Simon Says

[asmay2002]

If there was a pressing market demanding pre-grouping models then I think the manufacturers would be serving it. T

It's where much of the kit market has been for years and the mainstream companies are slowly waking up to the fact that there is a market they have been ignoring until recently (GWR City, SECR C, L&Y 2-4-2T, GCR O4, LSWR M7, etc).  The new 4-4-2's will be a real test as their presence in the BR era was minimal.  My bet is that they will sell.

 

I fully expect that we will see BR corporate blue increase in popularity as those 40 somethings who return to the hobby perhaps after a hiatus and with disposable income want to replicate the railways of their youth.

 

I was 8 when steam ended and so should be a natural BR blue era modeller as it's what I grew up with but to me it was an era with no redeeming features.  And what's this again with the "Railways of their Youth" - we're NOT all nostalgia modellers. 

[jjb1970]

I didn't say we all were, I suggested that the market responds to demand and the availability of BR steam and transition models indicates that this has been the largest market in recent years. We are all individuals, to make it worthwhile investing in tooling for a RTR model there needs to be a certain number of sales. The new entrants can work to lower volumes than Hornby or Bachmann but I'm guessing even they need a pretty substantial number of models before it becomes viable. And that generally means mainstream interest areas rather than small niche markets.

[jonny777]

That's an interesting point Chris and echoes Charlie's point about small-production runs from small manufacturers becoming more prevalent.

 

I'm not going to argue the point about demographics (my post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek about this with my counter-example!). Since Hornby, and Bachmann are not about to formally reveal their sales data of Steam vs D&E to us, we will have to keep guessing (or relying on unofficial whispers of a 2:1 ratio). It's likely we'll see this ratio move towards 1:1 over the next few years, the "subsidy" effect you describe will then have to disappear and models from the main manufacturers get much more expensive or they will stop making them (heavens above!).

 

At this point the small manufacturers come in to play as well as stuff like 3D-printed small-run or on-demand kits and hopefully we have a return to "modelling" rather than "collecting".

 

Guy

 

It is a very interesting subject, although will the ratio of steam to diesel sales ever reach 1:1?

 

I visited a small preserved line the other day, and the train (0-6-0ST plus a couple of Mk1s), seemed to be full of parents/grandparents with young children. Do diesel galas attract the same age range? Most of the ones that I have attended (admittedly not many) seem to be restricted mainly to 40/50-somethings who get excited by exhaust fumes and loud noise. 

 

Will the youngsters who are taken for a ride on a steam train ever get hooked enough to take up railway modelling? I don't know, but if they do - why would they ever wish to buy first generation diesel classes which they have never seen operating?

 

I know that the generation who can remember BR steam pre-1968 is dwindling steadily, but when we have all gone - what will that leave? Corporate blue BR enthusiasts will be pensioners by then, leaving a great swathe of the public who have never travelled on anything but a unit-style train of some description. But will they necessarily want to model class 14x / 15x units and their derivatives, in any great quantity?

 

Maybe, by then, computer power will be so much greater than today; and instead of real models there will be virtual creations of the past using computer manipulated images from photographs and video footage, in order to give a realistic 4-D "model" of any era, complete with 'design it yourself' trackwork, signalling etc., and locomotives/rolling stock in the correct liveries for whichever time period is chosen. Imagine a complete sequence of Mallard on its record breaking run down Stoke Bank, with the options of a lineside view, an on-train experience, and even a ride on the footplate, all courtesy of lifelike computer simulations.

 

These could either be displayed on screen or via a headset, and would make current modelling appear rather quaint.

 

A lot of questions, I know, and probably wide of the mark in many respects, but I hope they provoke some thoughts.

