State of British N Gauge

[railsquid]

Personally I'd like to see the AL1 to AL5 electrics done (81-85), however I might need a time warped class 66 to pull them 

I think the OHLE locomotives and MUs are seriously under represented and are something our younger modelers can associate with.

Are modelers asking for non-OHLE stuff because it's easier to model, or are companies selling what they think the current market associates with, if the latter how do we bring young blood into the hobby if they can't associate with the available market (not many young uns will have experienced a steamer at full speed either from a platform or on board the train)

I applaud your definition of "young" 

I suppose one issue with British OHLE electrics is that they were historically limited to certain (albeit quite large) areas (WCML, and in later BR days ECML and East Anglia IIRC) which makes them not as ubiquitous as diesels/kettles.

All I'm asking for is a class 85, updated class 87, and a class 304 EMU (all in BR blue). 

(Yes I could theoretically do something about those myself, but I am aware of my limitations, the most pressing of which for the forseeable future will be time).

Oh, and Dapol to hurry up with their promised 86s.

[Stevie DC]

Thanks to Dr Al for the heads up about this thread.

Given that the N Gauge market is apparently somewhere between 15% and 25% of the OO market and that the costs of design, tooling and assembly of an N Gauge model is comparable to that for a OO Gauge model, it is likely that the N Gauge market will never be as developed as OO - the returns on investment aren't there.

My 3D printed range came about due to my own requirements for locomotives to represent my chosen location. The lack of expansion into other company's locos and stock is mainly due to the very low sales numbers - my Patriot and V1/V3 models are currently tied for as the best sellers with fifteen models of each sold.

Some of the LNER scratch aids mentioned by Dr Al are below for those wanting to have a go.



LNER N2 designed to fit a modified Farish 3MT chassis.





Examples of the V1 and V3 bodies fitted to Farish N class chassis - both are 'pre-production' prototypes, the dome is a better shape on the model on sale.



K3/3 on a V2 chassis an powered by a spare J39 tender drive.

I've been working on a replacement body to fit on the N class chassis, hopefully this will be available sometime this year - the lack of spare V2 tender chassis/frames has delayed this as I need to CAD replacements now.





The L1 has been withdrawn for my range for an upgrade. The original design was my first effort designing for, the then new, FUD material - now Fine/Finest Detail Plastic. The current test model of the new model is below.



With regard to making things for oneself, I though I would show a bit of my own progression over the last ten years. There have been many more models and techniques studies, attempted and learnt to get from the first of these pictures to the last.



One of my earliest attempts at a C1 Atlantic (c.2008/9) built out of cardboard! It did get painted but I can't find a picture of it in that state. The chassis is from a Jubilee and the tender for Union Mills.



C. 2012/14. The unique C1, 3279. This time a 3D print done on my first home printer (a B9Creator) with the same Jubilee chassis as above (spare valve gear and cylinders fitted), a chopped up Farish A3 tender top, V2 frames and a Union Mills tender drive and lined with Fox Transfers. This model has since been retired and the parts recycled as I would like to have another try at it.



The latest model nearing completion. Again it has a 3D printed body and uses the frames from a Dapol hall as it's starting point (and parts from another two locos). The tender is to scale this time and is much smaller than the one that ended up behind 3279. This locomotive is completely hand lined. Admittedly, this is the extreme end of using a donor chassis/parts to build a model.

I hope these last three pictures do show that, over time, it is possible to learn/improve techniques and produce something that isn't too out of place compared to modern RTR. There are many useful books and references out there and all I've done is to copy and practice the methods outlined in these.

The hand lining has been done using a bow pen (ruling pen). Following a career as a competitive free skater (solo figure skating), I now have nerve damage in my left arm and hand (I'm left handed) which results in pain, numbness and intermittent shakes (my back and knees are also in a bad state now). My right hand lacks the movement required in my thumb to hold a pen or brush due to being born with a deformity so learning how to be right handed isn't an option. I've found that by supporting my wrist while working, I can keep my hand steady enough for most detail work.

[martyn]

Dr Al;

reply #11.

I did state at the very beginning that I would ignore kits for the purpose of my post.

I am well aware of the availability of the kits you mentioned, and indeed, with the exception of Steve/Atso's kits I have examples of nearly all you mentioned. But many of these are over twenty years old, and, I think, show it. I have to say that my interpretation of the original post was weighted towards RTR. I have also built some Foxhunter kits, which always were a step above Langley, but sadly, I think no longer available; likewise Hughes kits. I am awaiting Atso's L1-the chassis is waiting!

