Future models (N Gauge Locomotives)

[Les1952]

My REAL preference would be for a decent LNER mixed traffic loco. Given that Farish's V2 can't usually pull the skin off a rice pudding I would have suggested a V2 except Farish would probably get there first. That takes us to the 2-6-0s. Bachmann reckon the K3 is their poorest seller, despite there being so many of them.

Hornby, on the other hand, seem to be selling plenty of K1s. So could I suggest one of the following-

K1 2-6-0 with the option of using the chassis and much of the CAD for a later K4 (Great Marquess). The K4 needs a different tender, the K1 has the same tender as the B1, which might help a little with CAD costs.
K2 2-6-0 which had two basic variants with different cabs. There isn't one in OO to use for sales comparisons, but that might give an opportunity to make the same model in two scales.

The third suggestion follows on from that and is a B16 4-6-0, which could be one or both of two variations - as built or as rebuilt into B16/2 by Gresley and B16/3 by Thompson. I'm not sure how many differences there were between B16/2 and B16/3 visually, but I think they could be covered in the same tooling with slides.

Just a couple of thoughts.
Les

[CeeDee]

My vote would be for N15 (King Arthur) class followed by a Lord Nelson Class. Two very evocative SR and BR(SR) locos.

[Hailstone]

The loco missing most in my fleet would be the Hawksworth County, I am sure I am not the only Western modeller who would want at least one

[Matt Pinto]

The loco missing most in my fleet would be the Hawksworth County, I am sure I am not the only Western modeller who would want at least one

I can confirm that you are not alone.

[Mark2016]

I'd be delighted to see another RTR Southern EMU. My kit building skills are truly execrable and my poor 4CEP is getting terribly lonely.

Bulleid 4-SUB would be first choice, but I'd also be very happy with any of:
2BIL
2HAL
2HAP
2/4EPB (can't believe Farish haven't produced this yet)
Thumper (3 car)
4CIG
etc
etc

A re-tooled 73 to the standards of the OO model
71 / 74 (although that may be someone else's plans?)

Also, just about southern steam engine with a preference (that is unlikely to be satisfied, I know) for a W and Z class.

And finally, a Bulleid Tavern car set. Possibly the least economically viable of any of the suggestions so far on this thread, I know, but it would have a real 'wow' factor.

Thanks,

Mark

[gc4946]

I wonder if there's any demand for the popular class 153 to be backdated to a class 155 DMU?

Originally 35 2-car units were built for Provincial services and another seven built for West Yorkshire PTE (MetroTrain).
The 70 153s were rebuilt from the 35 ex-Provincial 155s, but the West Yorkshire-based units remain as 2-car to this day.

[VoyagerBen]

Class 155 in Northern Rail livery please :-)

[Elvinley]

GWR 'City' 4-4-0
GWR Dukedog
SR King Arthur
LMS Compound
Super D
SDJR 7F
LNER P2
Sentinel diesel shunter
Class 28
LMS 10000/10001

[zodiac]

I'd be delighted to see another RTR Southern EMU.

I don't think Dapol have produced any BR/SR emus, so a first from them would be very welcome.

An EPB, CIG or VEP would be a good place to start.

Z.

[Mark2016]

I don't think Dapol have produced any BR/SR emus, so a first from them would be very welcome.

An EPB, CIG or VEP would be a good place to start.

Z.

Sorry, I could perhaps have been a little more clear - I was referring to the N gauge market overall, not just Dapol. You're quite right though .... a first from Dapol would indeed be very welcome.

Mark

[gc4946]

Dapol already offers a Terrier in their range, but I suggest your company - over a period of several years - create a niche market based on the Isle of Wight's steam railways.
An 02 0-4-4T and an ex-LBSCR E1 0-6-0T could be introduced using your engineering expertise based on your similar-sized M7s and Pannier tanks.

[Bob G]

Any manufacturer will tell you - if the product is niche, the cash flow would be suicidal. Leave the IOW to the kitbuilders and manufacturers of the ilk of Etched Pixels, for example.
However, the O2 is not that bad a suggestion, as it did last until the early sixties on the mainland and 1966 on the IOW, in pretty much the same locations that M7 lovers would run their locos, so as a replacement to the M7 its not a bad concept.