[The Stationmaster]

Some interesting further points and several need further comment.  I understand for example that certain models sell far better when the public exposure of the prototype increases, however old it happens to be and however unfamiliar people were with it in its 'real' life.  This perhaps helps to explain what generally seem to be 'good' sales levels with preserved and museum based engines or those being offered in Pre-Group livery - some undoubtedly sell because, especially the latter, they are attractive to look at but others sell because folk have seen them in real life; mind you I think it helps if they also happen to be iconic.

 

Equally it has been shown (although we know not in what quantities) models of iconic prototypes appear to sell - for example the Beattie Well Tanks, the EM1/Class 76, LMS 10000 and so on.  Some of these are still with us in some form or other but others are not (Dibber's 18000 would probably slot neatly into this category too - hint to those watching from the trade sidelines).

 

Thus sales, and the market, have moved into a new and certainly rather different area which is not at all era dependent apart from, in many cases, examples being around to see today.

 

We also have another factor in today's market which confuses (and maybe confounds?) the whole idea of modelling what we're familiar with or remember as it does the same but in a  very different way.  Many of today's youngsters (and younger adults) have probably never travelled on a train on the national network and junior schools sometimes take their pupils on short train trips just to let them see what a railway (NR and franchisees) is like.  But within that desert of railway experience there lies the interesting oasis of the leisure/heritage sector.  I wouldn't mind betting that far more children of today experience their first, and rare, train ride behind a steam engine rather than in a dmu or emu on the national network or get their first chance to see 'a train' close up in a museum (where it will likely be a steam engine).  These are perhaps the places - even more so than at present - where the manufacturers should be concentrating some sales effort with (perhaps 'themed') starter ranges just as much as they aim at the High Street?

[dibber25]

I wonder how many of the 55+ age group, like me, have grandchildren? Most, I suspect. What's the betting a lot of them will have their first experience of trains with Grandad at a preserved railway? Of my three, eight-year old grand-daughter (first experience Santa event at GCR) loves playing with my trains. Likes the steam outline (says my EMUs 'have no head'). Oliver, six, (same experience but was REALLY impressed with the London Underground) more into emergency services. Youngest has yet to be 'trained'. Neither of my children have taken any great interest in railways real or model despite, or perhaps because of, an 'experience overload' in my company. My abiding memory of taking them on a modern image event was of having to demand that 'enthusiasts' on the train moderate their language in front of women and children (this was a public event run by NSE). It's much more difficult to introduce children to heritage D&E because of the behaviour of enthusiasts, while taking kids on ordinary trains on the main line network is usually too much hassle and expense to contemplate. None of that augurs well for kids in the future modelling based on nostalgia.

CHRIS LEIGH

[jjb1970]

The wild card here is 3D printing. The costs of making series produced models in large numbers are almost certainly going to favour conventional tooling and moulding (at least in the short - mid term) I think but 3D printing does offer the potential for fully bespoke models, even down to one off production. I do not think this will be cheap (3D printing does not obviate the requirement for research, preparing the files to print from etc) and clearly there remains the issue of painting and finishing which I suspect puts more people off kits than the actual building. There will be a real opening for people offering finishing services, perhaps an integrated service to both "print" and finish models on a custom basis. That could open up a whole new market for obscure and niche subjects by de-coupling the end product from sales numbers. Like I say I do not think this will be cheap but I think it will be affordable for many and if 3D printing technology continues to improve then we may not be that far off the point where this becomes attractive as a business proposition.

[dibber25]

The wild card here is 3D printing. The costs of making series produced models in large numbers are almost certainly going to favour conventional tooling and moulding (at least in the short - mid term) I think but 3D printing does offer the potential for fully bespoke models, even down to one off production. I do not think this will be cheap (3D printing does not obviate the requirement for research, preparing the files to print from etc) and clearly there remains the issue of painting and finishing which I suspect puts more people off kits than the actual building. There will be a real opening for people offering finishing services, perhaps an integrated service to both "print" and finish models on a custom basis. That could open up a whole new market for obscure and niche subjects by de-coupling the end product from sales numbers. Like I say I do not think this will be cheap but I think it will be affordable for many and if 3D printing technology continues to improve then we may not be that far off the point where this becomes attractive as a business proposition.

