Locomotive production - where does the industry go from here?

[victor miranda]

I dunno chicken45,

ya sure ya want it?

Realism has its limits...

[lock4244]

N scale GP40-2L or GP40-2W.

[up1950s]

Canadian owned 50' era trailers would sell on both sides of the invisible border .

RS-27 never done

RSD-7 needs a redo

RSD-15 needs a redo

AS-616 never done

S-6 never done

H20-44 never done

Early UP FEF ( FEF-1 ) never done

Early UP Challenger never done

UP 4-12-2 never done

4-8-4 T1 in AFT paint never done

[peteski]

I remember when only Lionel stuff had sound and smoke. Seems HO is getting those things. Not just smokestack, but steam blowdown and all that. You think that'll ever come to N scale?

Unfortunately these types of effects (smoke and steam) do not scale down well. It already looks far from believable in Lionel, silly in H0 and N is just too small for the smoke to be viable.  It is just a silly gimmick.

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Mike, I was wondering if you guys ever thought about doing something really crazy like a Wi-Fi enabled camera in the nose headlight of a FL9? Actually, I wouldn't really care what engine it was as long as I could record the video on my computer.

Newer smart phones have cameras that can focus and even zoom on. They are so small they would actually fit in the nose. Add Wi-Fi and a track charged battery and this would be awesome!

Also, do you know if you could build an NW5 off the GMD1 chassis? I think that would be a great quirky engine to do (I'll take an undec or Mass Central)

Also... CF-7, GP7R, GP8/10/11/16 rebuild projects would be a natural choice as well.

[nkalanaga]

Bob Bufkin:  I'd like the MILW boxcabs, and would also take an E33 or E44.  The MILW considered motor-generator versions of those in the late 60s, so I could freelance them without too many complaints.

[Rossford Yard]

Like the topic. For some reason, I always get interested in the economics of the hobby, if only because I want to make sure there are some mfgs around to keep the hobby going.

We do know that they are small, with even the largest probably only grossing in the low millions (for Kato or Atlas) and most grossing under $1M. It is still a cottage industry, and you can bet those companies need to keep whatever revenue they currently have nearly the same to survive.  If revenues drop, I can see a few combinations to reduce overhead.  Not sure what combos will make sense, but maybe a small company that makes new tooling buying out another small company (or some shells of a larger one) to produce enough repaint sales to supplement income easily.  Just a guess.

As to the "everyone wants something different" problem, it has been discussed, but somehow, the used market, repaints, custom paints, etc. will take care of it. If not, they won't survive.  It would seem there would be a need to find a way to effectively reduce the minimum number of units and still make a profit. There have been some attempts at it, and maybe some refinement can make them work. 

Atlas and a few others offer low potential road names, apparently using profits from main roads to absorb losses with all being charged the same.  MT has charged more for extra paint passes on complicated schemes.  I would have no problem with a few schemes in each run of an Atlas/Kato/IM being offered at $10-25 for low popularity schemes, or difficult ones.  I know they seem reluctant to do this, but I wouldn't mind paying that much extra for a favored unit. After all, the option is custom painting at $100 per unit.  And, most of us (despite complaints) have shown if we want it, we will pay for it.
 
Kato/Kobo offering limited custom paints, like Metra units, DCC, etc. (Metra later offered as a standard run, after I bought a Kobo unit.....of course)  I suppose Atlas, IM, etc. could follow this model to maybe work with trusted individual Custom Painters to produce a 1-3 dozen or so of some road, if that is what is required.  Maybe they add road specific details, weathering, etc. to justify the custom paint price.

In the old days, Bev-Bel would custom paint rolling stock runs in small runs the bigs wouldn't do, apparently and presumably cooperating to get the shells to Bev Bel at low enough price to make it work.  Pacific Western cooperates with the mfgs to do limited runs on freight cars, so the model is alive and well for rolling stock.  I visualize a bunch of baby boomers who still love MRR working at nearly a labor of love rates taking on a bunch of small projects perhaps to cover their own MRR spending.  Or maybe, a few more Fox River Valley or BLMA kind of young guys.

Why not locos?  On occasion, a historical society, LHS (like Model Train Stuff doing Maryland Midland, or someone running a special run of 50 ATSF GP40X or something similar)  My understanding is that the MM didn't sell out quickly, which may have squelched this idea, but maybe its time to revisit.  Obviously, it is a risk sharing idea, which might make it more palatable to Atlas, etc.  Again, molds or detailing for road specific details, weathering, etc. might justify the higher custom paint price.

Of course, in none of this do I see much flexibility to keep things constantly offered just in case there is one modeler who wants an XXX but wants it two years, three months and six days after they go to the effort to make the special, low interest model available.  And, while we would love to see them reduce costs, with 3D printing, etc., my guess is the cost per loco for any special tooling (accurate steam has to be an nightmare from road to road) or even paint will go up per unit, even more than inflation.

I base all of the above on models I have seen.  Maybe someone is out there with other, more creative ideas I couldn't possibly think of.  But, somehow, the market will get most of the way there.  Between innovation and motivation, someone will come up to meet market need.  We will gripe at cost, our release not being offered, etc. but because of low volume, I just sort of see this as inevitable, as they go after the demographic of middle age men in prime earning years who still want to model railroad.

 

[basementcalling]

Whatever is developed, if N scale brings in new hobbyists or converts from other scales, we will all be better off in the long run.

[Rossford Yard]

Agree there.  Ten years ago, we all thought N would take over HO as HO took over from O decades ago.  That seems to have stalled, as the HO market either has too many of the established modelers, and N doesn't have enough new ones, or some other reason.

