What do you think will or should be the next development in detailing of RTR models?

[Dagworth]

7 minutes ago, johndon said:

 

A friend has a very small cameo layout that has been to multiple shows and he has a small speaker hidden behind the fascia which plays some bird song.  You have to be within a couple of feet of the layout to hear it and, as a result, works rather well without annoying anyone away from the layout.

One show I took a layout to had a similar layout near us with bird song. On the second day we pinned a photo of my cat to the front of our layout to try to frighten the birds away! 

[Steven B]

I think the future will bring us more DCC controlled operating gimmicks - working doors wouldn't surprise me now we have control over pantographs.

 

DCC sound will progress - we've got reasonable sound from the loco but the noise from the rest of the train is lacking. Even on a small preserved railway you'll hear the coaches long after the loco has faded into the background noise.

 

Personally I'd want to see NEM coupling specifications followed - meaning I can take a coupling from one manufacturer and fit it to another's wagon/loco/coach without the need for files, Tacky Wax or other means to get them to fit and me mounted at the correct height.

 

Steven B.

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, DCMarvel said:

Proper reliable automatic couplings that do not require DCC so every modeller can operate a shunting sequence hands free. The Brian Kirby method could easily be made part of the coupling with track sections made with magnets for sleepers so the spacing was spot on. Brian would be a rich man. This could also be made retro fit.

It could be made operable by Bluetooth/NFC, but I would prefer an operating mechanism aboard the vehicle, as it can be restrictive and counter-realistic to have to uncouple at set locations; ideally one should be able to uncouple at any location on the layout (not asking for much, am I?).  A major improvement would be a standard coupling.  We have a standard mounting, the NEM box, but the tension lock couplers the UK are irreversably wedded to are anything but standard.  Different profiles for bar and hook, different materials, differening 'sets' of the bar in relation to the buffer faces, and different shanks. 

 

The shanks are an unavoidable issue as the couplings have to be mounted in a variety of positions on different stock, but greater standardisation across manufacturers would be a big step towards more reliable operation, a pre-requisite for automation.

 

I use a shunting pole, piece of stiff wire bent to a suitable shape attached to a torch, on my BLT and find that one of my acceptable compromises.  I prefer to uncouple from overhead as opposed to the sideways on approach needed with 'spade' uncouplers, not always convenient next to platforms. 

[The Johnster]

3 hours ago, johndon said:

 

Having spend a weekend next to a  layout that had 'ambient' sounds, I couldn't agree more...

There's that as well, and it is a consideration for home layouts where the layout is in the general part of the home.  I have a DC HM6000 controller with basic sounds which are turned off because I think is a bit of an imposition on others in the building (I live in a flat in a house of other flats), and The Squeeze already has doubts about my sanity because of my chuff chuff noises...

[wombatofludham]

6 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Off course we are all entitled to do whatever we wish (within the law).

 

We are also entitled to hold and politely express our own opinions about this hobby and what we feel is best about it. For me that is creating a model of a railway that is as realistic as I can achieve with my limited skills and budget. Highly detailed locos with various high tech options but running on poorly realised trackwork in "strange surroundings" doesn't match what I like, but each to his own.

Apologies if it came across as a criticism of your views, it absolutely wasn't meant that way - in fact, I agree with you about the need for good looking scenery to match the quality of RTR stock - but my comments were borne of a frustration I have experienced from a limited involvement in exhibitions that some modellers are very critical of anything less than Pendon quality exhibits or modelling, whereas I believe that as a hobby it should satisfy the individual first and we should give credit for the fact they are doing something other than passively watching a screen.

On scenic objects, I concur the early RTP resin buildings could look clunky and ill defined but more recent releases seem to be much crisper and better painted.  On my layout I've used a mix of RTP resin and plaster buildings, in some cases repainted or lightly modified, together with plastic kits and 3d printed items.  I've kit-bashed and repurposed items, using a 3d printer to make modifications, and horrors of horrors (to some at any rate) mixed HO and OO scale buildings, which is actually achievable so long as you introduce some space between them to reduce the obvious scale dimension clash.  RTP and kits can deliver a good basis for creativity, even simply adding signs and doing a bit of a repaint can personalise an item, and it will allow a modeller to devote a bit of time to looking at how the scenery would look in real life in the area they are modelling so they can modify their designs accordingly (eg, in my case, repainting "Cotswold" honey stone buildings into a terracotta sandstone finish more suitable for the West Midlands).  In my case it's the natural OCD of a retired Town Planner driving my scenic planning, but given the wide range of readily available off the peg aids to creating good scenery and environment I think many more could find achieving a good result much more satisfying.

On track however, I'm a heretic and sticking with Code 100, I find it much more reliable than the Code 75 I've experienced elsewhere which seems far less tolerant of any sloppiness in the running ability of locos.  That's my experience, no doubt others have better experiences.

