his time off. Trying to make a joke (being generous, I assume this is what you are doing) doesn't make you deciding that your needs are more important than his valid. Good grief - it's just toy trains!

 

@rapidoandy If you'd like, we can lock the thread until you are back home.

[Combe Martin]

6 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Sorry. No.

 

Andy is on holiday. You know he is on holiday. Generously, he has answered a few questions, but you have decided that your continuing diatribe about tank wagons is more important than his time off. Trying to make a joke (being generous, I assume this is what you are doing) doesn't make you deciding that your needs are more important than his valid. Good grief - it's just toy trains!

 

@rapidoandy If you'd like, we can lock the thread until you are back home.

 

Sorry Phil, but I wasn't expecting an answer so quickly.

[Karhedron]

On 05/05/2024 at 08:11, Combe Martin said:

Produce one common chassis either ex-GWR or ex-LMS (by far the biggest two chassis types) and therefore with the greatest spread.  For example, the GWR chassis is the same whether it has an Express Dairy tanker top or United Dairies/Unigate top, and the same for the LMS chassis.

 

Produce two tanker tops, one Express Dairies and the other Unigate.  I personally wouldn't buy an Express Dairy tanker because they wern't seen at Bailey Gate but I'm sure anyone building an Express Dairy ... dairy ...  probably wouldnt buy a Unigate tanker.  Anyone modelling a main line where tanker 'collection' trains ran would I imagine buy both.  I think I'm right in saying that some of the 'collection' trains collected both dairies tankers.

 

To add some variation to a multi dairy tanker train, and only because the Express Dairy tankers (from what I can see) all had a central top filler with central side ladder, produce the Unigate tanker with a ladder/side platform/frame and top filler at one end. 

 

I have to agree with @rapidoandy. Milk tanks are a bit of a speciality of mine and there are actually a lot more variations than are apparent at first glance. Milk tank chassis did change over the years but the tank fittings are where it really gets interesting. There are central manholes vs end manholes. Some tanks had round ladders, others had square ladders with a platform. Tanks might have 4, 6 or 8 supports between them and the chassis. There might be 2 or 4 straps holding the tank in place. Some tanks had walkways mounted on top. Some chassis had traditional bearings whereas newer ones had roller bearings. To top it off, most of the these features could be found in various combinations with others. Even if you omit detail that is too small to see, there is still more variety in milk tanks than many people realise.

 

So you either produce an accurate model knowing that it is only accurate for a fraction of the tanks in service or some sort of hybrid. If you take the hybrid approach, will the resultant model be any more appealing to detailed modellers than the current offerings from Hornby and Dapol? I have done quite a lot of research along with @BMacdermott and I know what I would choose to produce. But that would just be a level of compromise that would be acceptable to me. Whether it would be economically viable to produce and sell in the volumes required is another matter.

[Harlequin]

2 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

I have to agree with @rapidoandy. Milk tanks are a bit of a speciality of mine and there are actually a lot more variations than are apparent at first glance. Milk tank chassis did change over the years but the tank fittings are where it really gets interesting. There are central manholes vs end manholes. Some tanks had round ladders, others had square ladders with a platform. Tanks might have 4, 6 or 8 supports between them and the chassis. There might be 2 or 4 straps holding the tank in place. Some tanks had walkways mounted on top. Some chassis had traditional bearings whereas newer ones had roller bearings. To top it off, most of the these features could be found in various combinations with others. Even if you omit detail that is too small to see, there is still more variety in milk tanks than many people realise.

 

So you either produce an accurate model knowing that it is only accurate for a fraction of the tanks in service or some sort of hybrid. If you take the hybrid approach, will the resultant model be any more appealing to detailed modellers than the current offerings from Hornby and Dapol? I have done quite a lot of research along with @BMacdermott and I know what I would choose to produce. But that would just be a level of compromise that would be acceptable to me. Whether it would be economically viable to produce and sell in the volumes required is another matter.

 

What would you choose, @Karhedron?

 

[Wickham Green too]

3 hours ago, Karhedron said:

...most of the these features could be found in various combinations with others. ... So you either produce an accurate model knowing that it is only accurate for a fraction of the tanks in service or some sort of hybrid. ...

I suspect you'd be hard pressed to create a hybrid combination of features that didn't actually feature on one wagon at some time !

[cctransuk]

46 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

I suspect you'd be hard pressed to create a hybrid combination of features that didn't actually feature on one wagon at some time !

 

Perhaps, but could you quote the number(s) that were authentic for that combination of features?

 

Face it - manufacturers are aware of the demand, and would like to produce one or more milk tankers - but they are the ones who would have to stump up the investment.

 

I would imagine that they are a little more cautious than you apparently are with their money!

 

CJI.

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Harlequin said:

What would you choose, @Karhedron?

