Class 92, By Accurascale

[159220]

Hello, I have always dabbled between buying or not buying a class 92 (talking about the Hornby version not that Dell Boy). But due to the lack of detail, I never have done so. Now we have a super, non-compromising, detailed 92 I am very interested as I know these locos are 'everywhere (where there are wires...)'. But what do they work, apart from the sleepers? 

 

Namely, would be interested in Anglian/South ECML/London operations with GBRf and DB. Do you have one of those wonderful RevolutioN route map / sample consists? Would help me order, without researching myself! 

 

[Accurascale Fran]

12 minutes ago, 159220 said:

Hello, I have always dabbled between buying or not buying a class 92 (talking about the Hornby version not that Dell Boy). But due to the lack of detail, I never have done so. Now we have a super, non-compromising, detailed 92 I am very interested as I know these locos are 'everywhere (where there are wires...)'. But what do they work, apart from the sleepers? 

 

Namely, would be interested in Anglian/South ECML/London operations with GBRf and DB. Do you have one of those wonderful RevolutioN route map / sample consists? Would help me order, without researching myself! 

 

 

Hey there!

 

I remember seeing DB 92s regularly on a steel rail train at the southern end of the ECML when I lived there, also GBRf ones operate regularly across the North London Line in car trains to Dangenham I believe? My notes are in the office but I can check and confirm them and others for you tomorrow!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[TravisM]

4 hours ago, Darius43 said:

 

It is not a deposit.  It is risk capital.  You may get a model at the end of the process or you may get nothing.  DJM is under no obligation to refund you if you pull out or if the project fails.

 

That is the reality of crowdfunding.

 

Darius 

 

That might be so but that doesn’t excuse the fact that the lack of communication gives absolute no confidence.  I’m resigned to the fact that I’ve lost my £30 deposit but when I emailed DJM to cancel, he had explained I would have wished Dave and the project well.

 

This has been a step learning curve and from my experience, I’ll not get involved in a crowd funded project again.

[JSpencer]

 

14 hours ago, Darius43 said:

 

  DJM is under no obligation to refund you if you pull out or if the project fails.

 

That is the reality of crowdfunding.

 

 

I don't really wish to polute this thread with the other 92 projects issues but there is a whole seperate thread here about reward crowd funding and consumer rights, especially page 2 of that thread here.

 

 

 

Edited February 13, 2019 by JSpencer

[phil-b259]

On 11/02/2019 at 20:02, ThaneofFife said:

i don't get the bundle deal thing (you can have the 92 loco but only if you do the Mk5 stock too or Vicky verky)  that was take it or leave it.   never heard of this approach before so what was the thought process behind that Fran?

 

 

Licensing!

 

What lots of people totally fail to remember is EVERY post British Rail livery is a registered trademark of the company concerned. To reproduce it in model form you must get express permission form said companies legal department

 

For locos / rolling stock produced after privatisation things are even more complicated as the design of the locomotive itself is copyrighted / trademarked / patented by the private sector builder and owner (e.g. a leasing company) so you also require permission from them too.

 

This is why there will be no duplication as regards the class 68s & 88s - only Dapol have been granted the necessary permissions to make them and it is ILLEGAL for any other manufacture to do so.

 

In this case it is implied that the Owners of the Mk5 sleepers and the Caledonian Sleeper franchise have said they would not licence a model company to just make the MK5s - said model company had to also produce a class 92 as well or permission would not be granted. It may seem odd to traditional railway modellers but brand licencing is not something companies let go to the wind just because its a railway franchise they are operating....

 

 

Edited February 13, 2019 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

15 hours ago, letterspider said:

 

I have read those posts and they are interesting and exciting models upcoming. However I don't agree with either of your two statements - one of which is wrong - from the CAD file which has already been released and the other which explains quite clearly why he no longer posts on this forum.

You can hardly blame me from wanting to protect my investment so far?

 

The decision by AcuraScale to make a 92 as well as the Mk5s has by the sounds of things everything to do with the legal / publicity department of the owners of the Caledonian Sleeper franchise.

 

It has got NOTHING to do with CAD files, a desire to do people out of money or act as a deliberate spoiler to DJM.

 

Thus while we understand your anguish the folk you should be directing your anger to are the owners of the Caledonian sleeper franchise who have the legal right to dictate who does or does not make models of their rolling stock and under what terms.

 

If the owners of the Caledonian sleeper franchise say "No Mk5s without a new class 92 loco" then the modelling community will NEVER get the new Mk5s made in model form (unless DJM did a deal to make them as well as his 92) 

[MGR Hooper!]

