andrechapelonHowever, an assembly line doesn't require a mechanical line. If the work is small enough, the items being worked on can be passed from one worker to another, but IIRC, that's not the way things are built in the MR industry
Some of the smaller operations in China that I knew of ran sort of along that line you just mentioned but some of the Kader things are somewhat mechanised. When Len and I figure out more of that cnc machine then I'll be somewhat closer to getting an actual frame made out of barstock---I've done up a wheelset on it but---
Some of the books I've managed to find on production mgmt tended to refer to such hands on lines as a type of assembly line.
Hence my
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Excuse me for being a little but since there is no automated system involved we'd have to assume there are humans doing the work then, right? OK fine. Then there must be some kind of production line involved. If it is not automated and there is no assembly line for either the kit/completed models then how do they come out? Via thin air?
Some kind of human activity has to done if the product is going to be made/distributed. There are methods that can be used to do this without the traditional idea of an assembly line. Please rest assured I'm not bouncing on your head but I do think something went awry here---
An assembly line implies that the work moves in a sequential pattern to multiple work stations where the workers perform a very small number of highly repetitive operations as the line is moving towards the next work station. The classic example is an automobile assembly plant. However, an assembly line doesn't require a mechanical line. If the work is small enough, the items being worked on can be passed from one worker to another, but IIRC, that's not the way things are built in the MR industry. 'Course, my memory could be faulty.
Besides, an assembly line with respect to kits makes no sense. It would be as if Ford sent components in a line with more being added as the line moved until every component required to make a vehicle was dumped in a big box for assembly by the buyer. There's no assembly line because no assembly is done. That reminds me of a story that appeared in Car & Driver (IIRC) many years ago about a guy who was determined to build his own VW Beetle (the old one). Turns out, the "kit" cost 4 times more than the ready to run version because he had to buy the parts at retail. The story was fictional, but the relative cost was pretty close to what it would have been.
Andre
andrechapelonI don't want to rain on your parade, but they still have to pay people to put the pieces parts in boxes and make sure that nothing's missing. It's not automated. There's no assembly line, either, either for kit pieces or completed models.
jguess733why are the manufacturers so adverse to producing kits? It would seem to me that it would cut down on labor costs if they don't have to pay somebody to assemble it. Just roll it off the assembly line and into the box. Then again I could be mistaken.
I don't want to rain on your parade, but they still have to pay people to put the pieces parts in boxes and make sure that nothing's missing. It's not automated. There's no assembly line, either, either for kit pieces or completed models.
twhite CB&Q Modeler Yeh' wait'll they come out with one of these baby's then we can really scream...lol! Love it!! All that to get UP over the little 'bump' in the Rockies that they called Sherman Hill. Have no idea what they'd have concocted if they ever round a real MOUNTAIN on their route, LOL! Tom
CB&Q Modeler Yeh' wait'll they come out with one of these baby's then we can really scream...lol!
Yeh' wait'll they come out with one of these baby's then we can really scream...lol!
Love it!! All that to get UP over the little 'bump' in the Rockies that they called Sherman Hill. Have no idea what they'd have concocted if they ever round a real MOUNTAIN on their route, LOL!
Tom
That would be a classic Union Pacific idea!! What would have been it's overall length?
Tom- After looking at that I'd be wondering the same thing. It would be HUGE!!!
Jason
Modeling the Fort Worth & Denver of the early 1970's in N scale
So, this is what a 4-8-8-0+4-8-8-4+0-8-8-4 looks like; what I would call a true triplex, and apparently a triple articulated too. Sorry guys: in my mind an Erie "triplex" is merely a duplex.
I want one! It would be ideal for a 5 m.p.h. drag freight, but I wonder if the engine crew would need to be changed more often than resupplying the locomotive with water and fuel. Which bring me to the question: how many crew would be needed to run this thing? There are two cabs.
Mark
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
blownout cylinder Ever get the feeling the manufacturers are starting to cater to the collector market and forgot their own roots? Kinda makes one wonder---
Ever get the feeling the manufacturers are starting to cater to the collector market and forgot their own roots? Kinda makes one wonder---
The manufactures will go where ever the money is. If the collectors become the main market then expect even more of the unusual and big steamers. If the model railroaders with the smaller home layouts become the majority then I would expect more small steamer.
