Jump to content
 

DJM wish list thread


DJM Dave
 Share

Recommended Posts

Loads of people asking for the J21 and J27. Hopefully one of the manufacturers will listen. The J27 has scored highly in previous polls. I know the trust owning the J21 were looking to commission a model but we're only planning on speaking to Bachmann I believe. Probably should contact Dave!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Loads of people asking for the J21 and J27. Hopefully one of the manufacturers will listen. The J27 has scored highly in previous polls. I know the trust owning the J21 were looking to commission a model but we're only planning on speaking to Bachmann I believe. Probably should contact Dave!

.

 

No.  A few people asking many, many times.

 

.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How about some N gauge 4-4-0 locos?

I'm not a manufacturing expert but I imagine the chassis design and manufacture is the costliest part of producing a model loco so if a number of models can share a chassis then that makes things more viable to bring to the market place.

 

All the following were inside cylinder locos, had 10'0" coupled wheelbases, around 6'8" driving wheels and 6 wheel tenders so could share common chassis. The bogie wheel base may vary in length and position but that's (I reckon) relatively easy to incorporate into chassis design.

 

SR/BR  L1                  ran 'til early 60s

SR/BR  L                    ran 'til early 60s

SR/BR  D15                ran 'til mid 50s

SR/BR  L12                 ran 'til mid 50s

SR/BR  T9                  ran 'til early 60s

SR/BR  B4x                 ran 'til mid 50s

LNER/BR D11/1          ran 'til late 50s

LNER/BR D11/2          ran 'til late 50s

 

All the following had 9'6" coupled wheelbases, around 6'8" driving wheels and 6 wheel tenders: The 4P compounds had outside cylinders but no outside valve gear.

SR/BR  E1                   ran 'til early 60s

SR/BR  E                     ran 'til early 50s

MR/BR  2P                   ran 'til early 60s

MR/BR  3P                   ran 'til early 50s

MR/BR  4P compound ran 'til early 60s

LMS/BR 2P                  ran 'til early 60s

LMS/BR 4P compound ran 'til early 60s

 

Ian

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Yes they are Roy, but, in my opinion they are not produced to the detail and dimensional standards of Dapol and Farish recent locos and what we hope for from DJM.

Ian

And do you really think that, considering the duplication, they will sell in sufficient quantity to recover their development costs and provide a profit for DJM?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Yes they are Roy, but, in my opinion they are not produced to the detail and dimensional standards of Dapol and Farish recent locos and what we hope for from DJM.

Ian

No, they aren't, but the N Gaugers I know who use Union Mills locos are very happy with them.

 

They appear to run and pull very well and, at layout viewing distance, the dimensional compromises and rather basic level of detail aren't obtrusive.

 

If they were mine, I'd be in no hurry to replace them.

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have quite a few Union Mills locos, all DCC fitted,  and if ANY other manufacturer could come to within 50% of their pulling power and reliability I MIGHT think of replacing them.

 

135 wagons behind a 2F and 31 coaches behind a 4-4-0.   The only reason I didn't add more is I ran out of track (and the coaches pulled off the inside of a large radius corner...)

 

My advice to Dave would be to avoid duplicating Union Mills like the plague - too many potential lost sales.

 

Les

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that would be the case with the online polls, you can only vote once! Some people have a real objection to the North east getting some NER models.

I don't know whether that is fair really. I am a NER enthusiast, it is my interest above all else and would absolutely LOVE a RTR J21 or G5 etc but I think we also need to take a step back and have a sense of realism. We are a bit of niche area, with classes that were often quite geographically confined and therefore maybe there is simply less demand and less of a market. The NER isn't as glamarous as some other regions and I really think we should be grateful for the RTR products we have or are getting. The Q6, a revised J72, lots of LNER classes... Think back 20 years and we would have killed for that!!

 

Other classss have a cult following as well... hence why something like the obscure SR classes such as the Beattie Well Tank or Adams Radial could well be better commercial prospects than a ubiquitous but ' workhorse' J21 or J27. I think this has a lot to do with it.

 

I am not being critical in any way (please don't see this post as such) but I think we are well served and I am sure there will be more to follow in the future. Online polls are not the be all and end all of opinions and, as I say, I come from this as a NER enthusiast and modeller!

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wanted a superb loco with that 'Adams Radial Appeal', colourful livery, and lasting through to BR days you could IMHO do worse than visit Bressingham where the last LT&SR loco, 'Thundersley', is shedded in all its glory.

 

I crawled all over it (& under it!) about 10 years ago, took stacks of photos and measurements, plus I have an extensive collection of paperwork devoted to LTSR.  All yours for free Dave, if you'd like it.................................

 

post-312-0-43173700-1441199280_thumb.jpg

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wanted a superb loco with that 'Adams Radial Appeal', colourful livery, and lasting through to BR days you could IMHO do worse than visit Bressingham where the last LT&SR loco, 'Thundersley', is shedded in all its glory.