Now that I've digested the news, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Accurascale. I'm quite a fan of these humming electrics and a Class 92 has been on my wishlist for years. The Hornby one was almost my first option and I did intend on designing a kit for it, soon the DJM one came along and my excitement grew, but after a few personal issues with the brand I chose never to support the company again.

Therefore this announcement from you'll has really made me leap for joy. I have full faith in you'll after seeing what you'll did with the Irish models and also the stunning 3D printed samples of the Class 55 Deltics. As others have said, you'll came down and hit the ground running. There's something quite satisfying and reassuring about the way in which you'll deal with people and potential customers.

 

I look forward to the Class 92 with a lot of hope and excitement. I haven't made a decision yet as to what livery I'll choose, but it will most likely be the EWS one and/or the EWS/RfD one. I eagerly await the final pricing so that I can order.

Cheers!

Edited February 13, 2019 by MGR Hooper!

[Accurascale Fran]

4 hours ago, MGR Hooper! said:

Directed towards anyone at Accurascale...

 

Is the Class 92 only going to be available from you'll direct? Or will you'll rope in a few local model shops as well? I will be placing a pre-order but will wait for final price confirmation.

 

Hi there!

 

We sell direct and not through retailers. You can place your order if you wish through our website.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[Accurascale Fran]

7 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Licensing!

 

What lots of people totally fail to forget is EVERY post British Rail livery is a registered trademark of the company concerned. To reproduce it in model form you must get express permission form said companies legal department

 

For locos / rolling stock produced after privatisation things are even more complicated as the design of the locomotive itself is copyrighted / trademarked / patented by the private sector builder and owner (e.g. a leasing company) so you also require permission from them too.

 

This is why there will be no duplication as regards the class 68s & 88s - only Dapol have been granted the necessary permissions to make them and it is ILLEGAL for any other manufacture to do so.

 

In this case it is implied that the Owners of the Mk5 sleepers and the Caledonian Sleeper franchise have said they would not licence a model company to just make the MK5s - said model company had to also produce a class 92 as well or permission would not be granted. It may seem odd to traditional railway modellers but brand licencing is not something companies let go to the wind just because its a railway franchise they are operating....

 

 

 

Hi everyone,

 

As Phil says all manufacturers have to be respectful of the branding and trade marks of railway operating companies. We have found them very good and indeed helpful when making models.

 

We have secured exclusive rights to make the coaches themselves from CAF in OO and Revolution have obtained them in N, but of course we don’t have exclusive rights on liveries, as then nobody else could make a model of anything in that livery! I believe this is how it works on other models that are deemed ‘exclusive’ and this is why you can have models of Locos such as the 92s from several different manufacturers in the same livery. I hope that makes sense! We have a duty to be respectful to these brands and do them justice.

 

At the end of the day to do the Mark 5 we had to do an all singing all dancing 92 too. It has now given the modeler a choice which can only ever be a good thing. I do think we should just concentrate on the Accurascale 92 and it’s development on this thread from now on and discuss other models of Class 92s on their relevant threads.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

[Revolution Ben]

Hello all,

 

I just wanted to say on behalf of Revolution how excited we are to be working with Accurascale on these models.  I have high hopes that both in 00 and N we will be able to do the prototypes justice!

 

Also, Just a very quick note on licencing which does appear to be causing some confusion.

 

The most important thing to remember is that English Civil Law is predominantly based on precedent - meaning that what previous Judges have decided tends to determine what current ones can do.

 

The truth is that while a lot is said about branding, trademarks and copyright, very little has been tested, in law, when it comes to model railways.

 

While in theory companies can register their trademarks, and protect their brands, these laws are intended to protect intellectual copyright and so-called "passing off" - for example to stop some cowboy in a van marked British Gas charging for doing gas repairs, when he has nothing to do with that company.

 

That obviously doesn't apply to a model.  And it could be argued that reproducing a model is an artistic work and therefore falls under the exemptions that allow, say, photographers to sell pictures to magazines of Freightliner locos without any need to negotiate a licence.  Imagine a camera was developed that could take a 3D photo, and then print it out.  How would that be regarded?  Is that not simply what a model is?

 

This was tested in the US and the railway company lost, but a ruling in the US courts is obviously not binding here.

 

We just don't know what would happen, but since no one wants a complicated and expensive legal battle the sensible thing is to get the licence.

 

That is also a good idea because the owners of the vehicles are usually best placed to facilitate private site visits for photography/measurements and accurate colour specs, etc etc.

 

And perhaps most importantly because it's simple courtesy and common decency.

 

The point here is that the most important part of the licence is not whether it is exclusive, but that it implies greater accuracy and quality.