There is also another aspect to consider, steam versus diesel, not many modelers were around when steam was running. I spent a lot of time in the prairies and that is where Canadian steam spent the majority of it last days. I remember seeing the large CPR grain trains with the Selkirk engines near the end of steam days.
As that appears not to be happening, with the exception of the Bachmann Spectrums. Perhaps Bachmann has found the perfect nich market and the majority of purchasers are the small layout model railroaders. Should not forget Roundhouse also seems to recognize the need for smaller steam engines.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI will once again remind any manufacturers who are listening that I do not own any of the following: UP Big Boy UP Challenger SP Cab Forward UP FEF PRR T1 PRR K4 N&W Class J Triplex anything-10-anything SP GS4 etc, etc. So if you want to keep me off your customer list, keep making more of these. Sheldon
I will once again remind any manufacturers who are listening that I do not own any of the following:
UP Big Boy
UP Challenger
SP Cab Forward
UP FEF
PRR T1
PRR K4
N&W Class J
Triplex
anything-10-anything
SP GS4
etc, etc.
So if you want to keep me off your customer list, keep making more of these.
Sheldon
Took the words right out of my mouth!
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
It would seem that the collecting element is also much more willing to spend excessives amounts of cash on these large but limited application engines, as compared to the apparently more frugal prototypical hobbyists wishing to populate their locomotives rosters in a realistic manner with various smaller steamers. It's certainly not a new phenomenon in the hobby, but in recent times it has grown decidely out of proportion to what it was in the past.
You mean like this guy? http://www.spmogul.com/ Two Moguls and a Baldwin S-12 (although I see an Alco S-2 and a C-9 2-8-0. You gotta have some variety alread).
One of the things that tickles me is the focus on busy main lines rather than secondary mains and/or branches. A good modest sized layout is the White Mountain Division layout in the July MR is that focuses on the branches along the MEC line from Portland to St. Johnsbury, VT. You have the Beecher Falls mixed (4-6-0 in steam, SW-7/9 in the early diesel years or a GP-7 later).There was a local passenger train in each direction from Portland to St Johnsbury (#'s 162/163) powered by small Pacifics in steam, GP7's in diesel with the last run being powered by an E7 and containing more cars than the local ever ran. B&M ran a summer season train (the Mountaineer) from Boston to Whitefield which ran from 3 to 5 cars (diner plus coaches) powered by an E7 postwar. Through MEC freights from Portland to St. Johnsbury and v.v. were powered by MEC's S class 2-8-2's (which included the 6 USRA lights that MEC owned).
Basically the layout as it appears in the July MR could duplicate just about every MEC operation in the area with the added benefit of the "Mountaineer" in season depending on the era modeled. It wouldn't take all that much motive power, either. In steam, you could get away with 2 or 3 Mikes with a couple of 2-8-0's and a 4-6-0 (or another 2-8-0 in N scale sinc 4-6-0's aren't available) plus a B&M E7. Passenger cars: the MEC local passenger ran 3 to 5 cars (some wooden). The Mountaineer ran 3 to 5 cars with a mix of heavyweights and "American Flyer" coaches (now becoming available in HO and hopefully N later).
MEC dieselized the Mountain Division with F3's, GP7's and SW7's/SW9's. The switchers were used as road engines on locals and also replaced the Mikes at Bartlett in helper service. The initial color scheme was the same as B&M. After about 1953, units began being re-painted with green in place of the maroon. Note that the SW's were painted in road colors and not the black with red nose stripes normally assigned to both B&M and MEC switchers. The SW's were MU equipped.
For a diesel roster in the transition years, you could probably get by with 2 F3A's and a single B unit (MEC only owned 10 F units, all F3's, of which only 2 were B's). The 2 AB sets ( 671A and B, 672A and B) bought in 1948 were Phase II and the remaining 6 F3A's were phase IV's. Add 3 or 4 GP7's with one being for trains 162/163 and a couple of SW7's for the locals and you're set.
