Bachmann NRM/Locomotionmodels.com - GNR Ivatt C1

[Frappington Jct]

At the very least it gives us BR modellers who, let's say 'stretch' the lives of certain classes, own one in an authentic livery which it actually carried without having to respray it ourselves

[Mike70]

Has it been confirmed by Locomotion that the LNER version is based on the operating condition rather than the preserved condition (with LNER livery)?

 

I read the comment by gr.king on 30th July, which suggested it would be the operating condition. But I haven't seen a confirmation.

 

Apologies if I've missed it.

[Guest spet0114]

Has it been confirmed by Locomotion that the LNER version is based on the operating condition rather than the preserved condition (with LNER livery)?

 

I read the comment by gr.king on 30th July, which suggested it would be the operating condition. But I haven't seen a confirmation.

 

Apologies if I've missed it.

What external differences would differentiate the two?  I'm guessing that the main differences would be the valves (slide vs. piston) and presence (or otherwise) of a superheater. Would either of these have any detectable differences to the outer appearance? For example, did the superheated atlantics have the smokebox protrusions that enabled one to tell an A1 from an A3?

 

Cheers

Adrian

Edited October 28, 2014 by spet0114

[nerron]

With so few people modelling the drab 1948-1950 period, why would anything like 500 rather expensive RTR models of Atlantics be wanted portraying the locos working out their last couple of years, under sentence of death and in semi-scrap condition, in miserably plain finish? Why ANYBODY would want to pay the full price to portray a glorious pre-grouping loco in such degraded condition is beyond me. I can see sense in the LNER version as the class was intact, well maintained and working at peak effectiveness with large superheaters on front line duties for a decade or more after grouping.

Against this drabness you had a smattering of apple green, the experimental liveries and BR blue.But I take your point about the final years of such magnificent machines.

[gr.king]

From 1916, smokebox saddles were usually (but not always) provided for the large Atlantics when piston valves were fitted, the locos originally having smooth flowing sides to the smokebox down to running plate level. 251 did not get a saddle when superheated in 1923. Most pre-1916 piston valve engines also later got saddles, but piston valve locos Nos 3272, 4405, 4412, 4453 and 4456 never got saddles. Many locos retained balanced slide valves (with improved lubrication) even when superheated so never got saddles. Gresley snifting valves would be usual for the superheated locos after grouping, but earlier patterns of superheater protection were evident on some locos in GN days. Anti-carboniser fittings on the smokebox sides were another possible sign of a superheated loco. Ross Pop safety valves appeared gradually from 1923, some on raised adaptor seatings on older boilers, but some boilers retained Ramsbottom valves until final withdrawal of the last loco to which they were fitted.

 

With any luck the un-sold balance of the 500 drab BR versions will ultimately be offered cheaply. If so, I can make use of two or three.......

[Horsetan]

So much for "if you C1, you've seen 'em all"....

[micklner]

According to Dennis Lovett on MRE the NRM have exclusive sales rights to the C1 for the "fore sable future" whatever that may mean ? perhaps when then they can't sell anymore at the asking price ??  

[jwealleans]

That's an interesting comment.  I have seen a post on here quoting a letter from the NRM saying the model was exclusively theirs and would remain so.

 

How long did the Midland Compound stay exclusive, or 'City of Truro'?

[G-BOAF]

City of Truro is still exclusive to Locomotion

The compound, as a single loco, is still exclusive (unless retailers split sets, which is not under Bachmann/NRM control).

In both cases the tooling has been used for other models.

 

The Deltic has remained exclusive, so on that basis I can see exclusivity can be preserved.

[jwealleans]

 

In both cases the tooling has been used for other models.

Yes, I expressed myself badly.  That's really what I was getting at.  1000 and 3717 may remain exclusive, but if Bachmann can release models of 1001 and 3718 (or whatever) in the main range, with the prospect of some of them ending up in Hatton's Bargain Corner, I can see that that would undermine sales of the exclusive model. 

