Locomotive production - where does the industry go from here?

[Scottl]

Why ask hobbyists?  I see a lot of "what I want", which is not what "he wants".  It is repeated in these threads ad nauseam, often in threads about new releases.  The 1% of the 1%.

I think companies are quite capable of identifying market needs and advancing products that will sell, so the premise is a bit rhetorical to start with.  Those that don't will disappear by virtue of cash flow.  In a related but more substantive thread on Technology, we see some of the real issues faced by companies wanting to serve this small market within a larger hobby market and global manufacturing realities.  I want new models like everyone else, but I recognize that the business case for larger sales will drive business decisions.  That is why HO has the product range it does- scale.

I do think, producing esoteric models will always be a small, intimate niche and is a healthy part of the hobby but not for the major companies.  However, to maintain a flow of new blood into the hobby, we need to see products that a new generation of hobbyists will be attracted to.  I reject the notion that the days of expendable income are diminishing with the Baby Boomers- it is just changing in ways that will drive new blood with different interests into modelling and trains.  Just as Baby Boomers are attracted to certain periods and models and hence, a short term business model needs to reflect this demand, I think astute businesses should be cultivating future interest by modelers in their formative years.

[sirenwerks]

Scott has a good point.  It is more obvious when you're talking about railroad-specific models, UP gas-turbines and Pennsy K4s come to mind and, I'll add my own Achilles heal, a Little Joe.  But also when it comes to more generic items like diesels.  Models of different phases of a particular model and major details like dual v. single headlights aside, there are a lot of people these days that fear adding or removing details (not, necessarily, that replacement details exist anymore) so they want it perfect out of the box.  And they want it for the specific road number they've envisioned, fitting exactly in the era they model...  We're losing the modeling to a large degree because... well, I don't think I even want to go there.

But to revisit an important point in there, it might behoove manufacturers to foster the development of related businesses or product lines.  Details and decals that are applicable to available models comes to mind.  I'm personally dismayed that so few decals are offered for TTLX varieties of the PS-4427, given the very limited release of schemes by Exact Rail (there's a model that could use a second third manufacturer).  The Pennsy signal boxes are a detail people cry for and no one's even bothered to offer one on Shapeways.

But let's face it, there are two types of manufacturers, those that actually manufacture for a living and those that have a day job and manufacturing is one of at least two of their hobbies.  And some, but far from all, of both categories listen and seriously consider what consumers request.  Sure, there are lunatic fringe customers that make far fetched recommendations, but there are also recommendations being made out there (not directly to any one manufacturer necessarily, but in public spaces like Railwaire) that are opportunities which are being flat out ignored.  I commend the manufacturers that are on this list, even if I bash them, they're listening.  It's a shame more aren't.  And then there are the manufacturers like Walther to which Facebook is only to promote product, not receive input.  Shame.

[C855B]

> Why ask hobbyists?  I see a lot of "what I want", which is not what "he wants".

Ah... but the individual requests are nonetheless a snapshot of demand. The problem here is the determining the quality of the request. Is it a knee-jerk "I wanna..." or is it, like Richie's tag line about an AS-616, something that will cause folks to reach for their wallets. The recent S-4 and about-to-be S-2 are great examples of model releases responding to aggregated individual "I wanna..." requests.

> I think companies are quite capable of identifying market needs and advancing products that will sell

I disagree, especially with the smaller makers. The passion about specific prototypes that small makers bring to the table drives what they offer. The GMD-1 (...sorry, Mike...) is an example of this. Talk about a niche model. Don't get me wrong - it's really, really cool, and a very attractive prototype (and from pictures, the model, too), but it's sooooooo specific that the market is instantly limited. FVM is another case. No doubt Matt is passionate about the Milwaukee and he's done a pretty good job managing the model production, but, really, how much market is there for a Hiawatha trainset? Hopefully enough to have paid for the production + dinner on the table + kickstarting future projects, but IMO it was a gamble.

> Those that don't will disappear by virtue of cash flow.

