How are the models numbers selected for manufacture?

[exmouthcraig]

@railsquid THE SECOND you put a photo up of your creation some clown will have to come and tell you EVERYTHING that is wrong with it even if it was THE BEST modelled loco ever.

We seem to have a selection in society that HAVE to go to every length possible to prove something is wrong!! 

[PLD]

I've been watching an eBay auction for a CL40 - D369 - and I started to wonder why that number? Why wasn't D1 - "Scafell Pike" offered? Was it the expense of the nameplate?
Woudn't a humble Class 40 get a lift it had "1" on the cab side?

The most obvious reason for NOT putting D1 on the side of a Class 40 is that the real D1 was a class 44 not a 40 and they would quite rightly be vilified by most modellers - it's the equivalent of putting the name "Flying Scotsman" on an LMS Duchess, and D1 HAS been done on their Class 44 model. Why do wrong something you've already done right??

The 'celebrity' locos DO in fact get produced as well as the mundane. IIRC the most notable class 40 - long survivor in Green - D200 HAS been done.

From the manufacturing point of view, there is a tendency to avoid individual locos that had visual differences to the bulk of the class so they don't have to modify tools for each individual production run. Those attention grabbing celebrities are also often the focus of premium price, (often retailer supported) limited editions targeted at the collector market.

For the modeller buying in multiple, you'd want different numbers available, and if you want a realistic fleet, you'd really only want one of the 'celebrities' and the rest more mundane. If your wanting to renumber, for variety, its easier to put a name plate on than take it off.

[crewearpley40]

Steve @LASteve , heres a youtube clip https://youtu.be/f8O5k5dHAO4.  Look for 31105 and 31107. Also
https://youtu.be/_SVxUYP1E9w    . Named 31s in the 90s. I wont go what's been said already in this enjoyable topic

[Skyline2uk]

Read through this topic with interest and most of the points I had have been made.

One extra thing I have been told about manufacture choice for loco releases (albeit more linked to livery than specific number, but some liveries were only on a handful on examples):

The initial releases (say three examples) deliberately does not contain the most popular liveries, so those who REALLY want one will get the "next best" livery and wait for another release. Thus securing multiple sales.

Now I personally see two risks in this; lots of unsold examples or people simply buying one loco.

However it's a tactic I have been told is employed by manufactures from at least two sources.

Skyline2uk

[Graham Walters]

Read through this topic with interest and most of the points I had have been made.

One extra thing I have been told about manufacture choice for loco releases (albeit more linked to livery than specific number, but some liveries were only on a handful on examples):

The initial releases (say three examples) deliberately does not contain the most popular liveries, so those who REALLY want one will get the "next best" livery and wait for another release. Thus securing multiple sales.

Now I personally see two risks in this; lots of unsold examples or people simply buying one loco.

However it's a tactic I have been told is employed by manufactures from at least two sources.

Skyline2uk

Hornby's warehouse is full oif examples of this very thing, and during lockdown they have been trying to peddle them out to the trade at stupid prices, and still no-one is buying them, a classic is their Class 73 (I think).
Buyers are wise to it, and there is a growing aftermarket of people willing to relivery and re-number loco's at reasonable prices

[Newportnobby]

Harking back to my spotting days in  the 1960s (and armed with my Ian Allan Locospotters books once I'd got a Saturday job to pay for them) it was always the 'namers' we tried to bag rather than the 'day to day' unnamed ones. It was the only reason, really, I'd head to the capital to get round Paddington, Kings Cross, St.Pancras and Waterloo.
As to models, I have 3 Peaks (all named) and 5 class 40s (2 of which are named although one is the later named 'Atlantic Conveyor)
There are also loco numbers which will probably never be released e.g the class 40 involved in The Great Train Robbery (D326?)

[njee20]

However it's a tactic I have been told is employed by manufactures from at least two sources.

Yes that's a very common tactic. You get the 'early adopters' who have to have one of the first examples, and then you get repeat buyers when you do the livery they really want. That'll happen with Dapol 50s in revised NSE I'll wager. "Buyers being wise to it" is still good for the manufacturers, they get the sales from those who will repaint, and then still get the second 'wave' from the production run.

I think often the choice is random, frankly! Whilst Railsquid's point is funny it is true that there are a spectacular number of 'errors' between subclasses or mixing and matching of details/logos. Few will know, even fewer will care, but they're there. The Dapol 50, for example - the large logo version has NSE logos between the marker lights, but by the time they were fitted it carried a different name (IIRC). Dapol have recently done 66002, but actually 66001 and 66002 had EWS maroon bodyside grills (admittedly they promptly turned black, the other 248 EWS ones were delivered with black grills).

What bemuses me is the propensity for brands to duplicate offerings. Farish and Dapol both do 66101, 66111 and 66152. Less surprising is doing "Evening Star" and other 'specials', but for comparatively run of the mill models it seems a bizarre choice.

[Ben A]

Hello Steve,

I can only speak for Revolution Trains, but we give a fair amount of thought to what numbers the vehicles will have.

