The next Accurascale steam loco in OO ???

[Islesy]

10 hours ago, The Johnster said:

I can't avoid the impression that some of us think there are six new different locos heading in our direction.

That’s exactly what will happen - 6 new steam locomotive projects are currently (and actively) in progress, at different stages.

[The Johnster]

Wow!  So the thread title should really be ‘The next six completely unrelated Accurascale steam loco projects in 4mm???’.  Six new steam locos is impressive stuff, and means we are more justified in including GW in the list, though perhaps not at the top given that the GW has already had it’s turn with the Manor!

 

You have your work cut out, sir!  Six new locos probably amounts to forty or fifty or more new catalogue items when livery and detail variants for each are considered, double that with DC & DCC options.  And if some are mixed traffic or passenger types, there might even be new coaches for them to pull; now that is a fertile field for exploration!

 

So how far along are you with my Collett 1938 31xx? (just to be clear, this is not a serious question.  I’d prefer an 1854 pannier first.  Although…).

 

 

Edited September 9, 2023 by The Johnster

[Downer]

What we haven’t been told - and presumably won’t be - is how many of the six have previously been done in RTR.

[Black 5 Bear]

18 minutes ago, Downer said:

What we haven’t been told - and presumably won’t be - is how many of the six have previously been done in RTR.

Why exactly would Accurascale tell all and sundry what their future plans/release schedule as it doesn't make good business sense?

The Rails V Hornby Terrier duplication immediately springs to mind!

Additionally, even if a particular model has been done or is indeed current with another manufacturer, does it really matter?

From what I've seen so far, Accurascale have an excellent business acumen and I'm pretty certain they wouldn't produce a particular model if it wasn't going to sell.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2023 by Black 5 Bear

[The Outcast]

Here's hoping one of the six is a 14xx! 🤞

[Francis deWeck]

Now, let me see:

WR 1. County 1xxx, 4-6-0; 2. Collett 2251, 0-6-0.

SR. 1. Q1 0-6-0; 2. U 2-6-0.

LMS. 1. Jubilee, 45552, 4-6-0; 8F, 48xxx, 2-8-0.

 

There, that's six locos.

 

[Mallard60022]

17 hours ago, Mad McCann said:

Fair one.

As long as they put more effort into the bogies on their LMS/LNER types. The current ones are very anemic and cheap looking.

Davy.

Oh I hadn't really noticed that on my Portholes. I don't have any of the new Thompsons so I can't comment. 

I quite like the Bulleids though, despite their 'failings', but Hornby sorted the standard with the Shorties.

Anyway, enough of that as it's a Loco thread.

Phil

[Mallard60022]

50 minutes ago, Francis deWeck said:

Now, let me see:

WR 1. County 1xxx, 4-6-0; 2. Collett 2251, 0-6-0.

SR. 1. Q1 0-6-0; 2. U 2-6-0.

LMS. 1. Jubilee, 45552, 4-6-0; 8F, 48xxx, 2-8-0.

 

There, that's six locos.

Classic. Except I think it should be a Q, as the Hornby Q1 is quite cute. 

I'd have 3 of those and several of two of those and they won't be LMS!

Cheered me up that has, as I'm melting.

Phil

 

[Captain Kernow]

17 hours ago, Mad McCann said:

I am not responsible for your narcissism.

It was meant in friendly spirit but it was clearly a waste of effort.

 

Anyway. Enjoy your Manor.

I don't usually take offence at something others write about me on this forum, but you have managed to do this.

 

Most people, when they realise they have inadvertently caused offence, will apologise. That I see as normal, friendly behaviour. 

 

You have twice now declined to do so and have deliberately offered another insult.

 

Anyone who knows me will know what a nonsensical accusation that is. 

 

Like I said before, what a pity. It says more about you than about me.

 

[50025]

What’s great about accurascale is that they make a number of liveries and named for each model. With some other companies it’s a drip feed of 2 maybe 3 different identities every few years.

 

Really great for me to be getting excited about modelling again after a few lean yers for me

[Francis deWeck]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Classic. Except I think it should be a Q, as the Hornby Q1 is quite cute. 

I'd have 3 of those and several of two of those and they won't be LMS!

Cheered me up that has, as I'm melting.

Phil

 

Thanks for the response! I've had Hornby Q1s but they were let down by the drag bar, on which I carried out a none too brilliant modification. They have been passed onto other users now. I would like an upgraded/modernised model of one (well, several) to be brought into production. 

[Captain Kernow]

1 hour ago, Mad McCann said:

 Perhaps if you hadn't been compelled to spew unsolicited, irrelevant and puerile drivel about panniers on my post referring to locos at Bo'ness, I might not have even commented in the first instance.

Anyway, I'll leave you to stew in your vat of personal grievance and bruised ego.

Really? That very brief sentence?

 

It was clearly meant to be humorous in the context of an on-going theme on this thread, being perpetrated by followers of the GWR, about a new pannier, so I'm not apologising for that.

