RailRoad product ideas.

[RDS]

If you could add one product to the RailRoad range, what would it be? I would choose the Furness K2, better known as Edward's basis.

[walkingthedog]

What does Edward's basis mean.

[walkingthedog]

Just realised, it's another Thomas item. You seem to be able to link it to everything. 

[Tony57]

I would add the old working Cantenary (overhead wire) system both the single masts and the twin track gantrys in a grey colour. 

That way new models can run under it and older models can run off it, may be it could be made dcc compatible with dcc electric locos with working pantographs.As most modern trains are all overhead apart from southern but parts of that will be overhead soon.

[LCDR]

The difficulty in selecting this class or any other class of Furness 4-4-0 is that the classes were limited to a small part of the country and were built in tiny numbers, and most importantly all were withdrawn by 1933, long before the collective memory of enthusiasts alive today. All in all an obscure prototype with negligible following. Making the comparison with 'Railway Series' characters is also futile because Hornby no longer have the licence to make any of those types. 

 

Railroad tends to be entry level models either utilising tried and tested popular types which can be made inexpensively or have been made by Lima successfully in the past. It is also a range where interesting prototypes can be tried out, particularly if they can be adapted from  pre-existing tooling, the case in point being the Crosti Boilered 2-10-0. 

 

 

 

[LCDR]

A simple to instal and use overhead  catenary system is certainly a good idea, especially if it can be made to work reliably. 

 

Because a lot of the new trains being introduced are electric or hybrid, it is inevitable that these types will appear as models in future and indeed the 800 series are already an important part of the range. 

 

Masts and wires need to be robust and capable of being adapted to both set track and flexible, and to work effectively across pointwork. A realistic appearance is also important. 

[JeremiahBunyan]

I'd love to see some more modern additions to the Hornby RailRoad range. Not everyone will agree with me, but ever since Hornby released items like the Franco-Crosti 9F, LNER P2, GWR Hall and so one, it only proved that you can get a fairly nice and accurate looking locomotive for a reasonable price.

 

With that being said I'd love to see a modern take on classics like the Class 37 and Class 47. I'd also love to see the Class 89 in the Hornby RailRoad range. EMUs such as the Electrostar family would also be a nice addition.

 

By RailRoad spec, I'd expect following features:-- Simple diecast chassis (for added weight)- Smooth motorized bogie or basic centrally mounted motor design- Working headlights- Wire handrails- Simplfied paint job- Bag of additional details for customers to fit.

[Fazy]

The railroad Crosti 2-10-0 is a bad choice LC&DR , I totally agree with you but the Crosti is a bit of a stand alone model yes it's railroad but it was a complete new design. personally I think it was one of those clever design models where it was going to be both railroad and full fat model but wasn't full finished when the clever design idea was dropped never to be spoken about agai. 

[96RAF]

A simple to instal and use overhead  catenary system is certainly a good idea, especially if it can be made to work reliably. 

Because a lot of the new trains being introduced are electric or hybrid, it is inevitable that these types will appear as models in future and indeed the 800 series are already an important part of the range. 

Masts and wires need to be robust and capable of being adapted to both set track and flexible, and to work effectively across pointwork. A realistic appearance is also important. 

 

 

Getting that reliable enough to work with DCC will be a challenge LC

[LCDR]

Nevertheless a catenary system does seem to be an essential accessory, even though it may not be a working one, although ideally it should be functional. With the GW main line well on the way to be electrified all the major UK routes radiating from London north of the Thames are equipped with overhead line equipment and it becomes an essential part of the visible infrastructure. 

 

It is noteworthy that Hornby's Junior set comes with 4 'Power Poles' .

[96RAF]

Tram modellers have been using them for donkey’s years, both decorative and live. Not quite as complex as railway rigs though.

[walkingthedog]

The Crosti was a strange choice for the Railroad range. I have two and they have very fine detail. The handrails are the finest I have seen on any model. I don't really think anything else could have been added. 

[LCDR]

I would have thought a pantograph with a wide flat collecting area would be more reliable than a trolleyhead with a little wheel or a grooved slider having to follow the wire precisely, and requiring movable switches and frogs at turnouts.  A few tram systems (Sunderland and Blackpool) used pantographs in preference, and all modern tram and light rail systems do too.

 

The key to it is that the contact wire needs to be secure above the centre line of the track (most will zig zag within the gauge to distribute wear) and remain within tollerance above the locomotive. A good spring is needed to keep the contact surface in contact with the wire, so the masts need to be fixed robustly to the track. and the wire, if jointed, needs to be joined in such away to avoid bumps and gaps. Not easy, but achievable.  I once used a French made system many years ago where the ends of the catenary sections were rounded and when placed end to end round the support wire on the posts gave a smooth path from one to the other.  The original Triang Mark 1 was similar, although the French JV system was soldered wire and Triang used punched plated steel.

[Tony57]

In regard to a good cantenary system has anyone watched any of Oscar Paisley youtube videos showing his working Triang series 2 system on his layout. It is intresting to watch the working pantograph locos doing their thing, in some ways in the modelling field we still can not better our elders, in detail "yes" in practical working terms "no" Just think a 50 year old system still no bettered in todays modern world

 

Maybe todays generation of designers are not allowed to push the bounderies into new areas like a fully working cantenary system with working pantograph locomotives.  