We don't want that. A reality, maybe, but passion-driven manufacturing is what keeps MRRing alive. There has to be a happy medium. Athearn's N catalog got pretty thin during what I call "the accountant years", but evidently modelers within the company are beginning to prevail and they're responding to customer enough to re-release some quality product.

> I reject the notion that the days of expendable income are diminishing with the Baby Boomers

Yes, we'll disagree on this. I watch our kid and his peers struggle trying to parlay education into something assuring a minimally-comfortable future. He's already adopted an attitude of austere, anti-consumerism living. This seems to be a Millennial theme, a disdain for "things" fed somewhat by the necessities of economic survival. When I was his age I had already bought a house - he's seeing that as totally out of reach, and undesirable, anyway. Leisure money beyond a PS-II or XBox? Pshaw!

> ...a short term business model...

Ah... there you go. That's counter to the problems with the long production cycles. There is apparently very little short term response capability in the industry, so every decision has to be for the long term. Certainly an unenviable position to be in.

I'll respond to the niche model and short term manufacturing issues by suggesting as I have before, that the focus needs to be on RP with finishing capability, based around modular frames and mechanisms. Whoever cracks that nut has the proverbial mouse trap.

[jdcolombo]

I'll respond to the niche model and short term manufacturing issues by suggesting as I have before, that the focus needs to be on RP with finishing capability, based around modular frames and mechanisms. Whoever cracks that nut has the proverbial mouse trap.

Indeed.  It's not to hard to imagine this in the future:  You go to the Atlas web site; there are drop-down boxes for the scale, then the prototype, road name, and specific paint scheme.   E.g., I'll take an N-scale GP7, Phase II, NKP, Narrow Stripe scheme.   The frames/trucks/motor are all stock parts.  The shell is RP'd, then handed off to a small laser painting facility controlled by a computer that has thousands of paint schemes stored.  Paint is loaded, shell painted, and the painted shell, frame halves, trucks and motor with flywheels/worm gears already attached are shipped.   Modeler assembles with choice of DC or DCC electronics board, purchased from either a separate supplier or as part of the above "drop down box" process.  Or pays a small assembly fee to have the model fully assembled when shipped.  Really not much different conceptually from how BMW assembles cars (well, obviously, they don't ship the parts for do-it-yourself assembly, but the customer fills out an order sheet, it goes to the plant, the plant uses a stock of standard components to build the vehicle, they run the body through the paint shop with the paint color you have chosen, and six weeks later your vehicle arrives).

How long before we see this?  10 years?  20 years?

John C.

[OldEastRR]

For those who say only the rich can afford to buy N scale, let's look at the regional and shortline railroads of today: are they all buying and using the latest, high-end models of current locomotive technology?
Just like their GP7s, RS3s, S2s, and other past versions of real locomotives are still chugging around, so I think we can expect our miniature locos made over the past 20-30 years to find new homes on small start-up layouts as they are replaced by high-end super-duper oh-wow equipped newer versions of themselves. Considering model locos will last and run well for decades because they aren't used as much as the prototype antiques, these good but not as advanced locos will wind up on eBay at decent beginner railroader price. Or at swap meets. Or on modeler forums.
The locos are the most expensive pieces of rolling stock the modeler has to buy. Cars, track, buildings, etc are all much cheaper and like as not can also be second-hand. I don't think higher and higher prices for exotic-featured locos is going to kill the hobby. It's lack of getting younger people educated about the advantages and satisfactions that model railroading can provide.

[BCR751]

I disagree, especially with the smaller makers. The passion about specific prototypes that small makers bring to the table drives what they offer. The GMD-1 (...sorry, Mike...) is an example of this. Talk about a niche model. Don't get me wrong - it's really, really cool, and a very attractive prototype (and from pictures, the model, too), but it's sooooooo specific that the market is instantly limited. FVM is another case. No doubt Matt is passionate about the Milwaukee and he's done a pretty good job managing the model production, but, really, how much market is there for a Hiawatha trainset? Hopefully enough to have paid for the production + dinner on the table + kickstarting future projects, but IMO it was a gamble.