 

I crawled all over it (& under it!) about 10 years ago, took stacks of photos and measurements, plus I have an extensive collection of paperwork devoted to LTSR.  All yours for free Dave, if you'd like it.................................

 

attachicon.gifDSCF0665.JPG

 

Lovely loco.  One small sphere of success then stored at the back of sheds all over the country (except in the Stamford area).

 

Les

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know whether that is fair really. I am a NER enthusiast, it is my interest above all else and would absolutely LOVE a RTR J21 or G5 etc but I think we also need to take a step back and have a sense of realism. We are a bit of niche area, with classes that were often quite geographically confined and therefore maybe there is simply less demand and less of a market. The NER isn't as glamarous as some other regions and I really think we should be grateful for the RTR products we have or are getting. The Q6, a revised J72, lots of LNER classes... Think back 20 years and we would have killed for that!!

 

Other classss have a cult following as well... hence why something like the obscure SR classes such as the Beattie Well Tank or Adams Radial could well be better commercial prospects than a ubiquitous but ' workhorse' J21 or J27. I think this has a lot to do with it.

 

I am not being critical in any way (please don't see this post as such) but I think we are well served and I am sure there will be more to follow in the future. Online polls are not the be all and end all of opinions and, as I say, I come from this as a NER enthusiast and modeller!

 

David

 

I think I agree with a lot of what is said there. I have been the vanguard for wanting NER region models and now the Q6 is coming, I feel content to sit back and wait on this and the likely forthcoming models when the Raven workhorse fly off the shelves. Yes the region maintained a degree of autonomy under LNER and returned in its own right under British Railways which meant that some classes remained in the area, but some didnt. However, I would contest the idea that the region is not attractive or glamorous. Of all the regions it is proabably the most diverse. Railways over the pennies to Stainmore, Wensleydale and in Northumberland to Scotland, contrast with idyllic branches to Weardale, Teesdale and Alston. The Coastal routes around Whitby, Scarborough again contrast with the heavy industry of Teesside, the Durham Coalfields and areas where the region merged with that of others in Yorkshire, the Humber and Scotland. This before others go back to the East Coast Main line with its expresses.

 

The J21 was dispatched to Norwich under LNER tenure, the B16 was particularly widespread. The J27 probably has more cult following than many of the medium sized engines being produced at present, see J11, midland 3F, etc. These workhorses are the bread and butter of the region and would easily match the interest of other areas and markets if the range as a whole was available. I believe the Q6 will push this area to the forefront when they realise how quickly it sells. Other engines such as J21 match and can better the likes of a C-Class. The B16 - is three engines in one if your tooling allows the varients to be produced. The J27 can do for cult status what the J11 and 3F, or others want too. The add your G5 as a quaint tank that matches to a new build project and you have quite a range. 

 

Thats a lot and certainly deserves more than being dismissed as an area of 'restricted geographical coverage' and livery choices. DJM choose to think that what we are saying is true and the area has significant merit. That in itself deserves praise, rather than the bias and sycophantic nature displayed previously that has allowed some models of precisely such limited geography, type, colour and use to be produced. 

Edited by The Black Hat
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Yes they are Roy, but, in my opinion they are not produced to the detail and dimensional standards of Dapol and Farish recent locos and what we hope for from DJM.

Ian

ian You infar in the above your post that you're not happy with union mills dimensional standards but your suggestion of making a near enough chassis(posr1063) would do for the MR 2p 3p would be ok when the wheel base aer different and 2p had about 3or4 different driving wheel diameters from 6'6" to 7' 1/4".

 

So I take it djm are a load to make substandard models?

Edited by farren
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your say in this post your not happy with union mills dimensional standards but your suggestion of making a near enough chassis would do for the MR 2p 3p would be ok when the wheel base aer different and 2p had about 3or4 different driving wheel diameters from 6'6" to 7' 1/4".

 

So I take djm are aload to make substandard models?

 

what? when, where? eh? what did i miss?  :mail:  :paint:  :jester:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your say in this post your not happy with union mills dimensional standards but your suggestion of making a near enough chassis would do for the MR 2p 3p would be ok when the wheel base aer different and 2p had about 3or4 different driving wheel diameters from 6'6" to 7' 1/4".

 

So I take djm are aload to make substandard models?

 

Clearly off ill for most of the English grammar syllabus !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point about Union Mills is NOT that their fidelity to the prototype is up to modern standards (which it isn't) BUT..

 

They are exceptionally powerful for their size

They retail at about 75% of a more modern model or maybe even less

They are very reliable

There are quite a lot of them around by N-gauge standards.