 

Academic debate from my perspective but interesting in the wider context of limited editions and short runs for specific vendors.

[Matabiau]

The Midland Compound was released as an NRM exclusive exactly three years ago. It ceased to be exclusive a month or so ago when Bachmann released the same model as part of the Thames Clyde Express train pack. When I bought mine from Locomotion when it was first released there was no mention of the exclusivity being limited in time. Neither Bachmann nor Locomotion wanted to comment on their definition of "exclusive" when I contacted them both upon the announcement of the Thames Clyde Express.

City of Truro has to date only been available through the NRM (before Locomotion formally took over the NRM model railway sales). Bachmann general releases of the GWR City Class has been of other members of the class to date.

[The Stationmaster]

City of Truro is still exclusive to Locomotion

The compound, as a single loco, is still exclusive (unless retailers split sets, which is not under Bachmann/NRM control).

In both cases the tooling has been used for other models.

 

The Deltic has remained exclusive, so on that basis I can see exclusivity can be preserved.

Yes, there is a difference between total exclusivity (e.g. the Deltic) and exclusivity of a particular model when the tooling is not licenced exclusively to the NRM.  

 

Thus 'City of Truro' is exclusive but Bachmann had the rights to use the tooling for other models after an agreed period while the compound and the GC 'Director' are also exclusive but in both cases Bachmann had the rights to use variations of the tooling for other similar models.  The Midland compound remains an NRM exclusive model hence you can only get one in the correct packaging, and fully boxed etc, from the NRM.  I understand that the Thames Clyde sets were priced to make them an attractive purchase proposition in comparison with the loco on its own (in which respect they represent good value I think) but I believe it was probably not appreciated that a retailer might decide to split the sets and in so doing void any sort of warranty on the contents.  A lesson perhaps learned by Bachmann for the future that the good old days of retailers splitting the contents of sets are not dead and that in order to save money end purchasers are quite happy to buy something on which there is no warranty for its manufactured condition on delivery, or in the future, save whatever the retailer might decide to offer at his own expense.

 

In the case of the C1 the tooling is exclusively for NRM models (although I don't know who actually owns it - which isn't in any case relevant) so the NRM has total exclusivity and Bachmann cannot use the tooling, or variations of it, to produce any variants of the C1 for sale under their own name.  But of course the NRM can use the tooling for variants should they so wish, and a number of alternative parts have been tooled as was seen at the launch.

Edited October 29, 2014 by The Stationmaster

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Commercially, if I represented the NRM then I would want to optimally exploit any tooling paid for by the NRM. If that was best effected at some point in the future by licencing Bachmann to produce models on their own account from the tooling, without an 'NRM' branding, then that is legitimate. The 'exclusivity' of an 'NRM' release is not thereby diminished.

 

But then that is the opinion of someone grateful to be getting a RTR model of what is a difficult subject for kit building, and with no interest in collectorising.

[it's-er]

I would have thought that a logical sharing of the work going into this would be for the C1 to be exclusive to the NRM, as has been stated, and that Bachmann could use some/much of the tooling to produce the C2. The C2 would also be a popular model, and there is a preserved example in 'Henry Oakley'. Isn't much of the chassis and running gear identical, or pretty much so?

 

John

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Wheelbase and layout of engine machinery identical: to the extent that the GNR didn't differentiate the class description, all of them were GNR class C1. The frame profile must have been different at least to accomodate the wide firebox of the large boiler? Never really crawled over the two preserved locos to check.

 

From a model perspective, provided that the motor and gear train are pitched low and are narrow enough then the same running gear would suit a C2.

[The Stationmaster]

I would have thought that a logical sharing of the work going into this would be for the C1 to be exclusive to the NRM, as has been stated, and that Bachmann could use some/much of the tooling to produce the C2. The C2 would also be a popular model, and there is a preserved example in 'Henry Oakley'. Isn't much of the chassis and running gear identical, or pretty much so?