The one real problem I see with the layout in MR if you want to run B&M's Mountaineer is the fact that there's no way of turning the E unit at Whitefield without some modifications. Don't have room for the layout? Beecher Falls would make a good stand-alone shelf layout with some staging. If you can include Colebrook, so much the better.
Another good MEC based layout would be the Rockland Branch. Four passenger trains in each direction up until the early 50's with seasonal Pullman service and a couple of local freights in each direction. Motive power, 2-8-0's on the freights and Pacifics (including MEC's newest) on the passengers. Depending on the era in diesel, you could use GP7's, the SW7's/9's transferred from Bartlett, an occasional F3 or even, IIRC, an RS-3.
AMEN !!!!!!!!. Not only are the manufacturers what we don't want, the prices are bordering on the ridiculous. R. Staller
I sure hope someone at Horizon sees this thread! I know that I'd like to see the line of MDC kits return as I'd buy several more! I was only able to find three of the Santa Fe style 2-6-2 kits before my source dried up. When I e-mailed Athearn to ask about the possibility of reissuing the MDC kits, they unfortunately stated they had no intention of doing so.
Hornblower
Darth Santa Fe At least we're starting to see some different big steam engines now. For a while it was all the same thing (Big Boys, Challengers, Mallets), so it's good to see some variety. Now if only Horizon would bring out MDC's old steam engine line. Even if it was all ready to run instead of kits, at least we'd have more choice for small steam.
At least we're starting to see some different big steam engines now. For a while it was all the same thing (Big Boys, Challengers, Mallets), so it's good to see some variety.
Now if only Horizon would bring out MDC's old steam engine line. Even if it was all ready to run instead of kits, at least we'd have more choice for small steam.
Yes, if they brought out the Harriman in RTR or kits I would buy a few of each.
Isn't Roundhouse doing a 4-6-2?
EDIT:L Yep: right here. http://www.roundhousetrains.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=4-6-2&CatID=THLS I don't know what Roundhouse quality is like, aside from the decoder, but I see a 2-8-0 in there as well that I haven't seen mentioned much here.
-Morgan
Mark:
I do have a small representation of smaller brass steam in both Rio Grande and SP--and yes, I'd like to get some more. And yes, in brass, there's quite a bit out there if you search for it and happen to hit the 'market' on the right day, LOL!
My post was actually aimed at DCC or dual-mode modelers who would prefer to have more contemporary plastic locos in smaller wheel sizes, and less 'generic' and more road-specific, sound ready--all of the bells and whistles that are available with the riad-specific large steam being produced by MTH and BLI. To my way of thinking, at least, it seems to be a sadly ignored portion of the hobby market. However, what I would like to see and what the mfgrs. put out seems to be on two entirely different tracks.
twhite What I really have a dearth of are those neat 'backbone' locos of almost any railroad during the steam era, the 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's, 2-8-2's and 4-6-2's (and yes, both Rio Grande and SP had quite a few of them). And why? Well, there just aren't that many available. Bachmann, bless 'em has made some neat inroads with their smaller power, but if you stand back and look at the 'quality' small steam power, there just isn't very much running around.
What I really have a dearth of are those neat 'backbone' locos of almost any railroad during the steam era, the 2-8-0's, 4-6-0's, 2-8-2's and 4-6-2's (and yes, both Rio Grande and SP had quite a few of them). And why? Well, there just aren't that many available. Bachmann, bless 'em has made some neat inroads with their smaller power, but if you stand back and look at the 'quality' small steam power, there just isn't very much running around.
Tom, I'm surprised at you. Suitable mid-sized steam has been available on the used brass market. Let's see, for example, D&RGW locomotives. Consolidations were imported by Key Imports and Nickel PLate. Ten-wheelers were imported by PFM. Mikados were imported by PFM and Sunset. Pacifics were imported by PFM. And then there is the WP and SP stuff. You forgot to include Moguls, but those have been imported too.
You did it with your articulateds, so I know you can do it (buy used, remotor, paint, etc.) with mid-size too.
