S Gaugian, My Y3 wobbles and I have seen others that do. Do your plastic diesels wobble? None of my Gilbert plastic engines wobble, do yours? If properly done a plastic steam engine won't wobble.
Give Plastic a chance.
Rusty Traque posted:BTW, is anybody here also on the S-Trains Yahoo board to float this trial balloon over there?
I thought of floating this on S-Scale Yahoo and the S Scale SIG, but unless there would be an indication that a theoretical plastic steam locomotive could be converted to scale and operate on DC/DCC, a lead balloon would seem light by comparison.
Rusty
Interestingly, I have yet to see this thread cross posted to the S-Trains list. Does that mean I am the only one that belongs to both lists?
Tom Stoltz
in Maine
I don't belong to either of those posts. I do on Facebook. I don't know if Lionel watches the others. That is the key.
Roundhouse Bill posted:S Gaugian, My Y3 wobbles and I have seen others that do. Do your plastic diesels wobble? None of my Gilbert plastic engines wobble, do yours? If properly done a plastic steam engine won't wobble.
Give Plastic a chance.
A wobble will be the result of worn/bad bushings or bearings, a bent axle, a wheel not true on its axle or an uneven traction tire. The material used on the body will not cause a wobble, it will just emphasize it.
I've seen and owned plastic, die cast and brass locomotives that wobbled. The same for ones that didn't wobble.
As I once wrote in a letter to the editor decades ago in 3/16" S Scale Railroading magazine when discussing a similar topic: "A brass wheel with a wobble is no better than a plastic wheel with a wobble."
Rusty
Roundhouse Bill posted:I don't belong to either of those posts. I do on Facebook. I don't know if Lionel watches the others. That is the key.
Speaks volumes…
Maybe, Lionel should post the question of plastic steam locomotives on THEIR American Flyer Facebook page rather than highlighting a 3-rail O gauge guy.
Just a thought...
Rusty
Rusty Traque posted:Maybe, Lionel should post the question of plastic steam locomotives on THEIR American Flyer Facebook page rather than highlighting a 3-rail O gauge guy.
Just a thought...
Rusty
This is an interesting point. Though I’m not sure another dedicated Lionel site is the best place to get feedback about what S gauge really is. S gauge is not Lionel, never has been, however now it does seem that Lionel wants to dictate what S gauge will be despite 71+ years without them.
I have found the focus of this S scale (I use the words S scale & S gauge interchangeably though not really correct) forum to be largely influenced by the 3 rail cross overs. And maybe that’s as it should be, being that it is the 0 gauge forum. However, having been active in the Yahoo groups of S-trains and S-scale since 2001 and NASG since 1995 and S via AF since 1948, joining this group has been an eye opener and a very different experience. It seems of me that a large number of this group have come from the 0 gauge side which of course means Lionel which in turn means the acceptance of things Lionel… fantasy equipment and the proprietary control systems. I have not experienced this (at least to this degree) on the S gauge sights. So this attitude is new to me.
I do remember quite a while ago Jonnyspeed saying that Lionel was going to do what they wanted and not address the needs of S gaugers in general. I was surprised at the time, hoping he was wrong, but sadly have come to realize he was right. MTH seems to be following suit. I had hope they would continue in the direction of SHS, however it is now apparent they are more interested in competition with Lionel than furthering S gauge. Maybe great for the toy train industry, but S was never part of that.
Tom Stoltz
in Maine
Tom Stoltz posted:Rusty Traque posted:Maybe, Lionel should post the question of plastic steam locomotives on THEIR American Flyer Facebook page rather than highlighting a 3-rail O gauge guy.
Just a thought...
Rusty
This is an interesting point. Though I’m not sure another dedicated Lionel site is the best place to get feedback about what S gauge really is. S gauge is not Lionel, never has been, however now it does seem that Lionel wants to dictate what S gauge will be despite 71+ years without them.