To take this a bit further, what about things like Micro Trains' nose art sets, or the Canadian provinces set, or the battleship row set, or a complete circus train set?  Talk about a niche market.  Why would a manufacturer invest in tooling for this sort of stuff and seemingly ignore the obvious, more requested stuff?  Who buys this stuff???  Probably the "collectors", you know, those people that are just in it for the money and have no intention of ever running any of it.  I guess the manufacturers must feel that this portion of the market is viable enough to keep on producing the obscure stuff and the rest of us "main stream folks" can just pound sand. 

Doug

[thomasjmdavis]

(Let's ask this question; would a new tooling, high quality, DCC/sound equipped, with road specific details RS3 or FA2 (or other existing model) be a best seller....? Would you retire your older Atlas or Like Like models for these?)

Will steam offerings increase as a percentage of new products because of the number of yet never produced or not produced in modern times standard configurations left as opposed to main stream diesels ? Is there a viable market for "designer locomotives" (highly specific, small run, high detail units - road specific (ie: CN GP40W)

First, let me say thanks for asking.  Personally, I really appreciate the several manufacturers who engage us here, and I hope this type of marketing/surveying is successful for you- I know I am much more likely to purchase a product when I have some input.

To answer the first question- no and yes.  My Atlas stuff stays (I think the oldest survivor I have is late 90s or early 2000s- the old Atlas/Roco and Atlas/Rivarossi are long gone)- I might buy another one of something- if I need one more GP-7 and there is one out there BETTER than an Atlas, I might buy it, but I cannot see getting rid of the Atlas locos I have.  Likewise, I will hang on the my IM and Kato F units.  And my old Con-cor PA1, mostly for sentimental reasons, but also because it has more tractive effort than anything else in the engine shed.

The Life-Like stuff, you might convince me to part with.  Most of what I have are Es- I needed a lot of Es, and they produced them in several variants and lots of paint schemes- not highly detailed, not great operationally, but they look ok, have a pilot that is not part of the truck, and will pull a 6 or 7 car passenger train- and affordable.  Not my first choice, but filled a need at the time.  And it probably goes without saying that I am looking for replacements for the Bachmann "Spectrum" F units, that I bought sight unseen based on the promos, which turned out to be, essentially, Bachmann plus units with a somewhat better motor.

I don't think we need another USRA anything.  OR, if someone does them, at least don't try to market them as PRR and ATSF- put them out in the roadnames that actually had them. There are steam locomotives I will buy if they ever come out, assuming I could afford them- an ATSF Hudson that is NOT the Blue Goose or a GTW 4-8-4 or 4-8-2 (or something close enough to be detailed) might pique my interest.  In diesels, I am wondering if Kato might be tempted into producing a 1937 Super Chief with E1's (out of my modeling timeframe, but there are a few anachronisms I could find a way to live with).  As to what I would be willing to pay for in terms of detail- the question usually comes down to- if I bought a lesser model, what additional details would I want to add, and how much would that cost me in additional purchases and time? This is sort of the same thing that leads me to occasionally purchase a Rapido passenger car- it already comes with metal wheels, couplers, and nice detailing- and in truth costs less than a pair of sides, core (if you can find one), trucks, couplers and details, that would be needed to build one, and saves me 20 or 30 hours. And I get better painting and lettering than I can do myself. So the question comes down to- do I want a model of the prototype, and do I have the money?

In diesels, more or less the same story- what is left to produce is essentially road specific, or very limited.  In terms of my time frame, F and GP units probably accounted for the majority of all locomotives in service- so whatever else is done will be "limited edition" type locomotives.  Truth be told, Atlas producing the H-16-44 a few years ago came as a (pleasant, for me) surprise, as was the Rapido decision to do the GMD1 (something that I have no need for, but I applaud it anyway- I hope you sell out and take on similar projects in the future).