It has a way to go yet. The 3-D printed products that I've seen so far carry excellent detail but the material itself is very fragile, there are concerns about longevity and durability, and also, any locomotive model produced by this method will still need a conventional chassis and that's where much of the cost goes. There are still some in the hobby who have concerns about the life-expectancy of resin. The short answer is, that until it has been around for 100 years, no one will know.

CHRIS LEIGH

[Arthur]

 

I doubt that the impact on kids visiting heritage lines is going to inspire anything like the numbers of kids of my age who, certainly in an urban environment, were surrounded by intensive, varied and daily, railway activity. I'm just relating relative interest to numbers exposed to it.

[Arthur]

 

It's where much of the kit market has been for years and the mainstream companies are slowly waking up to the fact that there is a market they have been ignoring until recently (GWR City, SECR C, L&Y 2-4-2T, GCR O4, LSWR M7, etc). The new 4-4-2's will be a real test as their presence in the BR era was minimal. My bet is that they will sell.

 

 

I'm not sure that the sales of RTR pre-grouping relate to, or will generate much pre-group modelling. All of those mentioned, GWR City aside, saw usage on BR during the time we 'boomers' were kids. I've bought some not of my regional interest just because as a kid they were in railway books which I had. For exactly the same reason I'll be getting a green DJM class 71, for a kid in 1960's Manchester a piece of impossibly distant exotica. I won't be building a third rail layout to run it on.

 

A lot of these pretty models will be bought by those retired, or near retired, with healthy disposable incomes. They'll sit on a shelf having the occasional spin on the layout as a fictional LCGB 'it's my layout, I'll run what I want' special.

 

I've ordered an Atlantic myself, yes they'll sell but I'm not expecting an upsurge in LNE let alone GN layouts.

[raymw]

Hi Chris,

 

a realistic current view of the capabilities of 3d printing. I've posted some supporting 'evidence' about the hype in a new topic at  http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/89567-gartners-2014-hype-cycle/

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

[brushman47544]

Can I draw the conclusion from the comments about heritage railways as an inspiration for future railway modellers, that if we want a streamlined Merchant Navy in OO, we should pay to have one of the full size rebuilds converted back into original form, at least aesthetically

[lyneux]

It has a way to go yet. The 3-D printed products that I've seen so far carry excellent detail but the material itself is very fragile, there are concerns about longevity and durability, and also, any locomotive model produced by this method will still need a conventional chassis and that's where much of the cost goes. There are still some in the hobby who have concerns about the life-expectancy of resin. The short answer is, that until it has been around for 100 years, no one will know.

CHRIS LEIGH

 

Regarding 3D printing. No point bothering with locos or coaches since (as you rightly point out), most have been "done" RTR... instead think minority-interest items (e.g. wagons, detailing parts). 3D can't compete on price for larger items... yet!

 

The life expectancy question is a good one. I guess I'd probably want to keep some of my models for the rest of my life (another 40 years hopefully!). There are a multitude of materials available for 3D printing so perhaps this is one area where we'll see some development. Having said that, if my 3D-printed bogies snap in 10 years time, I can just print some more!

 

Talking subjectively, if I have accurate CAD that I have developed as part of the product development process then this is the most valuable asset. I can also improve and revise the CAD if I discover an inaccuracy. It's much harder, nay impossible, to do this with injection mould tools. If the item proves popular, I use the CAD as the basis for a set of injection moulded parts (with revisions) and scale up production.

[jjb1970]

I think the thing with 3D priniting is not where the technology is now, but where it has the potential to go. We are seeing a lot of investment developing the technology for industrial applications for the production of spare/replacement parts and improving the physical properties of the materials. Ditto the surface finish which has been disappointing on some older technologies is improving rapidly. The technology is not cheap, and it is still at an early stage in its evolution but nevertheless it has huge potential. I think it is probable that we will see printed chassis in the relatively near future and the capability to replicate the "add wheels, motor and gear box" level of kit by using 3D printing.