I have found the focus of this S scale (I use the words S scale & S gauge interchangeably though not really correct) forum to be largely influenced by the 3 rail cross overs. And maybe that’s as it should be, being that it is the 0 gauge forum. However, having been active in the Yahoo groups of S-trains and S-scale since 2001 and NASG since 1995 and S via AF since 1948, joining this group has been an eye opener and a very different experience. It seems of me that a large number of this group have come from the 0 gauge side which of course means Lionel which in turn means the acceptance of things Lionel… fantasy equipment and the proprietary control systems. I have not experienced this (at least to this degree) on the S gauge sights. So this attitude is new to me.
I do remember quite a while ago Jonnyspeed saying that Lionel was going to do what they wanted and not address the needs of S gaugers in general. I was surprised at the time, hoping he was wrong, but sadly have come to realize he was right. MTH seems to be following suit. I had hope they would continue in the direction of SHS, however it is now apparent they are more interested in competition with Lionel than furthering S gauge. Maybe great for the toy train industry, but S was never part of that.
Tom Stoltz
in Maine
Sorry to have been the bearer of bad news Tom, but I've been dealing with Lionel for a long time coming from O.
My feeling is that this thread is a microcosm of the main problem. If there are 20 unique responses to the original question, there are probably 21 different opinions. To add to the problem, S is represented by multiple factions... Flyer, Hi-rail, Scale, P:64, Sn3. I don't think Lionel or MTH really understood the dynamics of the whole S market before they jumped in. Add in a change in Lionel management and recent China production troubles and I guess that's where we find ourselves. I hope I'm wrong about the future of S from Lionel and MTH, but I've been right so far...
jonnyspeed posted:To add to the problem, S is represented by multiple factions... Flyer, Hi-rail, Scale, P:64, Sn3. I don't think Lionel or MTH really understood the dynamics of the whole S market before they jumped in.
I don't think anybody expects Lionel or MTH to concentrate on P:64 or Sn3. American Models surely doesn't and the former SHS didn't. (Neither does River Raisin for that matter. PBL is pretty much the go-to company for Sn3.)
But, both AM and SHS figured out how to sell to the other three (remember, AM started out only selling scale-wheeled, DC operated products.)
However, it appears over time SHS became the true driving force for S and it's an opportunity that MTH has squandered. And if Lionel ever stops bumping into walls, they could also become a driving force for S.
Rusty
Rusty Traque posted:jonnyspeed posted:To add to the problem, S is represented by multiple factions... Flyer, Hi-rail, Scale, P:64, Sn3. I don't think Lionel or MTH really understood the dynamics of the whole S market before they jumped in.
I don't think anybody expects Lionel or MTH to concentrate on P:64 or Sn3. American Models surely doesn't and the former SHS didn't. (Neither does River Raisin for that matter. PBL is pretty much the go-to company for Sn3.)
But, both AM and SHS figured out how to sell to the other three (remember, AM started out only selling scale-wheeled, DC operated products.)
However, it appears over time SHS became the true driving force for S and it's an opportunity that MTH has squandered. And if Lionel ever stops bumping into walls, they could also become a driving force for S.
Rusty
The point I was making is that S has very few modelers to start with and those are split between several groups. Niche within a niche... Then for whatever reason it seems that there are several differing opinions within those groups on any given question.
I agree that SHS had the formula correct. You need to design the products in a way that they will appeal to Flyer, HiRail, and Scale modelers alike. I suppose Lionel does have the traditional Flyer crowd, as the FlyerCheif BERK seems to be selling well at it's price point. While I'm happy for those folks that like it, it doesn't interest me as a Scale fan.
We've discussed this before, but I think one of Lionel's biggest missteps was the assumption that S was just like O. In O the bigger the model you make, the more you sell. Not necessarily so in S. You are talking about a scale that never had anything bigger than a 4-8-4 until Lionel came on the seen. They hit the market with 3 big articulated engines and then decided that there was no market and it was too costly to make more high end steam. I still believe that they simply chose the wrong prototypes. Jon Z. Told me 2 years ago that he had reduced the size of the electronics to the point that smaller models were now possible. That timing coincided with the management change unfortunately.