Edited October 25, 2021 by wombatofludham

[Dagworth]

1 hour ago, Steven B said:

I think the future will bring us more DCC controlled operating gimmicks - working doors wouldn't surprise me now we have control over pantographs

The only thing I want to see is working serck vents on 47s, such a visible moving part needs to be reproduced. No doubt as soon as I do one by hand a manufacturer will announce it. 
 

Andi

[D9020 Nimbus]

2 hours ago, Steven B said:

Personally I'd want to see NEM coupling specifications followed - meaning I can take a coupling from one manufacturer and fit it to another's wagon/loco/coach without the need for files, Tacky Wax or other means to get them to fit and me mounted at the correct height.

For N gauge, I'd have said for Bachmann/Farish to produce a coupling compatible with Dapol Easi-Shunt. They were going to do something along those lines ten years or so ago, but it never appeared.

 

I'd have said for Farish to use better gears but they've already done this — a most welcome change. For both Dapol and Farish, I'd suggest they need to give more attention to how they install the standard couplings — both have produced models where the couplings can’t lift high enough… this isn't generally a problem on European models.

[F-UnitMad]

2 hours ago, The Johnster said:

The Squeeze already has doubts about my sanity because of my chuff chuff noises...

Depends on which part of your body you make the chuff chuff noises with...  

[The Johnster]

Fair point…

 

I also make woo woo noises, but the same comment could be made about those.

[Nova Scotian]

14 hours ago, Kris said:

The next technological step forward could well be augmented reality on layouts. Imagine software that will combine live footage of your layout, establishing where roads, rivers and buildings are before overlaying people walking around, animals moving, birds flying and weather happening. How much would this bring to the experience. 

Kris really is on to something here.

 

I mentioned this thread to my partner and she goes "what about augmented reality? The people are always really hard to model for movement, so couldn't you get the glasses to lock onto features on the layout and run a sequence? If you had a sensor for when the train stops at the station that could run the sequence where people get off or on the train from the platform".

 

So you're still creating the environment, you're still modelling, you're still running trains, but the "people" part (and hopefully cats - you've got to have cats) can be spliced in with the glasses.

 

Edit for clarity: I mentioned it to my partner without Kris' comment, but had seen it and thought it insightful. My partner, who does not model railways, immediately jumped to AR, and despite the lack of modelling is a very smart person, so I jumped on here to point to how smart Kris is/was!

Edited October 25, 2021 by Nova Scotian

[HonestTom]

In locomotive terms, I don't think we can get much better ("This retooled Duchess includes the driver's tin mug and an authentic wad of cotton waste! The sound chip includes the sound of the fireman bumping his shin with a choice of regional swearwords!") I think a big one would be improved factory weathering with more subtle effects. I personally avoid factory weathered models like the plague because that one-colour airbrush effect looks worse to me than a pristine engine. You could even use it to increase the range of liveries available, e.g. here's a 9F that's fairly recently ex-works with only light weathering, here's one at the end of steam.

 

 

If we're going nuts, I'd also suggest more authentic wagon interiors - how about different shades for individual planks, and a bit of grime? I can't stand a wagon with a plain grey or orange interior, one of my biggest expenditures is wood-coloured paint.

 

And if coach lighting is a thing, how about more detailed coach interiors?

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by HonestTom

[jcm@gwr]

2 minutes ago, HonestTom said:

 

And if coach lighting is a thing, how about more detailed coach interiors?

 

 

More to the point, how about more realistic lighting levels, or seated figures with sunglasses!

[Cunningham Loco & Machine Works]

Steam locomotive models with solenoids in the cylinders instead of a great lump of motor drivetrain protruding into what should be "daylight".

[The Johnster]

Or a small compressor driving them by air pressure, and providing the correct exhaust beats from the chimney in relationship to the driving wheel revolutions.

 

If you think things are bad now, Cunningham, you should have seen RTR 40 years ago!  Hornby were still churning out locos with plastic boiler skirts, and, like Lima and Airfix, were using tender drives where you could see the spur gears revolving below the frames.  Mainline, like everyone else, were using weak pancake motors that had to run very fast to develop useable, but still usually insufficient, power, and then be geared down through spur trains to have a chance of reasonable controlability, which in those days meant down to about scale 20mph.  Very few tank locos had any cab detail, and the Mainline 2251's motor protruded into the cab Hornby Dublo style.  Hornby were still producing new models with smaller centre drivers and buffers sitting 2mm too high, a specification that went back to Rovex days in order for the Black Princess to cope with 13" radius curves.  Lima's tension lock couplings were hideous even by tension lock standards and Hornby's weren't much better.