On the DCC and sound questions, I would prefer a "DCC ready" loco.  I have not gone to DCC yet, but I imagine my next layout will be so equipped.  However, the last thing I will want will be 5 different brands of decoders in various different brands of locos.  I will want to be able to choose my own, and have a standard.  I am undecided on sound.  A lot of folks complain that their N scale loco does not sound like the real thing- but I figure the 3 foot rule should apply here as well- and since 3 feet scales out to 480, I want my loco to sound like what I would hear 500 feet from the tracks, not what I would experience at the gates of a grade crossing.  But either way, I expect the technology to advance a lot in the next 5 to 10 years, and I am willing to wait. 

Let me close with a note about affordability. In terms of locomotives, I sort of judge things against a Kato F3 or F7.  Those are reliable, reasonably accurate, quality, and affordable locomotives.  Not the best ever made, but a good "standard."  I can usually pick one up new from a retailer on the net for around $60-65.  If you want me to pay more than that for a diesel locomotive, what I will expect is some combination of features such as more unusual prototype (a Baldwin, or the GMD1, for example), better detailing (wire grab irons, or finer detail in the casting, ladder rungs less than 6 scale inches thick), or limited production of unusual paint scheme (the IM FP-7 in C&EI comes to mind).  I would say "more reliable drive", but I have never had any Kato drive fail- my PA with Kato drive was purchased 35 years ago (more or less) and has lasted longer than most of the real PAs.  And it won't hurt sales if you can show me a photo of whatever engine sitting at Dearborn station in Chicago sometime in the early or mid 1950s.

Tom D

[bbussey]

Six newly-tooled motive power models annually is a lot, given that existing models are released regularly with new schemes.

I would not want to see prototype-specific models of prototypes when there is an existing (albeit more generic) model of said prototype that remains viable — such as the aforementioned RS3 or FA2, both of which have received multiple upgrades from their respective manufacturers over the years.

I know that, at this point, I would be interested in any New Haven prototype that is released in N, but I certainly wouldn't even be tempted to purchase some other railroad-prototype-specific model that is released.  The Kato FEF is a perfect example.  I can't bash the model into a New Haven equivalent so I have no interest in acquiring one, regardless of how well it runs.  Only recently, I acquired a Kato GS-4 because the mechanism is a better candidate from which to kitbash a New Haven I-5 than the Con-Cor J3a.  But if Jason (superturbine) hadn't pointed that out to me, I wouldn't have been in the market for one.

I don't see the N scale locomotive industry as being in decline, or being in any sort of trouble.  Yes, most of the widely-used prototypes have been tooled.  Many esoteric prototypes also have been tooled.  But N scale motive power isn't released one or two times and then retired, so it's not as if there is a dearth of appropriate power for modelers to choose from.

[Puddington]

Probably the "collectors", you know, those people that are just in it for the money and have no intention of ever running any of it.  I guess the manufacturers must feel that this portion of the market is viable enough to keep on producing the obscure stuff and the rest of us "main stream folks" can just pound sand. 

Doug

While it's easy to understand the "anti collector" viewpoint if you feel that a specific product you are waiting for is being delayed due to another product, aimed at the fantasy collector market being made in it's place you have to remember that "our" hobby is "their business". It's hard to believe that any company owner would elect to proceed with a "Donald Duck series" boxcar over a "NSC 50' Canadian paper boxcar" if he/she had market research or knowledge that said the NSC car would yield a better financial return. Therefore when we see products we don't want, or that are aimed at the collector's market the logical assumption is that it is a more profitable product and that's why it's being produced ( The re-use of tooling, secondary markets, "collector appeal" all come into play for this, but at the end of the day a dollar is a dollar)

If some modellers are concerned about certain company's making odd ball prototypes (Hiawatha, GMD-1 etc...) then you have to question why they are doing this? Assuming that they are in business to make money then there must be a business case for the products they choose, often supported by a personal desire to see a model made, but a financial case nevertheless. Indeed; we often see people asking (begging) for obscure or road specific models here on TRW ( CN GP40W, AS616, the hue and cry for a PRR K4...) so are we to saying that manufacturers should ignore these prototypes in favour of other projects; and if so then would those projects not be mainly updating and re-running many existing locomotives?