Since the average house size seems to be coming down, there are some demographics that still favor N.  Reliability is almost if not equal, etc.  But, if the general trend if for youngsters to model what they know, perhaps the N and HO loco markets can go different directions, with HO providing all the more unique steam, etc. and N providing the most modern diesels (all of course, as a more generalized trend as I am sure many models will be ordered and built in each scale)

Of course, if talking about bringing in youth, I suspect the general locomotive will go more high tech and be more interactive.  Maybe coming with a chair insert so you can feel the vibrations as you accelerate the loco, and that sort of thing.  Or as MR once summarized, all MRR may be on the TV screen with photo realistic background of nearly any real railroad we want to run from the cab perspective. 

Hate to say it, but if the goal is to run trains in a realistic manner, and building the models only supports that (as it does for me and many, but not all, as for some, the model building is the thing) then in reality, there will be many different ways to provide that sensation and experience than in the basement.  Of course, that is either off topic, or Waaaaay in the future on this one.

[Cajonpassfan]

Unfortunately these types of effects (smoke and steam) do not scale down well. It already looks far from believable in Lionel, silly in H0 and N is just too small for the smoke to be viable.  It is just a silly gimmick.

I tend to agree about the smoke effects, but it has been done in N. Fleischmann has a German BR 01 class pacific with great sound and a smoke generator. Just google Fleischman "BR 01 Spur N" to see a video.
(The smoke looks slightly less silly at speed).
Otto K.

[JMaurer1]

First, the easy: Baldwin's, especially the AS-616 (I've been promoting this for YEARS). More great running steam locos (which ones? See below).

Second, the not as easy: How about a mfr coming out with a great running steam chassis that can then be shipped with more prototypical (meaning road specific) RP boilers and tenders? While more of the wheel arrangements have been done in the past, the steam loco mechs are becoming more standardized and figured out. There was a time when diesels mechs were not the split frame great runners that they are today (remember the LL plastic frame locos or the Arnold all metal body/no frame S-2?). Steam locos are almost (if not already) to this point to where they run great and last a long time. Now what we need are road specific steam locomotives and rapid prototyping can fill this gap for a lot less $$$ than creating plastic molds.

Third, the future: Unless I just totally read what Bachmann is working on wrong (and if I did, this would still work), kill DCC and DC. Replace BOTH with  low-cost Bluetooth transceiver microchips. Bluetooth transceivers have been shrunk to where they are smaller than most DCC decoders and are less expensive. If they were put in the locomotives all that would be needed is a constant DC voltage on the track and an app for your phone or tablet to have all of the benefits of DCC and NONE of the cost. Locomotive controls are sent wirelessly from your throttle (phone or tablet) to the locomotive. No electrical blocks, command stations, installing decoders, or anything. Not even the need to plug and play...just connect the loco to the controller (phone or tablet) and GO. Really, what could be simpler or easier? My fingers remain crossed and I remain optimistic...   

[C855B]

...Bachmann is working on ... Replace BOTH with  low-cost Bluetooth transceiver microchips. Bluetooth transceivers have been shrunk to where they are smaller than most DCC decoders and are less expensive. ...

No, will never happen. Maybe for Bachmann, but not for anybody else. The regulatory bar for RF-enabled consumer goods is extremely high - just ask Digitrax, because this is what shut down their plug-n-play WiFi server. Same thing with Dr. McRee's dead-rail system - works only as D-I-Y. Unless you are producing hundreds of thousands of something, the compliance costs are out of reach. Even just the provision for a universal plug-in wireless module invokes the FCC burden. The system was tweaked about a decade ago by the big players, shifting device compliance test costs from the FCC to the product manufacturers - a/k/a "privatizing" - shutting out anybody with a good idea but lacking the million$ to fund it through the required process.

[Seligman Sub]

No, will never happen. Maybe for Bachmann, but not for anybody else. The regulatory bar for RF-enabled consumer goods is extremely high - just ask Digitrax, because this is what shut down their plug-n-play WiFi server. Same thing with Dr. McRee's dead-rail system - works only as D-I-Y. Unless you are producing hundreds of thousands of something, the compliance costs are out of reach. Even just the provision for a universal plug-in wireless module invokes the FCC burden. The system was tweaked about a decade ago by the big players, shifting device compliance test costs from the FCC to the product manufacturers - a/k/a "privatizing" - shutting out anybody with a good idea but lacking the million$ to fund it through the required process.

Is this recent regulation? I note that Railpro introduced their RCC system only a couple years ago. They're not a large company...

[CBQ Fan]

North shore inter urban.

[C855B]

Is this recent regulation? I note that Railpro introduced their RCC system only a couple years ago. They're not a large company...

No, not recent. I ran headlong into this problem developing a handheld product about 12 years ago.

Without knowing how Railpro is handling the RF side I can't answer this directly. There are certain frequency bands - 902-928 MHz, and certain sub-bands at 2.4GHz - where there is a lot more "give" in the regulations for low-power users operating non-exclusively. IOW, they must tolerate interference from other devices and may not emit frequencies that interfere with regulated classes. Digitrax uses both bands in their duplex throttles, and NCE, for one, uses the same 2.4GHz sub-band in a way that crushes nearby Digitrax duplex users. I strongly suspect Railpro must use one or both of these specialty bands, and/or they had an "in" with the testing process that cut their costs substantially. I suspect both.

Wi-Fi and Bluetooth require running the full compliance gauntlet, even when you as a system integrator buy off-the-shelf chipsets or modules.