So back on topic.... I think that a small/mid sized plastic shelled steam engine could work. On the diesel side I think they need to look at something like the Sd40, Gp30/35/38/40, 44Tonner, 70tonner, S2, U23, C-series, etc... Basically something short enough to easily negotiate 20"r. That is assume of course that they want to invest in new tooling.
Perhaps they should call Ron at AM and see if he is interested in selling his tooling. Then they could spruce those up and add their electronics. Cheaper than making new. It's what Atlas and Lionel just did in O with Weaver... Just sayin...
Rusty Traque posted:But, both AM and SHS figured out how to sell to the other three (remember, AM started out only selling scale-wheeled, DC operated products.)
However, it appears over time SHS became the true driving force for S and it's an opportunity that MTH has squandered. And if Lionel ever stops bumping into walls, they could also become a driving force for S.
Rusty
I don’t think Lionel will be a driving force is S simply because they are so focused on the toy train market and their proprietary electronic systems. Most Hi-rail and certainly all scale people are not interested in non-standard systems. The model railroad settled on a standard DCC system and why Lionel can’t comply is beyond me. As I said before, maybe great for the toy train market, but S was never part of that.
Tom
Tom Stoltz posted:Rusty Traque posted:But, both AM and SHS figured out how to sell to the other three (remember, AM started out only selling scale-wheeled, DC operated products.)
However, it appears over time SHS became the true driving force for S and it's an opportunity that MTH has squandered. And if Lionel ever stops bumping into walls, they could also become a driving force for S.
Rusty
I don’t think Lionel will be a driving force is S simply because they are so focused on the toy train market and their proprietary electronic systems. Most Hi-rail and certainly all scale people are not interested in non-standard systems. The model railroad settled on a standard DCC system and why Lionel can’t comply is beyond me. As I said before, maybe great for the toy train market, but S was never part of that.
Tom
Tom, just so you are aware Lionel Legacy S electronics support AC, DC, DCC, TMCC, and Legacy. I don't think they are leaving anyone out.
jonnyspeed posted:Tom, just so you are aware Lionel Legacy S electronics support AC, DC, DCC, TMCC, and Legacy. I don't think they are leaving anyone out.
Jonathan, thanks for the reminder. However based on the performance of my Y3 on DC, I would have to disagree with that statement. Also, when I buy an engine, I would like to choose the sound system… there are so many to choose from it is silly to be locked into one. Then there is the issue that proprietary systems is not the way the model railroad industry is set up. If you want to participate in the model railroad market there are a set of standards that helps keep everything compatible. There is plenty of leeway within that system to put your own spin on it so again, I don’t understand Lionel’s approach other than their aim is towards the toy train side of things.
Tom
Tom Stoltz posted:jonnyspeed posted:Tom, just so you are aware Lionel Legacy S electronics support AC, DC, DCC, TMCC, and Legacy. I don't think they are leaving anyone out.
Jonathan, thanks for the reminder. However based on the performance of my Y3 on DC, I would have to disagree with that statement. Also, when I buy an engine, I would like to choose the sound system… there are so many to choose from it is silly to be locked into one. Then there is the issue that proprietary systems is not the way the model railroad industry is set up. If you want to participate in the model railroad market there are a set of standards that helps keep everything compatible. There is plenty of leeway within that system to put your own spin on it so again, I don’t understand Lionel’s approach other than their aim is towards the toy train side of things.
Tom
I can understand your point of view. I think that Don Thompson hit it out of the park at SHS. He designed a basic electronics interface based off of an existing standard (DCC) and made additional adapters that would allow AC, DC, or proprietary (LocoMatic) sound and control. I don't know what is so hard about that. My suspicion is that Lionel and MTH both force the electronics because a good portion of the profit and competitive differentiation (in their minds) comes from the electronics.