For the Pendolino, which was our first powered model, we created a poll among our crowdfunding backers and enabled them to select 7 of the 10 versions that were produced. 

The only ones we insisted on were 390103 "Virgin Hero", so we could make a donation to the Royal British Legion, 390104 as it was in the special "Alstom" livery, and 390151 "Virgin Ambassador", which has the union flag on each side.

For the revised versions, although production has not been finalised, as Flowing Silk is now defunct, we will probably select the trains that ran in it for longest; 390010 was the first to be outshopped in the livery, while 390156 was the first to receive the new Avanti colours IIRC.

For the 92s, again there were reasons each was chosen, some notable examples: 92003 "Beethoven" - chosen as it hauled the very last train under British Rail before privatisation; 92009 "Marco Polo" - the first repainted into DB Red; 92018; hauled the inaugural Caledonian Sleeper service.

Similarly, and for steam enthusiasts, when we helped Sonic Models finalise the numbers to be offered of the 56xx 0-6-2 tank much work was done to find photographs that confirmed combinations of liveries and details, and of course in some instances preserved locomotives in particular were selected, with a small donation to be made, for example, to the owners of 5637.

Beyond that, for most wagons I select numbers for which I have found clear photographs.  For example, the numbers of the Sfins2 vans currently under development in Norsk Hydro, Cargowaggon and Unbranded liveries were taken from photographs found on Paul Bartlett's excellent photo reference website here: https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/ferrynorskhydro

Apologies for the length of this post - I hope it is of interest.

Cheers

Ben A.

[crewearpley40]

Sadly @Newportnobby . D326 only in a larger scale. Still have my blue 40.

[PLD]

There are also loco numbers which will probably never be released e.g the class 40 involved in The Great Train Robbery (D326?)

Not sure about in N Gauge, but allegedly requested at least twice in 00 by retailers as special commissions but declined by the manufacturers...

[Newportnobby]

It did have a chequered history and was considered 'jinxed' by some. Engine probs, then the robbery, then a secondman was electrocuted whilst washing its windows and lastly total brake failure so it ran into the back of another train.
Not sure I'd want one!

[njee20]

I think locos involved in major accidents would be ones I would avoid as a manufacturer. Some may well consider them "tainted".

[red_death]

Having spoken to Hornby and several others about this I can give a somewhat objective reply.

If the engine still exists then there is copyright, and a manufacturer would pay so much to the owner of the copyright, if the owner is a trust or preserved railway, they can also specify how many can be produced for that sum.

If the engine doesn't exist, then the title to the number (or name) passes to the people that scrapped it, unless BR retained the number, (which they did in 99.9% of cases)

Graham

Sorry but that isn't true - if Hornby are telling people that then they are spreading fake news! You can't apply copyright from a full size loco to a model. 

What can be covered under IP laws are trademarks eg brand names/logos - for that you may need permission.  Most ex-BR stuff ended up with BRB Residual (though IIRC that has gone now), though some ended up elsewhere. Current franchises are normally relatively easy to deal with but franchises that are defunct can be difficult if the owner no longer wants to see the brand even in model form!

Cheers Mike

[Newportnobby]

I think locos involved in major accidents would be ones I would avoid as a manufacturer. Some may well consider them "tainted".

Certainly none of the ones listed in 'Incidents' on Wikipedia have been manufactured in N....

Incidents
15 August 1963. Knowle and Dorridge rail crash. No. 1040 Western Queen collided with a freight train, crushing the cab and killing the three traincrew. The locomotive was repaired and returned to service.[15]
11 January 1967. St Annes Bristol rail crash. No. 1071 Western Renown in charge of the diverted 12:00 Paddington to Swansea collided with the rear of the 11:45 Paddington to Bristol hauled by No. 1067 Western Druid. The collision resulted in very severe damage being caused to the leading cab of locomotive No.1071, but the three men in the cab escaped injury by moving into the centre of the locomotive. Nineteen passengers required first aid or medical treatment but there were no fatalities or serious injuries. The locomotive was repaired and returned to service.[16][17][18]
19 December 1973. Ealing rail crash. No. 1007 Western Talisman derailed while hauling an express passenger train, after an unlocked battery box door fell open, broke off and changed points under the locomotive. Ten people were killed.[19] The locomotive did not return to service.
3 January 1976 (Worcester Tunnel). No. 1055 Western Advocate crashed into a stationary parcels train killing the driver and guard of the Western.[20] The locomotive did not return to service.
4 October 1976 (Stoke Canon, Exeter). No. 1001 Western Pathfinder was working an overnight parcels train from London Paddington to Penzance when the train was in collision with a workers' van at a level crossing. One workman in the van died in the accident. The locomotive was removed to Exeter St Davids depot. Despite sustaining relatively minor damage, the imminent demise of the entire fleet of Class 52's resulted in condemnation of the locomotive. Up to this point, Western Pathfinder had been a serious contender for preservation.[ci

[gc4946]

Lima in OO scale released a model of 50025 Invincible in Network SouthEast livery, the loco which derailed at West Ealing in 1989.
No other manufacturer has released another identical version

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/lima-oo-class-50025-invincible-254084127