 

John

Why shouldn't the NRM produce the C2 if that is what it wants to do?  As I understand things the situation with National Collection items has moved on in any case as the Science Mueum (which is the top of the tree in respect of NRM assets) has realised that it is in a position where it has something to licence and has also reallsed that it is in a position where it has a potential market of considerable breadth for its own products thus it is seeking to protect both its 'brand' and its potential future investment on a much wider basis.

 

Don't overlook the very basic fact in all of this that when the NRM takes on a particular loco or train, as with the APT model, it is investing a possibly considerable sum of money upfront.  Obviously the return on that money goes back into the museum but it also has to cover the investment so is subject no doubt to some fairly strict rules and 'tests' in making the initial investment.  Should someone else then come along and offer a model of a national collection engine it could be seen that they are denying the museum the opportunity to do so on its own account.

 

That in turn takes us to the recent debate on duplication where a number of people on RMweb are expressing dissatisfaction with the number of duplicated models now appearing or reportedly under development.  Well when you think about it if the NRM/Science Museum is effect a form of licencing or whatever for its engines you are not going, in theory, to get such duplication.  Say for instance that the NRM has a long term plan to produce a whole series of exclusive models and someone else comes along and cherrypicks (or wishlist picks) examples out of that list - one business plan shot up the whatsit (a situation which someone else has already suffered in the industry).  Say too that the concern which wishlist picks isn't so fastidious as some other designers/manufacturers might be in terms of getting the detail etc right (in so far as mass production allows) so something could potentially appear to a lower standard than might have been the case had another researcher/designer/manufacturer taken it on - result being that the market does not get the potentially best offering.

 

Let's not overlook the simple fact that the 00 r-t-r market is changing and is now heading very firmly towards niche models especially of locos.  That market is one where quality and fidelity can become assume a greater role than in traditional r-t-r with long production runs because of its niche nature and tehh act that the products are probably more closely targetted than was ever the case in the past.  And if niche models turn out badly nobody can really afford to supplant them with something better.

 

It might sound terribly dictatorial but it is becoming increasingly apparent to me that licencing could have significant advantages in avoiding duplication and - hopefully through the strength of a brand -being beneficial to standards of fidelity and production values.

[it's-er]

Oh, Mike I wasn't suggesting that the NRM shouldn't produce the LNER C2. It was just a thought that, as one possibility, Bachmann and the NRM could half development costs for each of one was to produce the C1 and the other the C2. The possibility of two locomotives, albeit reasonably similar but yet distinctive, from one set of toolings must be quite appealing?

 

I suspect that if this happens, the C2 would appear several years after the C1, to provide enough clear water for the C1 to be a success first.

John

[The Stationmaster]

Oh, Mike I wasn't suggesting that the NRM shouldn't produce the LNER C2. It was just a thought that, as one possibility, Bachmann and the NRM could half development costs for each of one was to produce the C1 and the other the C2. The possibility of two locomotives, albeit reasonably similar but yet distinctive, from one set of toolings must be quite appealing?

 

I suspect that if this happens, the C2 would appear several years after the C1, to provide enough clear water for the C1 to be a success first.

John

Ah, sorry John - I misunderstood although in some respects it amounts to the same thing in the end I suppose. But I suspect there might be a lot of potential mileage in the large atlantic so the small one is perhaps a long way down the list.

[Legend]

According to Dennis Lovett on MRE the NRM have exclusive sales rights to the C1 for the "fore sable future" whatever that may mean ? perhaps when then they can't sell anymore at the asking price ??  

