What locomotives and rolling stock should be produced first?

[PeterStiles]

I'm shocked that no one has suggested that clearly the most sensible loco and rolling stock to produce to popularise the scale would be Thomas, Annie and Clarabel.

cough.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

3 minutes ago, PeterStiles said:

I'm shocked that no one has suggested that clearly the most sensible loco and rolling stock to produce to popularise the scale would be Thomas, Annie and Clarabel.

cough.

A fair point, but I think Bachmann now hold the licensing rights, and with their active investment in 009 in addition to all the Graham Farish N Gauge (and Liliput H0e), Bachmann don’t get seem to be getting mentioned as often as others.  You’d also need Setrack.  It could happen of course, but maybe not for a while?  Just a thought, Keith.

[47606odin]

I think to kick the scale off, starter sets would be the way to go, like I bought in Z scale. A loco, okay, a 31 in this case, with half a dozen wagons to suit, an oval of track, loop and sidings. Controller included. The Marklin starter sets in Z are awesome, and even have electrically operated points and double slip. Look them up

[HonestTom]

I'd crib pretty heavily from Dapol's O gauge range. The market the manufacturers seem to be aiming at is people who want something true scale, so I think a good starting point would be stuff that's less glamorous. I would also edge towards small prototypes, suitable for micro and compact layouts, because I think that's how a lot of people would start out when experimenting in the scale.

 

So, if I were starting such a range, my first four locos would be basic tank engines representing each of the Big Four.

- GWR 57xx

- LMS Jinty

- LNER J50

- LBSC Terrier

 

I might also give consideration to one of those Sentinel shunters that could be produced in LNER, LMS, GWR, BR, WD and private owner liveries.

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, PeterStiles said:

I'm shocked that no one has suggested that clearly the most sensible loco and rolling stock to produce to popularise the scale would be Thomas, Annie and Clarabel.

cough.

and Nellie & Polly?

[eldomtom2]

13 hours ago, rodshaw said:

The North American outline market is there for the taking for anyone willing to give it a go. There are no locos being produced at all at present, and the rolling stock offerings are meagre.

The S100 could be a good "dip-your-toe-in-the-water" choice. Used all over Europe, so you have sales there to fall back on, and several were sold into industrial use in the US.

[whart57]

15 hours ago, britishcolumbian said:

 

Arnold did a Köf in 1:120...

There's a lot more room inside the body of a Kof than inside the body of a small MW

[whart57]

2 hours ago, HonestTom said:

I'd crib pretty heavily from Dapol's O gauge range. The market the manufacturers seem to be aiming at is people who want something true scale, so I think a good starting point would be stuff that's less glamorous. I would also edge towards small prototypes, suitable for micro and compact layouts, because I think that's how a lot of people would start out when experimenting in the scale.

 

So, if I were starting such a range, my first four locos would be basic tank engines representing each of the Big Four.

- GWR 57xx

- LMS Jinty

- LNER J50

- LBSC Terrier

 

 

 

Do those locos actually fit into a strategy of "something true scale"?

 

I'm guessing the GWR Pannier does and I can't comment on your LNER choice but I would query the LMS Jinty. Weren't they primarily shunters?

 

It's the Terrier that doesn't fit. Yes, great for Colonel Stephens lines, and examples did turn up on other parts of the Southern, but the reason the Brighton was selling them off to the likes of Stephens was that they had been supplanted by larger engines across most of the network well before the Grouping.

 

What would someone contemplating a small foray into Southern or BR(S) based layouts model? That's a tricky one. There are the other half of the West Country branchlines of course, Seaton instead of Ashburton. At the other end of the network there is Hawkhurst as a popular example for a BLT or for the more adventurous, Allhallows. Terriers would not be useful on any of them. Some might be tempted to do a London suburban terminus post electrification but before the demise of steam. Iain Rice did a nice layout plan of a terminus based on Caterham. That would require a suitable EMU set plus an ex-SECR C class for the goods. The C class would find a home on most other Southern BLTs as well though in the absence of a third rail it would need to be partnered by something like an M7 on a push-pull set.