Example: I spoke with Andy E. of MTH at the big show in Cleveland a few years back. I asked him why he thought MTH would be successful re-releasing the same products that had been on the market for years? He was quick to say DCS and ProtoSounds. He felt that once S modelers got their hands on MTH electronics that they would gladly buy the same products again. I thought that was a bad idea then. I think it is even worse idea now because DCC sound has caught up to and well surpassed DCS or RailSounds. So now MTH is going to release a run of F's with a control system nobody wants that has sub-standard sound. AND they will likely take away the ability to easily swap electronics like Don designed. So the only options will be to live with it or gut it.
As I said before... S is different than O or HO and I still don't think they fully grasp it. But you can count on them force feeding the market what they want to sell us.
jonnyspeed posted:Example: I spoke with Andy E. of MTH at the big show in Cleveland a few years back. I asked him why he thought MTH would be successful re-releasing the same products that had been on the market for years? He was quick to say DCS and ProtoSounds. He felt that once S modelers got their hands on MTH electronics that they would gladly buy the same products again. I thought that was a bad idea then. I think it is even worse idea now because DCC sound has caught up to and well surpassed DCS or RailSounds. So now MTH is going to release a run of F's with a control system nobody wants that has sub-standard sound. AND they will likely take away the ability to easily swap electronics like Don designed. So the only options will be to live with it or gut it.
As I said before... S is different than O or HO and I still don't think they fully grasp it. But you can count on them force feeding the market what they want to sell us.
DCS 3.0 is DCC compatible. It's used in MTH's HO line (where DCS was snubbed) and also loaded in current O Gauge production.
Rusty
Rusty Traque posted:jonnyspeed posted:Example: I spoke with Andy E. of MTH at the big show in Cleveland a few years back. I asked him why he thought MTH would be successful re-releasing the same products that had been on the market for years? He was quick to say DCS and ProtoSounds. He felt that once S modelers got their hands on MTH electronics that they would gladly buy the same products again. I thought that was a bad idea then. I think it is even worse idea now because DCC sound has caught up to and well surpassed DCS or RailSounds. So now MTH is going to release a run of F's with a control system nobody wants that has sub-standard sound. AND they will likely take away the ability to easily swap electronics like Don designed. So the only options will be to live with it or gut it.
As I said before... S is different than O or HO and I still don't think they fully grasp it. But you can count on them force feeding the market what they want to sell us.
DCS 3.0 is DCC compatible. It's used in MTH's HO line (where DCS was snubbed) and also loaded in current O Gauge production.
Rusty
Fully aware of that. Doesn't change anything I said. They have the same problems as Lionel.
1. They employ a watered down basic DCC implementation. Not full blown DCC
2. They do not use a DCC socket for easy removal/upgrades (MTH remains to be seen)
3. Sounds are not as good as best DCC decoders
4. When DCS 4.0 comes out you probably won't be able to upgrade your 3.0 engines. See #2
5. With MTH's DCS/DCC implementation in my HO models there are some features/settings that can not be changed under DCC control. You HAVE to have a DCS system to make certain changes. Trust me, this one is a pain.
You guys keep talking about DCC as if that is what all in S want. I don't want it at all. I like and prefer Lionel's proprietary systems and I look forward to MTH's DCS system. Those of you in DCC make up probably about 15% of the S market.
I think Lionel is playing to the S market as it exists for the 85% and including the 15% of the market by extending Legacy to use DCC. Remember they have been making S since 1981 so they have lots of history in S.
MTH will develop its products with DCS because they believe the S market will like it better that the Lionel systems. I know about MTH as I spent lots of time talking about this with Andy Edelman at York. There were lots of questions and answers to this point in the interview article.
Lionel and MTH are never going to abandon their proprietary systems for DCC.
It's all a matter of perception.
DCC is a lot like my car radio where I have 18 AM, FM and XM selections each. Never tried the AM, and I'll generally use only two selections each on FM and XM. I've long forgotten what the other radio stations I programmed in are when I bought the car.
Lionel's DCC suits my purposes when I run my SD70's, I expect MTH's will do the same.