Maybe I'm too cynical but it strikes me that Dennis could have been a politician. How to say something without saying anything at all! the Atlantic remains exclusive to locomotion for the foreseeable future. I don't like "remains" as that suggests they could take it away at some time. "Foreseeable future" what's that then, a month, a year, two years. No doubt they couldn't foresee the Compound being supplied in a set when it was first introduced. I've forked out nearly £180 for an LNER Atlantic, the most I've ever spent on one model, because I want one. I'm going to be mightily p****d if I find out it's subsequently on general release for £30 less ! Probably Bachmann don't care as no doubt we will be back! But it will leave a sour taste

[Ian Hargrave]

Maybe I'm too cynical but it strikes me that Dennis could have been a politician. How to say something without saying anything at all! the Atlantic remains exclusive to locomotion for the foreseeable future. I don't like "remains" as that suggests they could take it away at some time. "Foreseeable future" what's that then, a month, a year, two years. No doubt they couldn't foresee the Compound being supplied in a set when it was first introduced. I've forked out nearly £180 for an LNER Atlantic, the most I've ever spent on one model, because I want one. I'm going to be mightily p****d if I find out it's subsequently on general release for £30 less ! Probably Bachmann don't care as no doubt we will be back! But it will leave a sour taste

I'm sure Dennis will feel flattered to be included in such illustrious company....but I don't think it will exercise him overmuch. We might consider that both Locomotion and Bachmann are commercial concerns with their necessary self perpetuating agenda. This has been said before but perhaps needs repeating here..There is seemingly an expectation that the manufacturers of model railways are put on earth to serve exclusively the interests and economic concerns of its client group.This of course is an idealistic goal.Sometimes,things don't quite go according to plan.

[Legend]

Sorry Ian , got to disagree with that. No one denies that Locomotion and Bachmann need to make money, but they can do that without been economical with the truth. They should be up front about any arrangements. The statement from Dennis says nothing.

[Ian Hargrave]

Sorry Ian , got to disagree with that. No one denies that Locomotion and Bachmann need to make money, but they can do that without been economical with the truth. They should be up front about any arrangements. The statement from Dennis says nothing.[/quote

 

But he owes nothing whatsoever to RMWeb.There is no obligation on his part to respond to posts on this forum.You make the allegation 'economical withe the truth'. Please be careful that you are able to substantiate that with hard evidence.This is not a select committee of The House of Commons ...well,not quite yet,anyway. Consider that...

[DerekEm8]

I'm sure Dennis will feel flattered to be included in such illustrious company....but I don't think it will exercise him overmuch. We might consider that both Locomotion and Bachmann are commercial concerns with their necessary self perpetuating agenda. This has been said before but perhaps needs repeating here..There is seemingly an expectation that the manufacturers of model railways are put on earth to serve exclusively the interests and economic concerns of its client group.This of course is an idealistic goal.Sometimes,things don't quite go according to plan.

Ian,

 

I'm afraid your comments are a bit idealistic, where would they be without their client group to keep the money flowing in.

 

If they don't serve their client groups interests what are they here for.? who are they trying to sell to ?

 

RMweb and other web based groups provide ideal market research for them giving insight into buyers who don't just buy for Christmas and Birthdays but are likely to spend throughout the year. - How many Locomotion Models are going to be bought  for little Johnny- very very few ?

Edited October 29, 2014 by DerekEm8

[The Stationmaster]

Sorry Ian , got to disagree with that. No one denies that Locomotion and Bachmann need to make money, but they can do that without been economical with the truth. They should be up front about any arrangements. The statement from Dennis says nothing.

 

They were completely upfront about the arrangement - read the first sentence in the final paragraph of my post 767 on the preceding page because that is what was said at the launch by both Bachmann and Locomotion people.  Somehow I don't think the museum (well actually the Science Museum as spending at that level has to be approved by them) would have signed on the dotted line, or whatever they did in terms of a contract, without making sure that they knew what they were buying.

[Legend]

Thanks Mike, didn't see that posting. But you have to wonder why Dennis didn't just say the tooling is owned by NRM they are the only ones that can use it, rather than the politician speak we got, unless of course , the tooling reverts to Bachmann at some stage, which would account for him saying "remain" and "foreseeable future". Anyway , enough theories. As I said , having forked out the £180 just hope I'm not short changed.