[geoffc]

Top of my list would be a Class 158, it has been in service for over 25 years, in two and three car formations, with a widespread operational area and many liveries.

[Alistair]

Biggest issue with that is It has been in the Farish catalogue for years. Plus Bachmann announced that they were doing a new tooling 158 a couple of years ago in 00. So will be prime to scale down as they will have all of the research and CAD done (current stage of 00 model).

[JeremiahBunyan]

Sadly Bachmann are taking way too long...

[Alistair]

They may be taking too long, but isn't that the sameness with all manufacturers. I would prefer that they take longer so as to get it right, than rush it and get it wrong. Also if they take their time over it it means that there aren't 8 models out at the same time to buy.

[Matt Pinto]

Dapol already offers a Terrier in their range, but I suggest your company - over a period of several years - create a niche market based on the Isle of Wight's steam railways.
An 02 0-4-4T and an ex-LBSCR E1 0-6-0T could be introduced using your engineering expertise based on your similar-sized M7s and Pannier tanks.

Not completely sure about the IoW niche overall but an O2 would be very welcome in general. Put it with a couple of Maunsell coaches and you have semi-accurate depiction of the 2-sets that were almost as common as the WR's B-sets in the SR's more rural locations.

[geoffc]

In many postings it has been said that as the CAD for an OO model already exists, it is implied that it can be modified for a N model. I was told from somebody who should know, that this is not the case, it can not be shrunk and the CAD has to be completely redone. Can Andy tell us if this is the case?

[Alistair]

Whilst having cad in 00 is not a foregone conclusion that it can be shrunk, it does mean that they have a much better start point than if there was no CAD available. It also means that all of the research component of the project has been completed. The very basic outer body shell of the cad can be utilised to shrink down and then worked back from there to introduce the details and interior bits. It just means that you are further along the timeline than a different company starting a fresh.

[Elvinley]

I didn't notice the narrow gauge option on the first page - this would be most welcome in any scale.

[Jeff Eastmond]

Yes, I've been thinking about that - does that refer to the stock OO9 (4mm scale, 9mm track) or something smaller, like 'Nz' (2mm scale, 6.5mm track)...

[JeremiahBunyan]

Hi Jeff, as the post is made in the N gauge loco section I'm guessing 1:148 scale locos on Z gauge track.

[JeremiahBunyan]

Also if it were OO9 it would've been listed in their OO gauge category.

[JeremiahBunyan]

Will Dapol consider doing a Class 87?

I don't know what's the demand for a Class 87, but I do hope Dapol will consider doing one. I think it'll be a great partner for the Class 86 that Dapol has exceptionally turned out.

I'm listing some points that will hopefully be of some use and ease as well.

• The Class 87 shares a lot of stuff with the Class 86.
• The wheelbase and the distance between both axles on the bogies are same.
• The windows and grilles on the side are identical.
• The overall shape of the body is the same.
• The roof equipment is slightly different, obviously the windows are on the front, the underframe and bogie frames are different and the face is also different.

So basically this may be a case where Dapol saves some on the research, the basic CAD file can be used. The CAD for the chassis block and other common parts can be used.

[Joel Dapol]

A good idea and one we will consider, what do other modellers think?

[JeremiahBunyan]

Hi Joel,

Thanks... I think if the tooling (the slides) are designed in such a way that it can be shared with your Class 86, it will save you'll a fair bit. Because if you look at the sides of the locos they are identical. The only difference is the face of the cab, the small grille on the cab roof, the roof and roof equipment and pantographs depending on type.

You main chassis block used by the Class 86 can also be used. I've already pointed out the identical dimensions. So what's left is underframe gubbins and the bogie frames. The PCB may/may not have to be redesigned depending on the lighting cluster and all other electrical work which I am unfamiliar with.

Please do consider starting a thread in your N gauge Electric section. And since the Dapol Digest has only 270+ members as of now, maybe you should have an online poll and advertise it on your facebook page etc. Reach out as far as you can for better feedback.

I see the Class 87 as a sensible option only because it shares so much with the Class 86 and saves a lot for you'll.

[beeshill]

I do agree that it would be an obvious partner for the 86, not sure how popular it would be due to a DC model been on the shelves for years from "elsewhere", albeit no lighting and not DCC ready!

All in all, a good idea from my point of view :-)

Ste