Consisting is a pain in my opinion with anybody's DCC. When my F3's arrive, they're not going to be switched out or changed around. I'll set up the consist and leave it alone.
I expect 95% of the model railroading community uses only the basic CV's of DCC. After 40+ years in the hobby, I have yet to destroy a conventional locomotive because minor speed or acceleration/deceleration differences. And I generally don't feel the need to mix brands of locomotives.
I'm less worried about sound nowadays than I was a few years ago. My SD's and SHS 2-8-0 are my only loco's with sound. I usually have the volume low enough that when the train is 5-6 feet away, the sound of the wheels drown it out. My other DCC loco's are soundless. And I'm in no hurry to convert my conventional locomotives.
Frankly, the thing I most like about DCC is it keeps the headlight constant and on when I stop the locomotive.
Rusty
Roundhouse Bill posted:You guys keep talking about DCC as if that is what all in S want. I don't want it at all. I like and prefer Lionel's proprietary systems and I look forward to MTH's DCS system. Those of you in DCC make up probably about 15% of the S market.
I think Lionel is playing to the S market as it exists for the 85% and including the 15% of the market by extending Legacy to use DCC. Remember they have been making S since 1981 so they have lots of history in S.
Bill,
I do believe this is a common mistake, confusing American Flyer with S as a whole. The trying to group Flyer as representative of S is what causes scalers to be so against AF. DCC and 15% of the market is not the way Don T of SHS describes it. And don’t forget AM doesn’t offer Legacy, TMCC or Chief nor did SHS. Lionel has been making AF since 1981 or so, but it wasn’t until the Mikado did they ventured into the wider market of S Hi-rail. Please remember, there is a difference between Flyer and Hi-rail. If you don’t believe me, just turn them over and compare the wheels. And scale wheels are a third category!
I have and run lots of Flyer plus I have ACG accessories on my layout, so it is not as though I’m anti Flyer. But I can tell the difference between Flyer (including the Flyonel rehash) and the Hi-rail of AM & SHS. I only have a few pieces of scale and there the distinction is harder to discern. One must really look at the wheels to see the variation between scale and Hi-rail.
I recognize the Lionel and MTH will probably have a difficult time getting away from their systems. But face it, it is not what the world of model railroading does. Ever see Legacy advertised in Model Railroader?
Tom Stoltz
I would say that DCC is less than 15% of the S market. Not all the scalers are into DCC. Most of the time I run conventional DC anyway. My first DCC locomotive was the SHS 2-8-0 (with sound to boot.)
I've converted a handful of locomotives to "silent" DCC, but the bulk of my roster is DC and there isn't enough of an advantage in DCC for my use to convert them.
Rusty
I keep mentioning DCC because it IS the standard that most of model railroading uses. If S has any chance of growing or even existing in the near future I think it should start to adopt standards, or at the very least replicate what Don did - gives us the option to swap out the proprietary system.
If Lionel was actually dedicated to producing S product and they were bring new stuff out then fine I'll take Legacy with DCC capability. At least I could use DCC to control Lionel and MTH on the same track at the same time. But it's been a while since the Y3 and how long will it be until the Scale Berk?
My big question to Lionel is this: You say tooling costs too much, but how do you have any idea of how many units you would sell of a particular engine if you never even offer it? You have implemented this BTO model where you shift the risk to the dealers and customers so why not put some ideas in a catalog and see how many orders you get? The catalogs are 50% wishful thinking these days anyways. Why not throw something new against the wall and see if it sticks? You can't say that XYZ is too expensive if you have no idea how many orders you would get. That's called talking out both sides of your ...
I don't even have an S layout right now but if Lionel hit me with an NYC Hudson, SP Daylight, N&W J, 2-6-0, 4-6-0, or other small steam I will commit to purchase a minimum of 2 @ $800-$1000 each. Must be scale, detailed, with Legacy/DCC. I'm willing to pay for what I want. I don't think many others in S are though quite frankly.