 

Coach sides were a scale foot thick, and wagons had moulded brake levers and brakes miles out of alignment with the wheels, clawing uselessly at fresh air.  Buffers were plastic and looked like mushroomy blobs, and a lot of stock had plastic wheels.  Worst of all, some locos used rubber traction tyres, which ruined pickup performance, spread crud all over your layout, and then wore out and tripped your locos up.

 

I reckon that future development will feature miniature traction motors on each axle, of which the shaft is in fact the axle, leaving space for daylight and sub-boiler detail including inside motion and valve gear settings that respond to direction and cut-off, and more room in the boilers for speakers and DCC type jiggerypokery.  DCC will be obsolete, though, replaced with onboard rechargeable power supplies controlled by NFC/Bluetooth.  No track wiring, no pickups, no track or wheel cleaning, only point and signal motors, plastic track that can be left out in the rain with no problems.  As there will be no gears to induce friction or pickups to act as brakes, the mechs will be very free running and excellent slow control with perfect smooth stops and starts will result.  I'll be a'moulderin' in my grave long before any of this happens, though...

 

The motors will not need to be particularly powerful, as each axle in a train can be powered in a similar way.  The NFC will switch those on the train off when the loco is uncoupled.

Edited November 4, 2021 by The Johnster

[Sir TophamHatt]

I can see automatic pantographs becoming the new standard, but just the same of what many others have said...  window wipers, opening doors, real smoke... potentially heading into diesel fumes too.

The problem I have with development like this is it means it'll be the same units or locos being re-made... yet again.

 

There needs to be a push to create un-modelled units and locos - there's still a large amount of DMUs and EMUs that simply aren't around, but could be fairly easily.

[The Johnster]

What's unmade so far in RTR?  As Sir Topham says, a good number of dmus and emus, and also a huge number of pre-grouping steam types.  Let's have a look at post-grouping steam:-

 

GWR - 54xx, 74xx, 81xx, Collett 31xx.  'Streamlined' King and Castle.  Some diesel railcars.

 

Southern Railway - emus, S 0-6-0ST, River 2-6-4T, Q 0-6-0, N1x.

 

LMS - Fowler Dock Tank, Austin 7, Fowler 2-6-2T and Stanier 2-6-2T.  Various emus.

 

LNER - Sentinel railcars, P1, Worsborough Beyer Garratt. 

 

Ministry of Supply - Riddles Austerity 2-10-0

 

Pre-grouping is a hugely undeveloped area, even if you restrict it to types that made it into BR ownership.  I'll mention what I think are some obvious gaps:-

 

.GWR - 517, Metro, 1854, Bulldog, Aberdare.

Absorbed & constituent - TVR A, TVR 04, Rhymney R.

 

Southern absorbed/constituent - LBSCR C2/C2x, SECR L.

 

LMS abs/const - LNW George V, Jumbo.  Midland 3F, 2F.  Caley Dunalsatair. 

 

LNER abs/const - NER B16, Z.  GER E4 2-4-0. 

 

There are many others but I highlighted these as being well known and having long service lives, making them arguably more attractive to modellers and possibly to producers, but I have no real idea of what it is that makes a prototype suitable or otherwise to manufacture, market, and make profit from.

 

But put me down for a GW 1854, Collett 31xx, or 44xx.

[Jol Wilkinson]

My interest is in the LNWR and kit building so I largely don't know what is available RTR but both the LNWR/LMS Jumbo and the MR/LMS 3F are already available.

[PenrithBeacon]

It would nice if EM/P4 variants could be offered.

[cypherman]

Hi all,

Here is a possible development that may happen as it has already happened in radio controlled aircraft world. And cameras are now small enough to do it. A small camera in the cab connected to a handheld controller with a video display. On the display there will be all the controls to run the engine. Possibly a similar display to that found on Railworks railway simulator or other railway simulators. I only have Railworks so I cannot comment on them. So basically you will be in the engine cab driving the engine. You should be able to set the difficulty levels via the controller. The camera could be fitted on a small gimble so you can look left and right and backwards in a steam engine. A second camera would probably be needed in diesels and electrics..

Edited November 9, 2021 by cypherman

[Michael Hodgson]

13 hours ago, Sir TophamHatt said:

I can see automatic pantographs becoming the new standard, but just the same of what many others have said...  window wipers, opening doors, real smoke... potentially heading into diesel fumes too.

 

Yes, the opening doors for Southern Region suburban stock could open just as the train is pulling into a platform. 

[Vistisen]

22 minutes ago, cypherman said:

Hi all,

Here is a possible development that may happen as it has already happened in radio controlled aircraft world. And cameras are now small enough to do it. A small camera in the cab connected to a handheld controller with a video display. On the display there will be all the controls to run the engine. Possibly a similar display to that found on Railworks railway simulator or other railway simulators. I only have Railworks so I cannot comment on them. So basically you will be in the engine cab driving the engine. You should be able to set the difficulty levels via the controller. The camera could be fitted on a small gimble so you can look left and right and backwards in a steam engine. A second camera would probably be needed in diesels and electrics..