[LCDR]

One of the better points with the old overhead catenary was that with Super 4 track the mast bases could be slotted at many places along the rail sections because there was a gap between the sleeper moulding and the bottom of the rail almost continuously along each piece which offered flexibility to adjust it to give optimum contact. Modern series 6 set track does not allow the same degree of flexibility because the slots between the rail and the sleeper moulding only occurs at a few places where normally a power connecting clip is inserted. 

 

This means that the mast bases need to be redesigned so that they can be secured firmly to the track and correctly positioned. I would envisage that this might be achieved by having a wide but very thin 'foot' which goes completely under the track, and has locating lugs which hug the adjacent sleepers and align the foot to the track. 

[Tony57]

The mast bases would only need to be like the old uncoupling ramp maker base or railside fencing base as they only have to hold the mast in place to hold the wire in the centre of the track. The more difficult one would be the power mast as that has to contact the off side (non insulated side) of the rail and the overhead wire, the piwer base would need to be like the series 1 power base (series 3 track) which went right under the track sleepers and contacted the rail between the sleepers.

 

Now the wires are smething else, the old series 1 wires were pressed metal to look like full overhead wire with top strainer, dropers and power wire and came in 4 sizes ( this included an adjustable wire), the series 2 was just a single wire which was bent to go around curners and could be cut to size. Think it would have to be a mixture of the two plastic top strainer and droppers with a nickel silver or copper power cable with simple connectors

 

[LBSCR Nerd]

Just so you are reminded, this forum is about products you want to see in the range. Not catenary.

[walkingthedog]

That's what somebody wants in the range, a catenary system. 

[Tony57]

In polite responce to LBSCR,

Model railways has to cover all aspects of the real thing, the main and railroad ranges have to reflect this. I would like a robust but flexible simple affordable working system that will be around for more than six months that I can build up over a number of years so idealy the railroad range is it's right place. 

I have looked at other makers systems, for my needs the old Triang/ Triang Hornby type system would meet my requirements. As would the older Class 90, 91, 92, 81, 86, EM2 non dcc  locomotives with their working pantographs again railroad range candidates.

 

If you want a list of other items then how about working ore wagons with bottom drop doors, 10t vent vans with sliding or hinge opening doors, 7 plank open wagon with opening doors, 5 plank wagons with working drop sides, working end opening door open wagons, SR utility van with six sets of opening doors. (most were made and available in my youth) 

[LBSCR Nerd]

Okay, sorry about my last comment. When I created this thread, I was thinking along the lines of locomotives.

[LCDR]

It didn't say locomotives. And a model railway is the sum of its parts, so carriages, wagons, track accessories and scenic items are all important to create a good model. 

 

The problem with parts of this hobby is that people get all het up about the thing at the front which has to be accurate to the N'th degree and complain if there is a rivet missing from the buffer beam, and then accept any old rubbish to go behind it. A good selection of carriages and wagons especially if care has been taken to make it look authentic can look really good.

 

Even a railway which is entirely freelance ought to have a back story which identifies the community it serves, whether that is Ankh Morpork or Barchester, its industries and its population, and then serves that with suitable trains. 

[LCDR]

I would lijke to suggest that the Railroad range looks at the goods wagons and tries to get a few more realistic looking types in to the range. Given that Lima did once make a good selection of 'modern' goods vehicles perhaps if the tooling still exists these would be a good start. 

I remember that there was a Bogie Bolster E, and a Grainflow hopper wagon, a bogie tank wagon, and a Fertiliser pallet van. Of the esoteric there was a multi axle torpedo wagon and a transformer wagon using the same bogies. Even the short wheelbase Lima Standard box van and mineral wagons weren't that bad. 

[Tony57]

I guess before asking for items to be added to the range one should ask what moulds are left for Hornby to reindroduce. On re watching the James May's program and the vast empty space in the mould storage area are the items moulds we might like to be reintroduced available here or in China?

 

In a lot of ways I feel sorrry for the current management team, the competition from other manufacturers is increasing with ever more detail, so new locomotive selection is getting harder without others beating you to the market, new makers are coming in on the coaching and goods wagons at both ends, Dapol still using the improved old Hornby Dublo moulds as well as their new stuff, and new highly detailed moulds with the likes of Rapido and Accurascale at the other.

[96RAF]

In this modern age of CAD and CAM with 3-D printing methods getting better I wonder if conventional moulds are even necessary, except for injection mouldings of plastic kits and minor loco accessory parts.

3-D printing is now far removed from the rough plastic blob layers of yore. Laser powder ablation and additive printing techiniques mean you can have a product produced in any included substrate (e.g. wood, metal, plastic, even pastry and literally printed circuits, etc) in no time at all to incredible levels of fineness, albeit it at some cost.

[LCDR]

I suspect production methods described by RAF96 will get faster and cheaper as more and more firms and customers use them. In an ideal world it ought to be possible to produce bespoke models including one-off items for individual customers. The most difficult part would then be researching the prototype and creating the CAD to drive the printer. Whether I will live to see and benefit from it, I am not certain. 

 

Until then I shall continue to hack the plasticard!