 

These four attributes means a long-term view and deep pockets are needed to make a duplicate.  Farish Have done it with the J39 - technically a J39/2 just as the earlier UM model is technically a J39/1.  However Bachmann have deep enough pockets to withstand a model taking a comparatively long time to generate enough sales to break even- and the Farish model has lower than average tooling costs through using the B1 mechanism and a tender body and frame shared with the B1 and the new V2 when it happens.

 

I feel there might be an opening for a J21 but not J25/26/27 as UM do these and there are plenty about.  Even here the recent departure of Graham Hubbard from Bachmann and the fact the prototype is sitting outside Locomotion at Shildon might yet bring one in two scales from Barwell. 

 

On the other hand I'd welcome a J21, a G5 0-4-4T or an A8 4-6-2T in N........

 

Les

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I agree with a lot of what is said there. I have been the vanguard for wanting NER region models and now the Q6 is coming, I feel content to sit back and wait on this and the likely forthcoming models when the Raven workhorse fly off the shelves. Yes the region maintained a degree of autonomy under LNER and returned in its own right under British Railways which meant that some classes remained in the area, but some didnt. However, I would contest the idea that the region is not attractive or glamorous. Of all the regions it is proabably the most diverse. Railways over the pennies to Stainmore, Wensleydale and in Northumberland to Scotland, contrast with idyllic branches to Weardale, Teesdale and Alston. The Coastal routes around Whitby, Scarborough again contrast with the heavy industry of Teesside, the Durham Coalfields and areas where the region merged with that of others in Yorkshire, the Humber and Scotland. This before others go back to the East Coast Main line with its expresses.

 

The J21 was dispatched to Norwich under LNER tenure, the B16 was particularly widespread. The J27 probably has more cult following than many of the medium sized engines being produced at present, see J11, midland 3F, etc. These workhorses are the bread and butter of the region and would easily match the interest of other areas and markets if the range as a whole was available. I believe the Q6 will push this area to the forefront when they realise how quickly it sells. Other engines such as J21 match and can better the likes of a C-Class. The B16 - is three engines in one if your tooling allows the varients to be produced. The J27 can do for cult status what the J11 and 3F, or others want too. The add your G5 as a quaint tank that matches to a new build project and you have quite a range. 

 

Thats a lot and certainly deserves more than being dismissed as an area of 'restricted geographical coverage' and livery choices. DJM choose to think that what we are saying is true and the area has significant merit. That in itself deserves praise, rather than the bias and sycophantic nature displayed previously that has allowed some models of precisely such limited geography, type, colour and use to be produced. 

 

I take your point but remember you are preaching to the converted and we are in agreement... perhaps I should have used the caveat 'perceived' lack of glamour.

 

Anyway, I think my ultimate point is that each railway/area/region has those who are interested in them and champion their cause, including on forums such as this and through online polls etc. From our respective viewpoint we all are pleased when a manufacturer announces a product which fits with our interest and some are disgruntled by a perceived (that word again!!) bias when nothing new comes forward. At the end of the day however a manufacturer will only produce what they feel will sell and sell well. I am delighted that Dave has taken his Q6 project forward. Now if, as you say, the sales figures are fantastic then that might make Dave and other manufacturers think that there may be a good market for NER locos. As NER modellers we would then reap the rewards... but only time will tell.

 

I just think people sometimes people need to be happier with their lot and realise that in many ways we have never had it so good. The be all and end all is that these are toy trains and this is just a hobby!

 

Apologies for clogging up your thread Dave but I am definitely behind what you are doing and look forward to your models reaching the market.

 

David 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I take your point but remember you are preaching to the converted and we are in agreement... perhaps I should have used the caveat 'perceived' lack of glamour.

 

Anyway, I think my ultimate point is that each railway/area/region has those who are interested in them and champion their cause, including on forums such as this and through online polls etc. From our respective viewpoint we all are pleased when a manufacturer announces a product which fits with our interest and some are disgruntled by a perceived (that word again!!) bias when nothing new comes forward. At the end of the day however a manufacturer will only produce what they feel will sell and sell well. I am delighted that Dave has taken his Q6 project forward. Now if, as you say, the sales figures are fantastic then that might make Dave and other manufacturers think that there may be a good market for NER locos. As NER modellers we would then reap the rewards... but only time will tell.

 

I just think people sometimes people need to be happier with their lot and realise that in many ways we have never had it so good. The be all and end all is that these are toy trains and this is just a hobby!

 

Apologies for clogging up your thread Dave but I am definitely behind what you are doing and look forward to your models reaching the market.

 

David 

 

I think the Q6 will be quite successful, more so than others realise, especially given the way that the K1 has sold. I think the K1 has sold very well, even if the rise in price might put some off getting as many as they thought they would - but thats the new reality concerned here. 

 

 

How about these for suggestions? Class 86, Class 87, Class 89, Class 92, Class 142 Pacer, Mk3 coaches

 

I think two of these are already being considered and worked on by others.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...