I have built many kit locos, wagons, and coaches, as twenty years ago it was the only way to get the prototype you required, but even though some won prizes in their day, they do not compare to modern RTR, and, personally, due to aging eyesight, I'm not sure if I could do it again.

On another thread on the Forum, Mike/Red Death asks for steam prototypes to be considered for production; my post was also partly in answer to this, as a 'standard' LNER loco which would sell 1000 units may be difficult to find, because of the problems I have mentioned.

I appreciate that Farish do two versions of the LNER J39 tender-but they are both 4200 gallon tenders, not 3500 gallon. My 3500 gallon version is from Foxhunter, but shows its age due to the Poole chassis under the loco. I believe the Union Mills is also 4200 gallon. I also have the Union Mills 'Claud'-which I have lined-and their B12/3-which, prototypically, I haven't-but these both have issues with size, especially the tender. My Foxhunter K3 runs with a Uniion Mills 4200 gallon tender.

I didn't mention LNER 280s; the main Gresley version (O3) came in two distinct versions at least, and the 'standard' LNER 280, the ex GCR Robinson ROD/O4, went to at least 8 sub classes, not to mention rebuilds to Thompson O1! Nor did I mention the Thompson/Peppercorn K1; this could also be produced using the Farish tender drive, but again, was really a BR built design and allocated in blocks to very few sheds.

Whilst I admire, and envy, the standard of your work, I think that many members of this forum lean towards RTR-which was where my post was aimed. I personally didn't mind building older kits using 'standard' RTR chassis, and accepted the resulting compromise; I would be quite reluctant to try altering more modern RTR chassis to fit kits, for a number of reasons, one of them being eyesight.

Martyn

[Bealman]

An informative, lucid and thoughtful reply. Posts like this make this thread useful and worthwhile.

Thanks for posting! 

[Madann01]

Personally I'd like to see the AL1 to AL5 electrics done (81-85), however I might need a time warped class 66 to pull them 

I think the OHLE locomotives and MUs are seriously under represented and are something our younger modelers can associate with.

Are modelers asking for non-OHLE stuff because it's easier to model, or are companies selling what they think the current market associates with, if the latter how do we bring young blood into the hobby if they can't associate with the available market (not many young uns will have experienced a steamer at full speed either from a platform or on board the train)
[/quote

Not just the young ones having not experienced the era of the steam train, I am nearly 60 years young and my only recollections of steam trains was watching them in the 60s as a child on the local section of the now named west coast main line. Not a clue on what locos and rolling stock were running and didn't really care if truth be known. My modelling aspirations are founded on what I see around me at this present time and I can only assume youngsters of today will only want to model what they have memories of ( when they can afford to ) just like the followers of steam are doing now. Manufacturers need to start planning for the future customers requirements. As memories of the 'Golden age of steam' are fast diminishing

Note I have nothing but admiration for those that do produce wonderful accurate portrayals' of the steam era For the inspiration.

[Madann01]

Not just the young ones having not experienced the era of the steam train, I am nearly 60 years young and my only recollections of steam trains was watching them in the 60s as a child on the local section of the now named west coast main line. Not a clue on what locos and rolling stock were running and didn't really care if truth be known. My modelling aspirations are founded on what I see around me at this present time and I can only assume youngsters of today will only want to model what they have memories of ( when they can afford to ) just like the followers of steam are doing now. Manufacturers need to start planning for the future customers requirements. As memories of the 'Golden age of steam' are fast diminishing

Note I have nothing but admiration for those that do produce wonderful accurate portrayals' of the steam era  For the inspiration.

[njee20]

I must say I loathe the "well build a kit then" attitude, it's only a short step to the derogatory term "box openers". Kits definitely have a place, and it's great to have something that not everyone does, but when talking about a lack of RTR availability the answer should not be "it's available as a kit, so why not do some modelling?".

As a comparative youngster (I don't recall ever seeing a BR blue loco, I only just remember loco-hauled trains on the SWML, let alone steam!) I've always been interested in the contemporary scene. I'm maybe generally about 3-5 years 'in arrears', I don't tend to buy stuff as soon as it's available on the 1:1 scale railway, but when I look at my collection now it's gradually shifted more and more modern. This comes up periodically though, and there are plenty of people modelling an era they have no recollection of. Let's be honest there are very few people with any living memory of the 1930s, let alone earlier.