 

Away from BLTs there are some excellent examples of BR(S) and Southern small layouts in 3mm scale built by the sadly missed Peter Bossom. Peter may no longer be with us but I believe his small exhibition layouts have found new homes

 

Edited June 17, 2022 by whart57

[whart57]

Friday afternoon, time to be silly, I suppose

[HonestTom]

1 hour ago, whart57 said:

 

Do those locos actually fit into a strategy of "something true scale"?

 

I'm guessing the GWR Pannier does and I can't comment on your LNER choice but I would query the LMS Jinty. Weren't they primarily shunters?

Jinties also worked branch lines, goods trains and even commuter trains now and again. As I say, I'm thinking primarily in terms of what would be useful for compact and micro layouts. Basically, I'm thinking of engines you don't need much of an excuse to own, regardless of the size of your layout.

1 hour ago, whart57 said:

 

It's the Terrier that doesn't fit. Yes, great for Colonel Stephens lines, and examples did turn up on other parts of the Southern, but the reason the Brighton was selling them off to the likes of Stephens was that they had been supplanted by larger engines across most of the network well before the Grouping.

This is true, but I'm having a hard time thinking of an equivalent to the others that would have the same kind of appeal and usefulness as the other three in the same size range. Maybe the E1? Terriers are a popular class of locomotive with a lot of potential livery choices, and I think the fact that there have been four RTR versions in three scales backs that up. They can be used on a wide range of duties quite authentically, and if you're building a micro-layout, you're probably thinking more in terms of a branch line, shunting yard or light railway than something main line. But you could find an excuse to use one on a larger layout if you really wanted to.

Edited June 17, 2022 by HonestTom

[Nearholmer]

Jinties. worked suburban passenger trains on the ex-North London Railway through the 1920s, 30s, and I think 40s, hauling four-wheeled coaches. Even though the NLR was past it’s peak by then, and some routes electrified, it was still a pretty intense steam-hauled operation.

 

They also came onto LT and SR territory with coal trains from Brent to the various ex-MR coal depots in south london. 

Edited June 17, 2022 by Nearholmer

[Nearholmer]

Small steam locos for the SR and BR(S) are a nightmare, because they tended to stay put in the territory of their original pre-grouping owners. I’d forget them until much later, if the scales takes off, and make an Ivatt 2-6-2T instead, because they worked on BR(S) and a lot of other places, although all the valve gear questions arise.

 

I’d be resigned to the SR and BR(S) being served last, steam, diesel, and electric, unless it emerges that potential buyers of southern things have tons more spare cash than anyone else.

[whart57]

41 minutes ago, HonestTom said:

Terriers are a popular class of locomotive with a lot of potential livery choices, and I think the fact that there have been four RTR versions in three scales backs that up. They can be used on a wide range of duties quite authentically

 

They are popular, I'll grant you that. The Horsham club had a "Terrier Night" earlier this month to celebrate 150 years of the Stroudley Terrier (no, don't take the hump north of the Border, we do know about the earlier Highland Railway version but hey, we are deep in London and Brighton country)

 

 

More than four RTR versions in three scales plus one kit built version in another scale.

 

But popular doesn't mean useful. They were useful to Colonel Stephens but the SECR didn't really get much use out of the one they bought to use on the Sheppey Light Railway. They were replaced on their South London stamping ground because larger engines were needed to handle the growing traffic so spent a lot of their life as works shunters and empty stock trains. Not the stuff of model railway layouts.

 

The most useful Southern tank engine was probably the M7 but given it's an 0-4-4T probably not the easiest for manufacturers. Next would probably be the SECR H, again an 0-4-4T, and then things like the G6. I would really say that for the Southern an 0-6-0 tender engine should be a starting point. The C would be my choice. OK, it didn't get west of Salisbury but nor did the LSWR 0-6-0s get east of Croydon. There isn't an easy choice.

[Nearholmer]

The Q has always attracted manufacturers for this reason, although TBH there weren’t that many of them. It’s also good because it can share a chassis with a 4F.