Mark (fortunate to have purchased new, 2 Challenger Consolidations, 2 Division Point Mikados, 2 Precision Scale Moguls, and a Glacier Park Pacific, all SP)
I notice my name came up twice on this page in relationship to 'big steam', and yes, I will admit that I have a propensity for it. And I have a relatively good-sized railroad with generous radii and long grades to justify it. But I try and keep my 'big steam' appropriate to the railroads that I model (Rio Grande, SP) with the one exception of my 3 Yellowstones--Rio Grande leased them but never bought them. However I did, LOL!
And I will respectfully disagree a little with CNJ about the 'collecting' aspect of it--BUT ONLY IN MY PARTICULAR CASE, mind you. Modeling the railroads that I model, most of my big steam HAS to be brass, but it's out there on the layout earning its keep (and being 'tinkered' with a lot ).
However, in my own defense, I will say that I've really GOT all the 'big steam' that need. Well, not exactly, I could use a Z-6 4-6-6-4 (which I've got on order and will become a GN 'loaner') but that should really wrap it up as far as articulateds.
So, from this particular end of the spectrum, I'm DEFINITELY in the 'smaller steam' camp. I've started running some shorter 'turn' trains on the layout, and I don't mind admitting that they look a little weird behind 2-8-8-2's, LOL!
_________________________________________________________________
CNJ831The real point to remember concerning the OP's thoughts is that in our hobby the "collecting" element outnumbers the truly "operating" segment and probably to quite a significant degree today. Very few existing layouts and the type of railroading depicted on them, justifies the use of a large number of huge locomotives, with even fewer layouts having large enough radii to make them look realistic. Yet these engines will sell out quickly every time, as do any re-issues.
Yes. We have only to look at the history of brass in the last 30 years. Big bucks, tightly controlled numbers, and they all go, mostly to fill a 16" gap in somebody's display case. And even then, if they are only buying the diecast and plastic offerings, fewer than (I would guess) one in ten purchasers would want them for something approximating proto operations. No, they want them (as do I) for their gee-whiz qualities.
The only operation I am hoping to get out of a BLI UP 9000 is one to repair the hernia that ensues first time I hoist it onto the tracks. Ouuuuw!!
CNJ831It would seem that the collecting element is also much more willing to spend excessives amounts of cash on these large but limited application engines, as compared to the apparently more frugal prototypical hobbyists wishing to populate their locomotives rosters in a realistic manner with various smaller steamers. It's certainly not a new phenomenon in the hobby, but in recent times it has grown decidely out of proportion to what it was in the past.
And it is not just in this hobby that one finds distorted markets.
Look at an interior design magazine sometimes. Notice style called "Shabby Chic"? Guess what. If you wander into a flea market you'll find pieces for about $30 that you can get that in some dang specialist stores will go for about $350!! And I used to make some $$$ off of this very thing because people will buy it if it is 'in'.
What John is saying is quite true. Audrey's quilts for example--in the 80's we could still get them at yard sales for $5. Now you'd be lucky to find any because the collector with lots of dough came along and --woooosh!!---up goes the price! If the market can bear it--and that also includes the collector with the cash--the prices will go up. And there are a LOT of collectors out there----
The real point to remember concerning the OP's thoughts is that in our hobby the "collecting" element outnumbers the truly "operating" segment and probably to quite a significant degree today. Very few existing layouts and the type of railroading depicted on them, justifies the use of a large number of huge locomotives, with even fewer layouts having large enough radii to make them look realistic. Yet these engines will sell out quickly every time, as do any re-issues.
It would seem that the collecting element is also much more willing to spend excessives amounts of cash on these large but limited application engines, as compared to the apparently more frugal prototypical hobbyists wishing to populate their locomotive rosters in a realistic manner with various smaller steamers. It's certainly not a new phenomenon in the hobby, but in recent times it has grown decidely out of proportion to what it was in the past.