[Gerald Henriksen]

We all come into this hobby from many different influences.

 

Some will have come after riding a train, as a kid or adult, "real" or heritage.

 

Others will arrive from just seeing trains as a bystander when the grow up.

 

TV will influence, whether it be Thomas as a youngster or a documentary (or even a hollywood blockbuster).

 

Yet others it will be via books, kids or those large coffee table picture books.

 

A declining number will be from train sets as a kid.

 

And some from ways that we can't even think of.

 

 

Which isn't to say the hobby isn't facing challenges, because it (like almost every aspect of life today) certainly is.  But rather, you can't point to one particular thing and say because of that the hobby is dying.  Instead, it is evolving, which is the best way to ensure that it continues to have a future.

[lyneux]

I think the thing with 3D priniting is not where the technology is now, but where it has the potential to go.

 

Agreed. So develop the CAD now (the hard bit!) and who knows what you can do with it as and when the tech develops!

[dibber25]

Hornby reckon they've been using 3D printing since 1994 for what they call stereotyping - making a model from the CAD BEFORE any toolmaking is done. At that stage it is relatively easy to make changes before the model is committed to toolmaking and metal is cut (the expensive part).

[jjb1970]

Some of the applications of industrial metal sintering type technologies are really quite remarkable, although that is a whole level (at least cost wise) above the sort of resin processes used for domestic 3D printing.

[jjb1970]

Agreed. So develop the CAD now (the hard bit!) and who knows what you can do with it as and when the tech develops!

 

I agree that the files are going to be where the real value is if printing does take off. Where I agree with those who advocate that 3D printing is over hyped is that there are some who see it as a panacea to every problem but it doesn't matter how you make a model, whether you scratch build the old way, tool up for mass produced injection moulding, go for cheap and cheerful resin moulding or 3D print, you still need to research the subject and have access to sufficient materials (drawings, records, photographs, an actual 1:1 example) to develop the files which will be the real asset in a printed world. That will require a degree of expertise both in terms of developing the files, accessing information and potentially even use of 3D scanning techniques. Some are worried 3D printing will kill modelling but I see it more as an evolutionary change, it will still be modelling, just a different form. And the process of finishing (painting, lining, numbering etc) will still be the same.

[Ozexpatriate]

If there was a pressing market demanding pre-grouping models then I think the manufacturers would be serving it. ... Even if people like pre-grouping, what does that mean? There were a lot of companies...

It's where much of the kit market has been for years and the mainstream companies are slowly waking up to the fact that there is a market they have been ignoring until recently (GWR City, SECR C, L&Y 2-4-2T, GCR O4, LSWR M7, etc).  The new 4-4-2's will be a real test as their presence in the BR era was minimal.  My bet is that they will sell.

There is a market for pre-grouping. Recent pre-grouping models sell and sell well.

 

Pre-grouping does have the problem that there are too many companies to model which fractures the market into tiny pieces making it less attractive to suppliers than the nationalized steam-to-diesel transition period.

 

The problem with RTR pre-grouping items (and grouping items as well) is that there is little to no 'joined up thinking'. (This was more prevalent in the past.) Rarely are coaches available to go with passenger locomotives or brake vans to go with freight locomotives *, which means to represent pre-grouping you still have to be a kit/scratch-built modeller.

 

* Ironically this is also true for the grouping era, but if you are patient most of them will come around eventually or you can source through the second hand market.

[jjb1970]

I'd love to see a lot more Edwardian and even Victorian era models as many of the trains of those eras had an elegance and style that was quite delightful. One of the best layouts I've ever seen in a magazine was a couple of years ago (I may be way out with that timing) where a group had made a Victorian era station which was basically a curve into the station with the layout mainly being the station. The layout was one of those simple layouts done to a breathtaking standard, it was genuinely jaw dropping and really rather beautiful. I wish I could remember the name of it. 