[whart57]

14 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I’d be resigned to the SR and BR(S) being served last, steam, diesel, and electric, unless it emerges that potential buyers of southern things have tons more spare cash than anyone else.

 

The route into BR(S) might well be via EMUs

[johnofwessex]

I'd start with 'Catch Me, Who Can' then move on via Locomotion, Puffing Billy and the Steam Elephant to Rocket

[mdvle]

5 hours ago, HonestTom said:

The market the manufacturers seem to be aiming at is people who want something true scale, so I think a good starting point would be stuff that's less glamorous. I would also edge towards small prototypes, suitable for micro and compact layouts, because I think that's how a lot of people would start out when experimenting in the scale.

 

It's a difficult choice.

 

There is a lot of sense to what you say, but on the other hand one of the additional attractions of going TT:120 for people in OO (or even O) will be the ability to fit more into their existing space.  So focusing on stuff for micro/mini layouts could end up hurting the long term chances of success.

 

5 hours ago, HonestTom said:

So, if I were starting such a range, my first four locos would be basic tank engines representing each of the Big Four.

- GWR 57xx

- LMS Jinty

- LNER J50

- LBSC Terrier

 

The problem with attempting to appeal to everyone is you end up satisfying none.

 

Having a single loco for each of the Big Four does a modeler no good if suitable rolling stock/buildings/etc are unavailable.

 

So as much as it may make some people (hopefully short term) unhappy better off focusing on a single railway an offer at least 2 different locos plus the rolling stock required for a complete layout - which in this case because Peco has already led the way likely means going GWR.

 

But my personal guess is that the steam stuff will follow more slowly.  Given that we are effectively 60 years from the end of steam, the flexibility of BR era diesel (locos and DMUs) means to me the best option for the first several years will be BR diesels and rolling stock.

[Nearholmer]

Just now, mdvle said:

But my personal guess is that the steam stuff will follow more slowly.  Given that we are effectively 60 years from the end of steam, the flexibility of BR era diesel (locos and DMUs) means to me the best option for the first several years will be BR diesels and rolling stock.

Yes, I think that the “nostalgia window” has moved on, although preserved lines do

inspire people to model someone else’s formative years, and non-steam prototypes seem better-suited than many steamers to what is a very small scale, easier to get right in both appearance and function.

[mdvle]

5 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

I do have a surplus of OO / 4mm that I need to sort through for sale.  Not that I particularly want to, I just don't have the space since I've moved.  But I've a limit on how much I can afford to pay for TT:120 locos and I would say around £100 mark for a tank loco and around £200 for a tender loco 700/T9 sort of thing.  

 

With Heljan's Class 31 coming in at £200, and with it being a small market without the volume of sales of OO, I don't think we will see anything at the £100 range.

[whart57]

5 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

The Q has always attracted manufacturers for this reason, although TBH there weren’t that many of them. It’s also good because it can share a chassis with a 4F.

 

But not wheels ........

[britishcolumbian]

7 hours ago, Derek 19B said:

How about a Merchant Navy in original condition with three green mk1’s. Perhaps say No 28 Clan Line . I’d by one bring back a lot of memory’s.

I Have Clan Line in OO in original condition but it would be nice to have small one sat on the shelf.

What else did I have back then?

Britannia, 3ft shunting tank as my railway man uncle called them never a Jinty that was the 1f, a diesel shutter (08)

and the DMU that Trang did. Also a spare 3ft body ,so could have two .

 

derek

 

 

 

 

I'd consider a Merchant Navy in general but would jump on Canadian Pacific

[Flying Pig]

23 minutes ago, mdvle said:

So as much as it may make some people (hopefully short term) unhappy better off focusing on a single railway an offer at least 2 different locos plus the rolling stock required for a complete layout - which in this case because Peco has already led the way likely means going GWR.

 

But my personal guess is that the steam stuff will follow more slowly.  Given that we are effectively 60 years from the end of steam, the flexibility of BR era diesel (locos and DMUs) means to me the best option for the first several years will be BR diesels and rolling stock.

 

I think it's the other way round: Peco's video strongly suggest they believe there's GWR steam coming quite soon.  The locos and stock are the heavy investment that's going to drive the direction of TT120 as an rtr scale.