CNJ831
blownout cylinder One thing that is certain, at least from this end of the world, is that there are a lot of collectors out there who do go after the big one's. It is like that in the die cast cars. How many of you seen a die cast AMC Gremlin? Or a Ford Pinto? (and no, the Fresh Cherries don't count) or a Chev Caprice of, say, 1990 vintage? Not too many around. But, boy, will you see Lamborghinis, Ferrarris, Hummers---
One thing that is certain, at least from this end of the world, is that there are a lot of collectors out there who do go after the big one's. It is like that in the die cast cars. How many of you seen a die cast AMC Gremlin? Or a Ford Pinto? (and no, the Fresh Cherries don't count) or a Chev Caprice of, say, 1990 vintage? Not too many around. But, boy, will you see Lamborghinis, Ferrarris, Hummers---
bc:
I have to say that the die-cast mfrs. are better at this than they had been, for a few years. I mostly buy these for my son (mainly because few are in the right era for my RR (:() and there's a lot of normal cars! Weirdly enough, actual Ferraris and Lamborghinis aren't as common as muscle cars.
I think Mikados need more appreciation. Everybody loves 4-8-4s, I love 4-8-4s, but there were 12 Mikes for every Northern. Looking at the Denver Public Library's photo collection online, that's all you see...Mike, Mike, Mike. People do run them on their layouts, but they just don't get the attention. They're a nice-sized engine for model use, too...big enough to look big, but small enough to take short curves.
Of course, this is all nothing new. You get the same situation back in the 1930s. People had one-horse pikes but ran Hudsons, K4s, and P5a electrics, because that's what was produced. There were familiar-sounding complaints in the letters pages. Over the years, the locos have changed, but this situation has generally persisted...what stands out are the exceptions, like MDC, whose steam was all just right for a small pike. I am really starting to miss that line.
andrechapelonI just had a horrible thought. If there were 55 manufacturers of NYC Hudsons can you imagine the number of questions on the MR Forum about which one's the best?
Think that might provoke a few flameouts maybe?
I know that it might leave quite a few locked threads ----
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It all comes down to the exotic element---and I'm only referring to those who just collect the things. They will drive that market--
fwright Just like BLI, MTH is going to favor large engine models. Small engines are not going to hold all their electronics, speakers, and smoke - nor sell at the needed price point. And MTH's 3 rail O heritage fits in very well with getting large locomotives to go around very sharp curves.
Just like BLI, MTH is going to favor large engine models. Small engines are not going to hold all their electronics, speakers, and smoke - nor sell at the needed price point. And MTH's 3 rail O heritage fits in very well with getting large locomotives to go around very sharp curves.
Fred, All good points, fact remains, my money and the money of MANY modelers I know will remain in our pockets.
I will not buy ANYTHING from MTH until he builds them to operate on DC to NMRA standards, big small or other wise.
I know I may be a minority (but maybe a larger minority than some think), but I do not use DCC or onboard sound or smoke, so companies like Bachmann/Proto/BLI Blueline who keep their prices lower and/or offer DC versions of their products will continue to get my business. And if they choose to make medium or small steam they will get even more.
I have big curves and some big locomotives, but I am building a model railroad, not a collection of the worlds most famous locomotives. I need/want locos that are plausable for my model senerio, not a trip to Steamtown.
citylimitsThis is not a loaded question at all - it's just that I'm interested because with two manufactueres offering what is the same locomotive model that seems to imply that there must be a descent sized market for this beast. Bruce
This is not a loaded question at all - it's just that I'm interested because with two manufactueres offering what is the same locomotive model that seems to imply that there must be a descent sized market for this beast.
Bruce
Read http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=2665. I don't think that market size for the UP 4-12-2 has much to do with 2 companies producing the same locomotive. I have little doubt that although the 4-12-2 is not on the list of transferred tooling, that production is being shared between BLI and MTH. Whether this is voluntary on the part of both importers or not is another matter, and I suspect both would much prefer to have exclusive rights to a particular prototype with MKT. We can look forward to MTH producing new runs of the transferred BLI tooling when MTH perceives a market opening.
FWIW, the other MTH lawsuit against Korean Brass referred to was about Korean Brass giving trade secrets to and making MTH designs for Lionel. A lawsuit that forced Lionel into bankruptcy until a doable settlement was reached. I'm amazed that MTH continues to place orders with Korean Brass (MKT). The settlement terms must have been good enough.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W