[Ozexpatriate]

I see lots of comments on the theme of 'nostalgia modelling' also known as 'modelling what you remember'.

There have been lots of age surveys of enthusiasts. Back in 2008 and 2009 Andy did an age survey of RMweb. Back then the respondents here were slightly younger than what was perceived in 'the community'

I took data from the MREmag 2012 wishlist poll question on 'which era do you model' and compared the era modeled with the period where respondents were in the 10-14 group - presuming that to be a age where people first get really interested in railways.

This is what I got:


The idea that we model what we remember (while this is absolutely true for a very significant group - BR late crest for example which is the mode of the distribution) does not hold for the everyone, or we would see a lot more BR Blue layouts.

I think that for a large number of modellers, the idea that you model what you remember is not accurate and that this is evident in polling data. (At least 32% of modellers model what they do not remember at all. This number will actually be larger but it can't be determined from the data I used.)

Let's not forget that to be able to remember 1948 in sufficient detail for it to inspire a model railway you'd probably need be around 74. I know we have many such members here, and wish them health and many more years but there are plenty of younger enthusiasts too.

 

I wonder how many 44 year-olds (who were ten in 1980, are modelling the grouping or nationalization periods rather than BR blue).

 

My guess is that there are three big 'camps':

1. People who model what they remember when they were young.

 

2. People who model the contemporary railway that they can see around them (they might stick with this period as they get older, even if the real railway changes).

 

3. People who model something simply because it interests them. This might be from the past or from a foreign country.

[robmcg]

I think you can belong to at least two groups; I enjoy models which are primarily from an age I remember but also those from an older era which interests me, before my time.  I should add that I don't model what I can see around me now. I enjoy seeing real railways at work though.

 

As a child about 4yrs old I just 'played trains' (older bro's Hornby 0 guage), then made 00 model railways on the floor which had books for stations, then began to think of trains as replicating the real thing in more detail, then became more and more accurate and 'defined' as in your 'three group' scenario.  I imagine that a similar pattern could take place today, with 'Thomas' leading to other trains like basic Hornby sets, and thence to models of things more like the real thing.

 

I also think that many follow this pattern in some way, with adolescence and early adulthood bringing many other things which might stop any involvement with model trains for decades, as it did for me.

 

Above all, and I think this over-rides the period of things modelled, there is sheer pleasure in actually doing modelling well, or appreciating well-made models, and this will never change.

 

Just my thoughts.

[JSpencer]

Lima also did OK convincing some that their limited editions would become heirlooms to rival faberge eggs, it was quite a smart move to stick a bit of paper saying it was a limited edition in the box as some really fell for the idea of their collectability. Obviously, if you collect anything for a love of the subject then that is entirely understandable and I collect a couple of things myself but I cringe at manufacturers trying to create an illusion that their wares are a great investment in the way Lima or maybe more accurately Riko did.

 

I don,t think Lima were alone there. Once limited editions were rare, then they became common and now they are pretty pointless (the latter might apply to even the early ones).

[The Stationmaster]

I don,t think Lima were alone there. Once limited editions were rare, then they became common and now they are pretty pointless (the latter might apply to even the early ones).

I suspect the term became rather meaningless when people began to find out the sort of numbers manufactured for some so-called 'limited' editions.  And of course the market has changed considerably due to the recession effectively ruling out the less than wholly commited folk such as the R number collectors.

[Andy Hayter]

The term has certainly changed over time.  I recently was going back over a mid 70s magazine and noted the announcement of the Hornby limited Edition re-release of the Triang Rocket set.  Limited to just 3000 sets and you were advised to order early to avoid disappointment.  To quote from a contemporaneous song, "Those were the days my friend."