 

The question is (assuming Peco are right), how quickly will the range grow to the extent that makes a small layout a satisfying possibility.  I think that's at least one loco, a passenger train and a goods train and preferably two locos, one for the goods and one for the passenger.  That's the sort of range we saw appear quite quickly when Mainline and Airfix came on the 00 scene 40 od years ago but would likely be too big an investment for a manufacturer to do all at once these days.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

 

With Heljan's Class 31 coming in at £200, and with it being a small market without the volume of sales of OO, I don't think we will see anything at the £100 range.

 

Today’s edition of the weekly World of Railways email newsletter has a very good interview with Ben Jones of Heljan ( @61661 ) following the Class 31 announcement.  Price is discussed, and the point is very reasonably made that this is a start-up venture with commercial risk; but if TT:120 gets established there might be a favourable price differential v new r-t-r OO down the line (my words, no puns intended).  This is not a promise, but makes good commercial sense to me.

 

Elsewhere I know I’ve made my own observation that, while design and tooling is a big part of the cost equation (esp. for small batch runs), there may be some small long-term benefits from less use of materials - particularly for packaging - plus maybe a volume saving on shipping (though more relevant for big batches).  These may not make items much cheaper, but may help avoid some of the price rises.

 

Heljan’s experience with r-t-r UK O-Scale diesels will have given them insights in developing new markets, and I’m pleased to see them in TT:120 for that reason too.  Their r-t-r 009 partnership with Peco also gets a mention in the video as another example (a bit different as 009 wasn’t new and can use OO accessories, though more mainstream r-t-r has perhaps only now taken off).

 

Interestingly, the July BRM Editorial suggests pre-ordering as one way to help ourselves, retailers and manufacturers.  Consumers may get a lower price, retailers get guaranteed business and manufacturers may see a clearer picture of demand.  The merits or otherwise of this for smaller retailers are outside the scope of this Forum, but I could pre-order a Class 31 and have time to save up before it’s due.  At the moment I’m wondering if something comes out with regards to coaches before I commit, given the choice of liveries.

 

Just some thoughts, Keith.

Edited June 17, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[britishcolumbian]

30 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

With Heljan's Class 31 coming in at £200, and with it being a small market without the volume of sales of OO, I don't think we will see anything at the £100 range.

 

Based on the 31 being pitched at £200 (which is reasonable - if at the higher end - for a comparable Continental engine, e.g. a new issue Roco M62 is about £170) and using prices for Continental stock from biggest producer Tillig as a guideline, I'd expect goods wagons to be in the £20-£40 range (higher end for bogie wagons), and passenger stock to be £50-£60.

 

Examples of MSRP for steam locomotives are around £260 for a BR44/BR50/BR52 2-10-0 from Tillig, £290 for a BR58 2-10-0 from Arnold, down to £80 for a Roco BR80 0-6-0T and around £195 for a BR55 0-8-0 from Piko (somewhat more for the same model in Hungarian, Czechoslovak, or Polish livery). So I'd venture to say one should expect similar or slightly higher prices, but not lower, for comparable British outline steam.

[D9020 Nimbus]

The real question that manufacturers need to decide is whether the initial range should be concentrated or scattered. Class 31s in the transition era were pretty much confined to the ER; they didn't make it north of Doncaster even until the mid 1970s. In the blu era they were more readily to be found.

 

What will go with the 31 though is BR-era freight rolling stock — Vanwide, 16t mineral, brake van. Possibly others too—grain wagons, Presflos and the like. As far as East Anglian branches are concerned, DMUs and railbuses covered most passenger workings. Heljan have done the W&M railbus in OO and could possibly downsize it. The best DMU would undoubtedly be the class 101—not as typically East Anglian as the 105 but much more widespread, longer lived, and appeared in lots of liveries.

 

One advantage of the GWR in the steam era is its standardisation. A 14xx + auto trailer, 45xx, B-set and 57xx cover a lot of branch line possibilities. None of the other "Big 4” companies were that standardised. There aren't many branch lines where Jinties were used.