I remember an article i Railway modeller back when I was a lad. That is to say the 70's to start 80's. It was a prophecy of railway modelling in 2020. The author imagined that when you went down to the model railway club, you shut yourself in in a mock-up cab of your locomotive and operated the controls, doing this caused a real model with a small camera which was replicated on tv screens the shape of the windows of your locomotive. !0 years ago, I would have laughed at this and pointed out that this would be done via computer simulation. Now days it could be done. I have mounted a go-pro on wagons and driven it around my layout about 5 years ago. Since then, cameras have got even smaller. My phone can record I bluray quality! I should think that putting miniature cameras in a train send the pictures via Wi-Fi could be a hit. Both in paly value for kids controlling and viewing trains from their phones. And for the adult ‘kids’ who could recreate full-size simulators of their favourite cabs. (Lots of potential aftermarket products) It would then open up for the ability to extend the physical layout into a virtual one. With active backscenes, or even augmenting the lengths of trains to make them longer than they really are.

[Flying Pig]

2 minutes ago, Vistisen said:

It would then open up for the ability to extend the physical layout into a virtual one. With active backscenes, or even augmenting the lengths of trains to make them longer than they really are.

 

I suspect augmented reality will provide smoke and steam effects, long before anyone solves the physics of doing it in the real world convincingly.  It could provide a more complete sound environment than the speaker-in-loco paradigm too.  Whether everyone will like this is another matter - expect long threads about the boundaries of real modelling.

[SD85]

12 hours ago, The Johnster said:

What's unmade so far in RTR?  As Sir Topham says, a good number of dmus and emus, and also a huge number of pre-grouping steam types.  Let's have a look at post-grouping steam:-

 

GWR - 54xx, 74xx, 81xx, Collett 31xx.  'Streamlined' King and Castle.  Some diesel railcars.

 

Southern Railway - emus, S 0-6-0ST, River 2-6-4T, Q 0-6-0, N1x.

 

LMS - Fowler Dock Tank, Austin 7, Fowler 2-6-2T and Stanier 2-6-2T.  Various emus.

 

LNER - Sentinel railcars, P1, Worsborough Beyer Garratt. 

 

Ministry of Supply - Riddles Austerity 2-10-0

 

 

You forgot the U class, which is the glaring omission in the Southern scene. Why no manufacturer has done one yet is beyond me. You'd have thought that one of the small suppliers or shops would have commissioned one, but no.

 

And the argument that it can't be produced because it's too similar to an N class to make it worthwhile doesn't wash any more I'd say, given that Hornby are doing a BR 78xxx, a loco which is basically the Ivatt 2MT tender engine with minor detail differences. If there's room in the market for a 78xxx and an Ivatt 2MT, then there's room for an N and a U class.

 

The other major omission is a 4-CIG, practically all the Mk1 third rail EMUs have been done except for this one. Likewise the 375/377 Electrostar series, an obvious choice for a model given their profusion in the London/SE area. You need either to do a model of the Brighton main line in 4mm scale post 1960s.

 

And why did a 466 Networker EMU get made as far back as the late 90s, yet no one has done the 4-car 465 variant?

 

Edited November 9, 2021 by SD85

[SD85]

Though the loco I'd like to see the most is a Z class tank. That said these were shunting yard locos primarily, so it's possibly something of a limited clientele that would buy them.

[The Johnster]

They were used very successfully as bankers between Exeter St.David's and Central.  This illustrates an issue with modelling heavy marshalling yard shunting locos, though; very few of us have the space to model such environments and recreating the loose shunting or hump shunting of wagons running under their own momentum for considerable distances is next to impossible; physics doesn't scale down by x76.  Such locomorives, which included NER and GCR 4-8-0s and 0-8-4s, and Barry Railway Cooke 0-8-2s (specialists for a very short haul transfer traffic between yards at Cadoxton) were one trick ponies, and not much use in general traffic, so difficult to justify on most layouts. 

 

That said, the same argument could be invoked against Adams Radials or Beattie Well Tanks in their later years, as the places they worked were very precise and well known, so their use on layouts not directly representing the Lyme Regis or Wenford Bridge is incorrect.  Huge numbers of modellers have purchased them under the authority of Rule 1 and ignored this. 

 

And any South Wales LNWR layout should include a cameo involving a derailed Beames 0-8-4T in the sidings with the rails spread under it...

 

My list wasn't intended to be exhuastive, so I'd be quite happy to have the U included; I'd simply not thought of it in my GWcentric world.  There are no doubt a good number of locos in the LMS and LNER abs/const worlds as well that should have been included; there must be plenty of L&Y, G&SW, GN, H&B, and GC examples of numerous long lived types that might be worthy of consideration.