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

 

Edited February 13, 2019 by Ben A

[lyneux]

Some good points there Ben. Got me thinking about AndyWarhol's paintings of Campbells soup cans.

 

FT article here that talks about some legal cases (although none of them are UK-related): https://www.ft.com/content/cb5b802c-b3c3-11e0-855b-00144feabdc0

 

 

[arran]

13 hours ago, 071 said:

 

Hey there!

 

I remember seeing DB 92s regularly on a steel rail train at the southern end of the ECML when I lived there, also GBRf ones operate regularly across the North London Line in car trains to Dangenham I believe? My notes are in the office but I can check and confirm them and others for you tomorrow!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

That could be the service that runs to France, i think the wagons are intermodal twins with cradles on.

 

Regards Arran

[Accurascale Fran]

5 minutes ago, arran said:

That could be the service that runs to France, i think the wagons are intermodal twins with cradles on.

 

Regards Arran

 

I believe so Arran! 

 

Cheers,

 

Fran

[Mike Harvey]

1 hour ago, Ben A said:

 

 

This was tested in the US and the railway company lost, but a ruling in the US courts is obviously not binding here.

 

We just don't know what would happen, but since no one wants a complicated and expensive legal battle the sensible thing is to get the licence.

 

 

cheers

 

Ben A.

 

 

 

I think that Ben's attitude towards licensing is realistic. There was the recent case of RailNscale  in the Netherlands who market a range of 3d printed N scale cars. Some cars in the range were labelled BMW and bore a striking resemblance to BMW cars. These were withdrawn when BMW threatened legal action. In practice just the threat of a court case was enough not to want to fight to keep the BMW labelled items in the range.

 

It could be thought that RailNscale attempted a minor fightback with the single BMW lookalike model left in the range.

 

https://railnscale.com/2018/03/15/car-breakdown/

 

Edited February 13, 2019 by Mike Harvey

[JSpencer]

I've looked everywhere for a picture of these locos with PCAs. Helas no luck so far....

[159220]

14 hours ago, 071 said:

 

Hey there!

 

I remember seeing DB 92s regularly on a steel rail train at the southern end of the ECML when I lived there, also GBRf ones operate regularly across the North London Line in car trains to Dangenham I believe? My notes are in the office but I can check and confirm them and others for you tomorrow!

 

Cheers!

 

Fran

 

Hi, that would be very interesting and no doubt awfully useful to others too. Ideally one or two active flows where wagons are already produced in OO. 

 

I have also just reminded myself, during HS2 reconstruction of Euston, the Sleeper is going to be routed to Kings Cross. Hmm, this might get expensive! 

[Accurascale Fran]

1 minute ago, 159220 said:

 

Hi, that would be very interesting and no doubt awfully useful to others too. Ideally one or two active flows where wagons are already produced in OO. 

 

I have also just reminded myself, during HS2 reconstruction of Euston, the Sleeper is going to be routed to Kings Cross. Hmm, this might get expensive! 

 

Hi there,

 

The 92s on the sleepers has used Kings Cross several times over the past few years due to engineering work, so that's another one!

 

Cheers,

 

Fran

[Johnson Street IEMD]

Wooooooooooooooooooo

 

I like it ALOT... i say it, i really mean them

 

And the livery variations, too, with the new style GBRf 92020 as well.... (and the Cally Sleeper ones too) at long last Electric modellers are being spoilt, what with the impending Bachmann Class 90, the Hornby Class 87, the recently announced Heljan Class 86 Mk2 and now this too..

 

Decisions decisions :-))))

 

Kat

 

 

[JSpencer]

There are 2 pantos on this class, I wonder if the pantos will swap up and down when you change direction on DCC?

Or you have a function button for each. I guess all this is early days and you are not likely to be popping pantos up and down all the time anyway. Almost never in my case running from 3rd rail.

[Great Western]

Oh my goodness !

ill definitely be ordering some Railfreight Scheme locos, but I’ll wait until firm prices are confirmed so I can budget accordingly.

 

what others have said about the MK5s is right, a staged release to spread our budgets would help push people towards a bigger order, there’s nothing worse than placing a order in good faith then when the time comes be faced witch a huge bill that you fully expected you’d be able to fund being cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances.

 

The ability to spread payment or release would be really useful.

[ThaneofFife]

i am probably many others are probably aware already that their Is licensing and patents etc to consider but...…...what I find hard to get my head around is that you have somebody such as Accurascale ask permission to produce a Mk5 coach from the franchise but then its how their thought process worked to turn around and say "yes you can have the mk5 but only if you product the 92  as well".