 

The whole point of the 'give us a pannier' theme is that it is meant to be humorous. You may not like it, but there's a lot of unsolicited, irrelevant (and sometimes puerile) stuff on this forum that I don't particularly warm to, but I don't go around offering insults to people I don't even know. Who else have you had a go at on this forum, just because you think they 'spew drivel?'

 

In the meantime, you appear to have lost your sense of humour, hope you find it somewhere.

 

1 hour ago, Mad McCann said:

This conversation is over

Not on your say so, you do not dictate when people make posts and what they say. Only the moderators can do that (and I expect they will soon).

 

1 hour ago, Mad McCann said:

thank you for your attention.

Still making statements in such a way as to be construed as dismissive and insulting...

 

Edit - just realised that you did find my puerile drivel funny:

 

 

Do make your mind up!

 

 

Edited September 9, 2023 by Captain Kernow

[ed 66 plant]

Agree with S.R U CLASS idea--50 strong--never done before.On numbers built alone, it must warrant serious thought.

[Michael Hodgson]

On 09/09/2023 at 09:30, Islesy said:

That’s exactly what will happen - 6 new steam locomotive projects are currently (and actively) in progress, at different stages.

There's nothing like putting a cat among the pigeons to wind up RMweb! 

OK, so let's deconstruct that little announcement.  

 

It would have to be at least one each for the remaining three of the big four companies, plus a BR standard, and an independent - perhaps industrial/colliery engine or similar (or perhaps something competely eccentric like a fireless or a crane tank?).  But that's only 5. 

 

So the sixth could be an Irish loco which would be only fair to an under-represented prototype but would a loco badged Irish Railway Models be outside the scope of that statement?  Or maybe something purely pre-grouping, or conceivably a second GWR?

 

But that's all on the assumption that we're only looking at one scale.   Nothing in that statement implied they're all OO.  It might be better to assume there's be at least one in N (a scaled down Manor might be a good bet).  O is also on the cards.  G&T seem unlikely - anyway I think they prefer Guinness!  But let's not forget 009 narrow gauge; there's a lot of demand for that.

[Mallard60022]

36 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

There's nothing like putting a cat among the pigeons to wind up RMweb! 

OK, so let's deconstruct that little announcement.  

 

It would have to be at least one each for the remaining three of the big four companies, plus a BR standard, and an independent - perhaps industrial/colliery engine or similar (or perhaps something competely eccentric like a fireless or a crane tank?).  But that's only 5. 

 

So the sixth could be an Irish loco which would be only fair to an under-represented prototype but would a loco badged Irish Railway Models be outside the scope of that statement?  Or maybe something purely pre-grouping, or conceivably a second GWR?

 

But that's all on the assumption that we're only looking at one scale.   Nothing in that statement implied they're all OO.  It might be better to assume there's be at least one in N (a scaled down Manor might be a good bet).  O is also on the cards.  G&T seem unlikely - anyway I think they prefer Guinness!  But let's not forget 009 narrow gauge; there's a lot of demand for that.

Also Scale needs to be considered:

2 could be 2mm, 2 could be 4mm and 2 could be 7mm! I thank you.

Phil 

[nightstar.train]

2 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

It would have to be at least one each for the remaining three of the big four companies, plus a BR standard,

 

Why would it "have to be". That's an awfully large presumption. And don't forget they've already announced the Buckjumper which could well count as an LNER loco for your list. I will admit I'm not an expert of steam engines and what has/hasn't been modelled, but there is literally nothing forcing Accurascale to model one of each of the big four. They could just make GWR if they want.

Industrials certainly sell well, but there are now 5 RTR in or on the way to the market, so another one might be a big risk, they might end up with a warehouse full of unsold little 0-4-0s. 

[nightstar.train]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Also Scale needs to be considered:

2 could be 2mm, 2 could be 4mm and 2 could be 7mm! I thank you.

Phil 

 

I think upscaling the J67/68/69 Buckjumper to 7mm might be a winner. The problem with upscaling a big engine like the Manor is the cost. Judging by the cost of other 7mm locos compared to their 4mm counterparts it would probably be a £750 loco. Could they sell enough to make the project pay? Maybe if they did on more of the Rapido model where it only goes ahead with enough firm orders by X date. (also judging by the size of the boxes for their 4mm locos they'd probably only get 4 x 7mm locos in each 40ft container, so the shipping costs will be enormous 🤪)

[The Johnster]

1 hour ago, nightstar.train said:

Industrials certainly sell well, but there are now 5 RTR in or on the way to the market, so another one might be a big risk, they might end up with a warehouse full of unsold little 0-4-0s. 

 

The risk could be reduced by producing something distinctively different to previous RTR industrials, and the possibilities are large outside cylinder 0-6-0s like the Peckett Maerdy Monster or the Talywaun ABs, industrials on steroids, utter brutalism.  I'd find it hard not to buy a Talywaun AB, having driven and fired one!