From the previous comments it seems lie the answer kind of breaks into two camps; one camp still craving road specific, odd ball offerings of a high quality and willing to pay for them while the other camp would like "more of the same"... SD 40's and -2's updated GP units and F units..... Neither answer is wrong; both have their risks and their rewards; my "new" question is "can the industry support both approaches at one time? Can you, the consumer support let's say ten - twelve releases a year; let's say 40% new, less well know, higher priced units and 60% re-runs/re-tools and new road name/numbers....."

[Kentuckian]

I have two Bachmann C&O Kanawhas on order to replace/supplement my Walther's/Lifelike Berkshires that are still sitting on the shelf.  Sound and protypcial features are what prompted me to upgrade.  If a better model comes out I will replace something I already have.

I second Mr. Colombo's motion for an H-8 Alleghany.  It seems like this model has been done to death in HO, I don't understand why not in N.

I think Kato could produce the Mike with different boiler shell and tender combinations once a month now until doomsday and not cover all the prototypes.  The C&O had eight different classes!  It would be like printing money. But I know this subject has been beaten to death.

Pud, thanks for asking.

[basementcalling]

I bought Battleship Row and some of the MT State Series cars and Presidential Series for work. Seriously, showing kids items that reflect history has an impact in the classroom.

As for new production, people complained way back when Bachmann came out with their crappy SD40-2 and for years no other company would touch producing a competing model for fear of it not selling and some debate about how to fit the nose truck gear tower into the shell or some such production and design challenge. Now that Kato has run some SD40-2s we still have trouble getting these models in wide availability because Kato USA will always be a secondary market for Kato compared to their Japanese interests.

That Atlas or Kato did such and such a model in whatever roadname 10-15 years ago does little to grow the hobby today. Sure if you scrounge Ebay and other sources you can build a decent roster and fleet, but the limited production run offerings are a get em while you can problem for people without resources at the time to buy or those new to the hobby. What can someone entering the hobby today in N scale reasonably expect to be able to buy to use for powering trains on their layout? Will their choice of modeling road or era be defined by available products at the time of entry?

If the hobby base is growing, with more new hobbyists coming into N scale, then there will always be a market for engines. The question is how big a market will that be? Obviously companies would love to make a never before produced engine to tap the full sales potential of N scale. Adding new technology as an upgraded version I don't think will do as well. Adding DCC capabilities to the "classic" lines of engines would be nice, but isn't essential to my modeling. And I have no desire to go down the route of sound from N scale engines with speakers in the engine. Just not impressed by the results, but the costs certainly catches my attention.

I hope some of the "captured" locomotives will continue to be re run in new roadnames or numbers so they are available for those who weren't in our hobby back in the day when that engine was run. That might not be a way to keep a business profitable though.

[Scottl]

If  this thread is a snapshot of what will sell, I have some swampland in Florida for you 

Ah heck, this Gen-X person with a little expendable income wants a SD70M-2 with nose headlights, please.  Coreless motors, and walkway lights as well, as well as room for speakers, R/C and batteries too.  I'll accept a Donald Duck scheme if necessary

[Wardie]