 

personally if I worked for Caledonian and the request came to me my natural reaction would be to grant permission for what was asked originally ie ; the Mk5.   My brain wouldn't then caveat it by saying but only if you make the models of the 92.  In myhead I would be thinking that if another manufacturer wanted to produce the 92 and they put in for permission then again Caledonian would deal with that request in isolation and wouldn't think to make the connection.   If I ran a franchise my main raison Detra is to run trains and not spend too much time on the minutae of model railways to even think "hang on ive got this request for coaches but wheres the request for matching locos?....i'm not having that - here you've got our permission but its all or nothing   ".

 

Others may see it but I struggle with their thought process on this against Accura.  but don't worry its fine Im not sweating over it just putting it out there that its just weird from a business PoV when my business is running trains.

 

Like Fran said - its more complicated than he could really reveal on here.

[Joseph_Pestell]

6 hours ago, Mike Harvey said:

 

 

 

It could be thought that RailNscale attempted a minor fightback with the single BMW lookalike model left in the range.

 

https://railnscale.com/2018/03/15/car-breakdown/

 

 

I am not such a car nerd as to have done a detailed count but it often seems to me that I see more BMWs stopped at the roadside than any other marque.

[stovepipe]

42 minutes ago, ThaneofFife said:

i am probably many others are probably aware already that their Is licensing and patents etc to consider but...…...what I find hard to get my head around is that you have somebody such as Accurascale ask permission to produce a Mk5 coach from the franchise but then its how their thought process worked to turn around and say "yes you can have the mk5 but only if you product the 92  as well".

 

personally if I worked for Caledonian and the request came to me my natural reaction would be to grant permission for what was asked originally ie ; the Mk5.   My brain wouldn't then caveat it by saying but only if you make the models of the 92.  In myhead I would be thinking that if another manufacturer wanted to produce the 92 and they put in for permission then again Caledonian would deal with that request in isolation and wouldn't think to make the connection.   If I ran a franchise my main raison Detra is to run trains and not spend too much time on the minutae of model railways to even think "hang on ive got this request for coaches but wheres the request for matching locos?....i'm not having that - here you've got our permission but its all or nothing   ".

 

Others may see it but I struggle with their thought process on this against Accura.  but don't worry its fine Im not sweating over it just putting it out there that its just weird from a business PoV when my business is running trains.

 

Like Fran said - its more complicated than he could really reveal on here.

 

I notice there's a gap in the catalogue numbers, ACC2194, so perhaps there's one more yet to come.....maybe CS, or the livery design house, want train packs for marketing etc?

[James Makin]

49 minutes ago, ThaneofFife said:

i am probably many others are probably aware already that their Is licensing and patents etc to consider but...…...what I find hard to get my head around is that you have somebody such as Accurascale ask permission to produce a Mk5 coach from the franchise but then its how their thought process worked to turn around and say "yes you can have the mk5 but only if you product the 92  as well".

 

personally if I worked for Caledonian and the request came to me my natural reaction would be to grant permission for what was asked originally ie ; the Mk5.   My brain wouldn't then caveat it by saying but only if you make the models of the 92.  In myhead I would be thinking that if another manufacturer wanted to produce the 92 and they put in for permission then again Caledonian would deal with that request in isolation and wouldn't think to make the connection.   If I ran a franchise my main raison Detra is to run trains and not spend too much time on the minutae of model railways to even think "hang on ive got this request for coaches but wheres the request for matching locos?....i'm not having that - here you've got our permission but its all or nothing   ".

 

Others may see it but I struggle with their thought process on this against Accura.  but don't worry its fine Im not sweating over it just putting it out there that its just weird from a business PoV when my business is running trains.

 

Like Fran said - its more complicated than he could really reveal on here.

 

I agree that it’s an odd request but with something like this you’re dealing with a companies’ brand team and completely at their mercy, there’s no rules or logic here to try and understand!

 

It could be that the brand team aren’t enthusiasts and the concept of producing just their coaches but not their locomotives is unfathomable (maybe they want some display models as part of the deal?) or alternatively it might be the other way around, the contacts are absolute model railway nuts and want an awesome spec Class 92, and have the power to ask for it! 

 

I work in a similar world but in an aviation equivalent and I can easily imagine this kind of thing being requested, despite the size of a company you’re down to a very small number of actual decision makers and at their whim, often with outcomes of decisions that can seem bizarre, but it’s their way or the highway! 

 

Cheers,

james

[Accurascale Fran]

Hi everyone,

 

It will all make sense in time, but at the end of the day the most important thing is that we’re doing a Class 92 and we will certainly do it justice along with the Mark 5s! 

 

Orders have been been brisk so far, we should have prices ahead of Model Rail Scotland for the 92 at least, and once we do we shall confirm them here as well as on our website.

 

Cheers!

 

Fran