 

I would start with a GWR O38/O42 as these are a pre-war design . Despite being different diagram numbers, these diagrams were identical as far as I have been able to tell. The only difference seems to have been that the O38s were built for United Dairies and the O42s for Express (plus the smaller dairies that had opted for the same fittings. The O39s were the same apart from having a different ladder with a central platform.

 

So from a single model with 1 alternate ladder tooling you could produce O38, O39 and O42. This would cover about 50 vehicles for Express, United Dairies/Unigate, CWS, IMS, West Park Dairy, and Nestle. It would cover both the colourful 1930s liveries and the later BR dull silver and (I think) St Ivel. These worked all over the (G)WR and SR. While only representing about 10% of the fleet, it covers all the main iconic dairies and several colourful liveries.

 

If we could stretch to a second prototype, I would opt for the GWR O57 or O60. These were built in large numbers after WW2 and featured the distinctive ladder and platform at one end. The main difference is that the O60s were a BR design and featured roller bearings.

 

So with 2 toolings and one ladder variant, you could build 3 visually distinctive styles of tank covering everything from an array of colourful 1930s liveries to the St Ivel and dull silver liveries of the diesel era.

[rapidoandy]

10 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

I would start with a GWR O38/O42 as these are a pre-war design . Despite being different diagram numbers, these diagrams were identical as far as I have been able to tell. The only difference seems to have been that the O38s were built for United Dairies and the O42s for Express (plus the smaller dairies that had opted for the same fittings. The O39s were the same apart from having a different ladder with a central platform.

 

So from a single model with 1 alternate ladder tooling you could produce O38, O39 and O42. This would cover about 50 vehicles for Express, United Dairies/Unigate, CWS, IMS, West Park Dairy, and Nestle. It would cover both the colourful 1930s liveries and the later BR dull silver and (I think) St Ivel. These worked all over the (G)WR and SR. While only representing about 10% of the fleet, it covers all the main iconic dairies and several colourful liveries.

 

If we could stretch to a second prototype, I would opt for the GWR O57 or O60. These were built in large numbers after WW2 and featured the distinctive ladder and platform at one end. The main difference is that the O60s were a BR design and featured roller bearings.

 

So with 2 toolings and one ladder variant, you could build 3 visually distinctive styles of tank covering everything from an array of colourful 1930s liveries to the St Ivel and dull silver liveries of the diesel era.

Well - as another expert in the field I’m always open for a chat directly - you know where I am (well Disney) to drop me a PM…

 

Andy

[Wickham Green too]

39 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

Perhaps, but could you quote the number(s) that were authentic for that combination of features? ... I would imagine that they are a little more cautious than you apparently are with their money!

BLOODY 'ELL ........ I was only hypothesizing about the probability of a random combination of features appearing - not demanding that anyone should produce me a model of anything in particular. ☹️

 

 

Maybe it's time to give milk tanks a rest .........

[Bucoops]

17 minutes ago, rapidoandy said:

Well - as another expert in the field I’m always open for a chat directly - you know where I am (well Disney) to drop me a PM…

 

Andy

 

Must be odd being in a Mickey Mouse outfit establishment for a change.

[Harlequin]

33 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

I would start with a GWR O38/O42 as these are a pre-war design . Despite being different diagram numbers, these diagrams were identical as far as I have been able to tell. The only difference seems to have been that the O38s were built for United Dairies and the O42s for Express (plus the smaller dairies that had opted for the same fittings. The O39s were the same apart from having a different ladder with a central platform.

 

So from a single model with 1 alternate ladder tooling you could produce O38, O39 and O42. This would cover about 50 vehicles for Express, United Dairies/Unigate, CWS, IMS, West Park Dairy, and Nestle. It would cover both the colourful 1930s liveries and the later BR dull silver and (I think) St Ivel. These worked all over the (G)WR and SR. While only representing about 10% of the fleet, it covers all the main iconic dairies and several colourful liveries.

 

If we could stretch to a second prototype, I would opt for the GWR O57 or O60. These were built in large numbers after WW2 and featured the distinctive ladder and platform at one end. The main difference is that the O60s were a BR design and featured roller bearings.

 

So with 2 toolings and one ladder variant, you could build 3 visually distinctive styles of tank covering everything from an array of colourful 1930s liveries to the St Ivel and dull silver liveries of the diesel era.

 

Thanks. That sounds like a pretty good plan to me!

 

[Pteremy]

It has probably been mentioned before but I would have thought that some Grain Hoppers would be good. Bachmann have done at least one  excellent BR version - but I am sure that an LMS version would be popular. Something for both mainline and private siding/industrial use. I think that most of the complexity would be in the basic tooling (but I may be wrong!). 

[Andy_C]

Hi Rapido. I’ve just received the email flyer with your latest updates. Sad to see nothing yet on the N Gauge 44’s etc? Any cheeky update you can post on here? No rush - it’s not an urgent question😉

[RapidoCorbs]

We'd like to wait until we have some substantial progress to show on that front. Our N Gauge projects tend to have longer lead times than OO but hopefully it'll be worth the wait.