[Ben A]

In a short amount of time how many models have Revolution tested the waters with then felt that the product wasn't viable.

Hi there,

Revolution has cancelled just one proposed model after it failed to generate adequate interest - the Class 21/29 diesel.

The Class B tankers struggled for a while, but got there and have now been delivered to supporters.

The Class 320/321 EMU enjoyed an an early surge, stalled for a while, but is now about to go to tooling.

We expected the APT-E in N to take a while to reach required numbers to make it viable, but it is already almost there and development work with Rapido has started.

Cheers

Ben A.

[Stevie DC]

I must say I loathe the "well build a kit then" attitude, it's only a short step to the derogatory term "box openers". Kits definitely have a place, and it's great to have something that not everyone does, but when talking about a lack of RTR availability the answer should not be "it's available as a kit, so why not do some modelling?".

njee, while I agree that there can occasionally (and unfortunately) be an element of elitism within our hobby, I disagree with your statement that somebody suggesting that a modeller build a kit/scratch aid that is available is only a short step from using the derogatory term 'box openers'.

As somebody struggling to try and make a living in the industry, I would say that roughly 50% of my sales come from people who have referred others to the fact I offer a print of a prototype they would like that isn't available RTR. With the best will in the world, the RTR manufacturers cannot hope to invest in producing a model of every item of stock that was ever made (certainly not without our lifetimes, anyway). In those situations it really does come down to having a go at kit building (if a kit is available), scratch building or doing without. I am very grateful to those who have suggested that people buy and finish my prints as they have helped to offset development costs for new designs.

I find one of the most gratifying things is when somebody emails me, or posts on a forum, a picture of something they made from one of my prints. The standard of the finish doesn't matter, the fact that they made the purchase and gained enjoyment from it means the world to me - maybe one day I'll be able to make a living wage out of designing as well.

We are fortunate that our hobby is a very broad church and it is very much up to the individual in what direction they take their own involvement. There will inevitably be differences of opinions and sometimes these can lead to unfortunate, heated, exchanges. One particular approach may not appeal to an individual but please don't shoot somebody down for suggesting another option or referring them to a small supplier.

Happy modelling in whatever form, period or location it may be.

[njee20]

I totally agree Steve, and my post wasn't aimed at anyone particular on this thread, it's just a general disliking of the way that is often phrased, you can hear the sneering! There's a nuance between "have you considered building a kit?" and "there are kits available, get back in your box and stop whinging!".

Kits definitely have a place, that is to supplement RTR offerings and help to fill the gaps particularly of the more esoteric prototypes. What I don't like is the attitude that people need to shut up and buy kits rather than lament the lack of availability of RTR models. It's akin to people complaining about a manufacturer being rebutted with "well why don't you do it better?". It's just not helpful, and it is furiously elitist.

I'm most definitely not saying that I think manufacturers should release everything, and I think a lot of people have unrealistic expectations - there was something on RMWeb recently where someone was lamenting the fact that some forthcoming model, of which he wanted a good number was not available in the exact permutation he wanted (Dapol 50 maybe?) and thus he wouldn't buy any. That's excessive - if you're going to be sufficiently picky as to want a certain running number and condition as at a specific point in time then you need to break out the tools and sort it yourself.

I've got several repaints I've done which are alright. They're not RTR standard, but I like that I have them, because others don't. I've got a few kit built wagons, principally 3D printed as not much needs doing. I tried my hand at a brass wagon kit, but I was too ambitious with my first attempt. I'll likely have another go at some point. I keep trying to teach myself CAD because I'd like to try printing some wagons myself, it's not going well!

I will, however, defend people's right to say "I really want one of x", meaning a RTR version, because I'll continue to do it too!

[Skyline2uk]

Touched on briefly but to add my two pence to the "gaps" in BR Diesel / Electric RTR:

AC electric

81-85
87 (Farish one old and out of production)
90 (Farish one old and out of production, surely the imminent 00 needs a shrink ray?)
91 (Farish one old and out of production)

Diesel

Class 59. Been mentioned as long as the 142s and much further behind in development.

I admit that's a small amount of locos and therefore I have little to moan about (and I cant afford many anyway).