I will admit that for the most part I am happy with my fleet and very few of them are on the list to be replaced. I will say that if Atlas choose to tool a phase IV U25B that my 3 Atlas/Kato U25B's would get replaced with newer DCC ready chassis with phase IV shells instead of phase II, and that the remaining 5 mechanisms that I have that are DCC ready would all get new phase IV shells. I also do have 2 Atlas/Kato RS-3's that I have toyed with the idea of replacing, partly with hopes of a phase III long hood with angled numberboards and steam generator detail. Both of those are examples where I would take advantage of technological developments along with more prototypical details. And while upgrades are available now they are good enough that I haven't put them on immediate list of projects because I am hopeful for a more prototypical option.
My Walthers and Atlas RS-2's and RS-3s in CP also certainly fit the bill but I could be tempted with MLW versions of the RS-3 and CP specific details on the RS-2 shell as well, although those would probably be just more RS's instead of replacements .
Most of the rest of what I would like are very specific models that are not generally mainstream production, and are locomotives that I could theoretically kitbash, but given the current amount of time I have for the hobby have not started in hopes that I will see them produced in N scale. The CN FPA-4, I have high hopes of Rapido making the N scale version, phase III and GMD versions of the GP-9 to round out the CN/GT fleet I hope to see, CP RS-18's and RS-18u's, I hope the RS-18 will someday be re-run or done by someone else, if not the Atlas RS-11 is a starting point for both versions of these, phase IV F3/F5 I lobby Intermountain for these on a semi-annual basis although I know I could get undecorated F3 and F7 parts and make what I need. I also hope that someday somebody makes a U18B, yes I can get close using Atlas U boat and -7 parts, and I do have a couple examples made from Kato U30C shells, but my skills at piecing handrails together do not satisfy me enough to proceed with mechanism and building the Maine Centrals ten unit fleet.
I am pretty sure the Atlas S-2 will hopefully lead to it's siblings the S1,3 and 4 and those should keep my locomotive budget happy for the next several years.

As others have stated though that is all about MY specific want list, I don't know how helpful that is to anyone looking to develop new production, and I will admit I am perfectly happy to paint and detail my own. I just don't like making handrails . I would much rather see faithful prototypes developed then the almost but no quite right Bachmann efforts there NW2ish switcher and RS-3 sort of with weird cab do not help the hobby I think. I have bought the 44 tonner and 70 tonner with their compromises because they are the only option out there, and my 2-8-0's are certainly finely proportioned. But I certainly hope that there duplication of the RS-3 NW-2 and GP-7/9 with their 90% right efforts was detrimental not helpful.

Some of the other points raised on the made to order inventory and having stock for new modelers to choose from comes back to another item we love to debate and the general lack of hobby shops. I have nothing decent left in my entire state and most of stuff is ordered from my friend Chuck on the other coast of the country. Otherwise I take advantage of the occasional MBK sale or ebay. I don't know what else to say as I lack the crystal ball to say where things will go as our internet age of purchasing evolves and changes.

The future may well be the 3D/rapid prototype printer and an ink/laserjet method of printing models where our manufactures develop computer files and mechanisms and the details and paint schemes are all made to a specific order. For those of you who didn't want to read my personal wish list, my apologies, it seemed like the best way to express the direction where my wallet wants to spend.

[peteski]

To take this a bit further, what about things like Micro Trains' nose art sets, or the Canadian provinces set, or the battleship row set, or a complete circus train set?  Talk about a niche market.  Why would a manufacturer invest in tooling for this sort of stuff and seemingly ignore the obvious, more requested stuff?  Who buys this stuff???

Um, think about those. They are very cheap to make since the only think unique about them is the paint job.  They all use existing tooling (standard boxcars).  Doing just the artwork and decorating (nowadays with a sprayed base color and ink jet printing) it is relatively inexpensive to do these "collectors"cars.  And as long as the collectors buy them, there is profit to be made.  I don't think that making those takes away from the prototype releases which get made anyways.

[nstars]

If I look at our locomotive roster I can say my brother and myself started of (as probably most of us) with buying generic locomotives like f.i. the F's, E's GP's and the USRA type of steam locomotives. The fact is, the longer we are in the hobby (which means the longer we are modeling the PRR), the more specific our choices have become. This is one of the reasons we (like Bryan) didn't buy the FEF.

What does this mean? We still buy "generic" locomotives, but in most cases they are candidates for a kitbash or (perhaps even worse) as part spenders. My brother sometimes calls it "buying a box of parts assembled as a locomotive".  . However, if there is something specific brought out like f.i. the BLI M1 and the GHB L1, which fits our theme, we're certainly prepared to spend more on a locomotive and (if necessary) replace an older model. In other words, any quality locomotive, which fits our theme, is interesting.This could be a generic type of locomotive or a railroad specific locomotive.

Marc