 

OT for a topic for the next steam model, but another industrial gap is a jackshaft-drive 1950s diesel mechanical 0-4-0.  These were very popular in smaller steelworks, cement works. quarries and similar situations.

[Ian Hargrave]

2 hours ago, nightstar.train said:

 

Why would it "have to be". That's an awfully large presumption. And don't forget they've already announced the Buckjumper which could well count as an LNER loco for your list. I will admit I'm not an expert of steam engines and what has/hasn't been modelled, but there is literally nothing forcing Accurascale to model one of each of the big four. They could just make GWR if they want.

Industrials certainly sell well, but there are now 5 RTR in or on the way to the market, so another one might be a big risk, they might end up with a warehouse full of unsold little 0-4-0s. 

But an “industrial loco” comes in other sizes and configurations too. A few posts back,I made a pitch for the Lambton tank ,currently enjoying its renaissance on the NYMRC.We were given the nod that it’s under consideration. Bigger

than your average Peckett / Andrew Barclay ..? 

 

[The Johnster]

Come to that, surely there is scope for reworking some of Hornby's toytrainset Smokeyjoe range prototypes to current specs, Nielson pugs, the Dowlais, 101 (I agree this isn't an industrial but that wouldn't stop some of us Rule 1-ing it), and even the ex-Dapol L&Y pug, several sold into private use (including one which was dragged a thousand feet up a mountain at Penmaenmawr!), which badly needs a mech that doesn't intrude into the very visible cab.  How about the Swansea Dock Avonsides (again, not strictly industrials, but see 101 comment), which had the same T.E. as a King according to a old Danygraig driver I spoke to once...

 

There's also the Andrew Barclay 'Fife Special', different enough from the Hatton's model to make an impact I'd say.  And I'd love to see a Puffing Billy/Wylam Dilly with full working motion clickclacking about the layout for fun like a mobile weaving loom...  That could start a whole new genre of pre-Rocket modelling, set on Tyneside, Wearside, Middleton, and the Penydarren tramroad (where the first articulated locos, the first rack engines for inclines, and the first collapsible chimneys were used; there was a lot more to it than than just Cap'n Dick's steam trombone).  The coo-embarassing  Locomotion No.1 would be 'modern image', and who wouldn't want these beautiful bonkers machines eminently suitable for minimum space layouts!

 

Just thinking, with a keyboard to hand...

Edited September 12, 2023 by The Johnster

[nightstar.train]

I'd forgotten the Hatton's Andrew Barclay. That makes 6 industrials, plus I'd probably also count the DJ Models (now EFE)  J94 as that was produced in mostly industrial liveries. 

 

• Hornby W4 Peckett
• Hornby B2 Peckett
• Rapido Hunslet
• Rapido Manning Wardle
• Dapol Hawthorn Leslie
• Hattons Andrew Barclay
• DJ Models/EFE Rail J94

I'd certainly be up for a model of the Lambton tank. I had haulage behind it two weekends ago, lovely engine. 

[Mallard60022]

3 hours ago, nightstar.train said:

I think upscaling the J67/68/69 Buckjumper to 7mm might be a winner. The problem with upscaling a big engine like the Manor is the cost. Judging by the cost of other 7mm locos compared to their 4mm counterparts it would probably be a £750 loco. Could they sell enough to make the project pay? Maybe if they did on more of the Rapido model where it only goes ahead with enough firm orders by X date. (also judging by the size of the boxes for their 4mm locos they'd probably only get 4 x 7mm locos in each 40ft container, so the shipping costs will be enormous 🤪)

I've converted My Manor Loco Box to also contain the 8 Coaches for the Diverted Paddington to Exeter Express that it will haul. Super use of space.

I was considering building a layout in it but, that got boring.

A. Fibbaroona. 

[daltonparva]

I spoke to an Accurascale chappie at an exhibition (Donny or York I think) and asked if they planned on producing anything with LMS written on it. He said the only thing they might think about was the little Kitson shunter. Make of that what you will.

[phil-b259]

On 09/09/2023 at 18:39, Francis deWeck said:

Thanks for the response! I've had Hornby Q1s but they were let down by the drag bar, on which I carried out a none too brilliant modification. They have been passed onto other users now. I would like an upgraded/modernised model of one (well, several) to be brought into production. 

Re-tooling what is an otherwise good loco just for a better drawbar is not a sensible suggestion or a wise use of manufacturing slots.

 

Re-tooling so as to allow the fitting of sound would be a better angle to go down - but as with the person who was desperate to have the Stand 4MT re-tooled it has to be said that the Q1 body is in fact a very good rendition of the real thing and still stands up well even a couple of decades after it was first produced.

[The Johnster]

Good point.  Retooling is not automatically and necessarily a good thing.  It usually is, but can be simply a production engineering cost reduction exercise, and result in lower quality for the customer.  It is much-loved by Marketing, though, a selling point because of the perception that new automatically = better!