Ref kits: I have started a few and my biggest problem is time. I would love to run a rake of tipplers (behind a 59!) and say "yes I made those", but a full time job and approaching 5 week old junior mean that's an aspiration.

At least with RTR stuff I can admire it.

Skyline2uk

[Stevie DC]

I totally agree Steve, and my post wasn't aimed at anyone particular on this thread, it's just a general disliking of the way that is often phrased, you can hear the sneering! There's a nuance between "have you considered building a kit?" and "there are kits available, get back in your box and stop whinging!".

Kits definitely have a place, that is to supplement RTR offerings and help to fill the gaps particularly of the more esoteric prototypes. What I don't like is the attitude that people need to shut up and buy kits rather than lament the lack of availability of RTR models. It's akin to people complaining about a manufacturer being rebutted with "well why don't you do it better?". It's just not helpful, and it is furiously elitist.

I'm most definitely not saying that I think manufacturers should release everything, and I think a lot of people have unrealistic expectations - there was something on RMWeb recently where someone was lamenting the fact that some forthcoming model, of which he wanted a good number was not available in the exact permutation he wanted (Dapol 50 maybe?) and thus he wouldn't buy any. That's excessive - if you're going to be sufficiently picky as to want a certain running number and condition as at a specific point in time then you need to break out the tools and sort it yourself.

I've got several repaints I've done which are alright. They're not RTR standard, but I like that I have them, because others don't. I've got a few kit built wagons, principally 3D printed as not much needs doing. I tried my hand at a brass wagon kit, but I was too ambitious with my first attempt. I'll likely have another go at some point. I keep trying to teach myself CAD because I'd like to try printing some wagons myself, it's not going well!

I will, however, defend people's right to say "I really want one of x", meaning a RTR version, because I'll continue to do it too!

Thank you for clarifying njee. 

[PaulCheffus]

Hi

The one thing that winds me up are the people who say "I can't do that" when they then state they have never tried.

Like anything worthwhile in life it requires an investment in time and accepting that the first few items will be rejected.

Cheers

Paul

[ohlavache]

Touched on briefly but to add my two pence to the "gaps" in BR Diesel / Electric RTR:

AC electric

81-85
87 (Farish one old and out of production)
90 (Farish one old and out of production, surely the imminent 00 needs a shrink ray?)
91 (Farish one old and out of production)

Diesel

Class 59. Been mentioned as long as the 142s and much further behind in development.

I admit that's a small amount of locos and therefore I have little to moan about (and I cant afford many anyway).

Ref kits: I have started a few and my biggest problem is time. I would love to run a rake of tipplers (behind a 59!) and say "yes I made those", but a full time job and approaching 5 week old junior mean that's an aspiration.

At least with RTR stuff I can admire it.

Skyline2uk

Question from a non-British guy.
My wish list for RTR models is as follows:
- diesel: classes 07, 17 and 23
- electric: class 71
- steam: class W4 Peckett 0-4-0ST (or at least class B2 Peckett 0-6-0ST), 4-4-2 'Atlantic' class H2/C1
- multiple units: underground stock 1938, Derby Leightweight (single unit or 2-car)
I can't figure out if they are part of the gaps or if some, not to say all, of them are "unrealistic expectations" as said by njee20.
What's your view?

[njee20]

Hi

The one thing that winds me up are the people who say "I can't do that" when they then state they have never tried.

Like anything worthwhile in life it requires an investment in time and accepting that the first few items will be rejected.

I principally agree with people saying "I can't" if they've not tried, although that could mean "I'm not prepared to throw the money at it to find out because my previous experience tells me it won't go well", which is basically the same. I've flirted with O gauge since forever, and have nearly bought several Heljan 60s. I'm not going to buy an O gauge kit because I'll massacre it, but I've never tried one. To that end "I can't" build an O gauge loco!

Question from a non-British guy.
My wish list for RTR models is as follows:
- diesel: classes 07, 17 and 23
- electric: class 71
- steam: class W4 Peckett 0-4-0ST (or at least class B2 Peckett 0-6-0ST), 4-4-2 'Atlantic' class H2/C1
- multiple units: underground stock 1938, Derby Leightweight (single unit or 2-car)
I can't figure out if they are part of the gaps or if some, not to say all, of them are "unrealistic expectations" as said by njee20.
What's your view?

I don't know what any of them are, so can't really help, but my comment was about someone who complained that the exact model they wanted wasn't being released. Ie the running number they wanted, with a specific livery variation.