mdvle

Rapido has announced VIA Rail "wraps" as well as a new run of regular VIA F40PH-2Ds. Wraps include Home Hardware, CBC 50th, Telus, Kool-Aid, Operation Lifesaver, and Coors Light Silver Bullet Express and are all based on sufficient orders being placed to allow production to proceed. If someone is willing to pay the $50,000 license fee Spiderman II would become possible. Regular VIA Rail (as delivered, Canada scheme, and Canda (rebuilt)) are also offered. Order deadline is July 1 2018, delivery estimated Fall 2018. https://rapidotrains.com/ho-scale-via-f40-relaunch/

Revolution have indicated their intention to produce more OO models in the future, they are simply waiting at this point for their first OO model to arrive so that people will have an idea of what they are offering. Yes, many of us are aware of the Rapido background to the models and what that means, but the general masses that don't follow things closely don't.

I suspect the problem was that most people seemed to indicate that if they were to buy the Prototype HST they wanted the coaches to go with it, which changes the economics of the model. Then Oxford announced their Mk3 model, which further complicated things.

1) cost is related to sales numbers. A popular locomotive will sell more, making a lower price possible. It is also worth looking at Bachmanns upcoming new tooled models and seeing how the Bachmann prices are going up. 2) same thing could happen with Rapido. It all per 1) depends on how popular it is whether it can justify multiple production runs combined with whatever agreement is made with Locomotion.

No easy answer. If everything goes right then the quickest would probably be 12 to 18 months, but there are a lot of assumptions in that. Any number of issues can cause delays so it could be longer. The good news is that Bachmann appear to have gotten over their recent production issues (an issue not unique to Bachmann, they all seem to run into periods of trouble at some point) and based on the comments and decisions Bachmann have made (see post above from AndyY about a different model) as well as the samples of the Mk2f, Class 90, and crane Bachmann appear to be on track to release really good models going forward.

Your son will only have a limited number of years where he will want to run trains on your layout with you as a child, if the turntable gives both of you enjoyment then put it in. It can always be removed when he gets older and either drifts away from trains or becomes more interested in things being correct.

Most companies either don't comment or make negative noises about possible future products until they are ready to announce in part to not risk sales of currently available and announced products. Which isn't to say the Bachmann will make the 116, but equally it doesn't mean they won't.

At the bottom of AndyY's post announcing the 2018 releases it is stated that the 168/170/171 have only just started the process and aren't even at the CAD stage yet. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/129822-Bachmann-announcements-2018-full-list/page-1

I suggest you take a step back and consider what was said, and what the terms on the Class 74 order page indicate. As you so brilliantly highlight, based on the terms Kernow is taking on the entire financial risk of the Class 74 once it starts unless there is a further legal contract between DJM and Kernow taking care of any risks Kernow has assumed through the T&C. While I have confidence in Dave following through if the model proceeds, if anything interrupts it then from the customers perspective it is Kernow who are financially responsible regardless of how much money Kernow may have paid out for the respective milestones. Trade war causes the Chinese factory to go under and the assets all disappear into the night and everyone who ordered the Class 74 can simply cancel their order and get a full refund despite the fact that Kernow and DJM may well have already paid the factory 75% of the collected money and thus have no way to restart the model. Or maybe a fireworks factory next door to the factory explodes, taking the factory with it. Or any other number of admittedly highly unlikely things can happen leaving Kernow on the hook. Despite supposedly being a crowd funded model the terms on the order page merely make this a regular model that only goes ahead if there are sufficient fully paid pre-orders. If that is Kernow's intention, then great for them taking the position in supporting the project. But it is then not a normal crowd funded model because the crowd is not taking any financial risk. Edit - the short version is this. Most of the terms provided on the Kernow Class 74 order page are nonsense. If you can get a full refund at any time up to delivery, then all the talk about separate accounts, payments at milestones, etc. means absolutely nothing. They only have meaning if the customer is taking part of the risk, which the above highlighted sentence indicates isn't happening.

From Rapido's Facebook page, pictures of lots and lots of boxes of newly arrived product to be shipped out including the Pendolino.

I don't think the T&Cs are clear at all. What is the definition of "proceed" regarding a full refund? Some may read it as a completed model being delivered, but it can also be read as being that the model has "proceeded" as soon as the first of the milestones has been reached, and hence the first of the money has been released to DJM. How can you cancel and get a full refund if one or more milestones have been reached and part of your payment has been used to pay for those milestones? I suspect someone at Kernow has copy/pasted these T&C's from their commissioned models (where Kernow does take the risk) and applied them to the Class 74 (where the assumption is as a crowd funded project it is the purchasers who are taking the financial risk and not Kernow). Clarification from Kernow might be a good idea, if for no other reason than to make sure they really do mean to be as responsible as the T&C's can be read to mean.

Very interesting scene, but I agree difficult to try and fit into a model. My feeling, if I were to build it I would sacrifice most of the river. While the idea of a removable river does allow it to be kept I can't help but feel it would be an annoyance over time and eventually just left off. Moving the river even closer I think would be a mistake, changing the atmosphere of the station to something it wasn't. Instead I would (using the lower left of the scenic section as (0, 0)) run the front of the layout from (0, 0) to somewhere around (2, 0) (maybe ((2.5, 0)) and then cut into (5.5, 2) - playing around with curves if ambitious - and ending up at (11, 1.5). By keeping the road, river, and bridge you still have the most "scenic" part of the scene while allow the viewer to use their imagination to place the river in its place. If your lucky the road bridge might even allow some photo opportunities.

Does the 47xx share tender design with any other model, thus allowing a better replacement to at least solve part of the problem / reduce the list of fixes?

Well, there were apparently exceptions... http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/92905-Heljan-gwr-47xx-night-owl/?p=1674314

The Kernow model (announced and then cancelled when Bachmann made their intentions known) was with DJM.

There is no right and wrong, but it is all a trade off depending on what the individual prefers and how they want to spend their finite available hours in the hobby. If you like building kits, then kits work. If you like building a layout, then rtr frees up time for the time to build and scenic a layout. No it's not. The price "a few years ago" doesn't reflect what the price today would be. One of the drawbacks of getting older is that you start to judge prices (and hence value) on what you remember paying in the past and forget that the world is not static.

The doors are recessed, not flush with the side, and the windows are a different shape. I don't see how you get away (as a manufacturer) with just repainting an existing model.

I think there is the danger that you are having the layout design the room where in my opinion the home office should be designing the room. On the assumption you are working 6 to 8 hours a day I would think the first priority should be to make sure the work environment is comfortable and then fit any layout around that. I would hate for someone to try and fit their ideal layout into the room and then they come to hate the layout because it makes their workday miserable. In may well be once you decide on your ideal work environment that you compromise on the type of layout you have, or perhaps as suggested make the layout high enough so that it goes overtop of your work environment.

Already discussed http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131161-class-385-night-running-issue/

On business it is the matter of leaving business items like laptops, which likely have confidential information, accessible to outsiders, that would prohibit sharing.

Upgraded spec, no price change https://rapidotrains.com/ho-53-husky-stack-containers/

https://rapidotrains.com/ho-ge-b36-7/

It is also a reflection that the railways no longer have an army of staff spread around the network to apply manual labour when the weather interferes with all the current technology.

But any bid should have included the possibility of NR not delivering on schedule, new trains not arriving on schedule, etc. If the bidder bid on the assumption everything would work flawlessly then that is the bidders problem.

Rapido found some extra copies of the APT-E book that was included with the model and are selling the extra books http://rapidousa-com.3dcartstores.com/APT-E-Advanced-Passenger-Train--Experimental-book_p_215.html