Tom,
I thought I had grasped the concept of hi-rail and Flyer but it seems the edges are becoming blurred again. I have a Y3 in my display case with a 326 above it and a 21099 below. When I look at the profile of the tender wheels on the Y3 they look very close to the same tender wheel profiles on the 326 and 21099. So what is the Y3, hi-rail or Flyer?
I also have the NYC PA set and I seem to remember that the powered unit had wheel profiles that were quite low and then Lionel changed them to be larger afterwards, so is this hi-rail or Flyer?
To make this subject clearer can someone actually denote the upper and lower parameter measurements of hi-rail wheels and do the same for Flyer?
Ukaflyer posted:
To make this subject clearer can someone actually denote the upper and lower parameter measurements of hi-rail wheels and do the same for Flyer?
Nope. You really want to get confused? There is an NMRA S HiRail standard http://www.nmra.org/sites/defa...3.3%202010.02.24.pdf . Unfortunately nobody seems to adhere to it. I spoke to Fast Tracks when they where making the S HiRail turnout fixtures and they said that the spec didn't match the models they tested. I have the Flyonel Mikado and Pacific. One would think that they would be similar as they are from the same era. Nope, The Mikado has significantly deeper flanges and a narrower gauge. The Pacific will actually run on code 100 flex track where the Mikado bumps along.
Again, why I am advocating standards in S.
jonnyspeed posted:I keep mentioning DCC because it IS the standard that most of model railroading uses. If S has any chance of growing or even existing in the near future I think it should start to adopt standards, or at the very least replicate what Don did - gives us the option to swap out the proprietary system.
The lack of DCC doesn't seem to hurt O Gauge, although I guess the code is now in some of Lionel's O gauge loco's.
But, Lionel put DCC into S first.
And the 8-pin plug was brought up early on in the development of Lionel's DCC compatibility. It was shot down by the people at the top. Lionel simply isn't going to allow it.
None of my AM loco's came with a DCC plug. Even the latest and greatest RS11's.
Rusty
Rusty Traque posted:jonnyspeed posted:I keep mentioning DCC because it IS the standard that most of model railroading uses. If S has any chance of growing or even existing in the near future I think it should start to adopt standards, or at the very least replicate what Don did - gives us the option to swap out the proprietary system.
The lack of DCC doesn't seem to hurt O Gauge, although I guess the code is now in some of Lionel's O gauge loco's.
I wouldn't be so sure about that. MTH seems to think that O is contracting.
Lionel Pioneered Command Control and sound in the mid 90's and it was a game changer. Since then DCC has surpassed Lionel's systems in all aspects except arguably the usability of the handheld remote. Motor control, expand-ability, upgrade-ability, sound, compactness, standardization, and price are all on the side of DCC.
I still can't believe that O buyers are willing to buy the same exact model made from the same exact tooling for more money just to get upgraded electronics. Even as much as I love the electronics I think that's nuts. I think you are seeing a big push back in that area in O right now. Especially against MTH.
BTW... AM will wire an 8 pin DCC socket in for $15 if you ask them.
Ukaflyer posted:Tom,
I thought I had grasped the concept of hi-rail and Flyer but it seems the edges are becoming blurred again. I have a Y3 in my display case with a 326 above it and a 21099 below. When I look at the profile of the tender wheels on the Y3 they look very close to the same tender wheel profiles on the 326 and 21099. So what is the Y3, hi-rail or Flyer?
I also have the NYC PA set and I seem to remember that the powered unit had wheel profiles that were quite low and then Lionel changed them to be larger afterwards, so is this hi-rail or Flyer?
To make this subject clearer can someone actually denote the upper and lower parameter measurements of hi-rail wheels and do the same for Flyer?
I try to keep it simple: look at Flyer, that’s Flyer; look at AM or SHS Hi-rail, that’s Hi-rail and in general the same for scale. If your flanges look close to one of these 3 categories, then that identifies it.
Here is a short video (second one down) that shows a comparison of all 3:
http://tomsturnouts.com/video/VideoTTT.html
Tom
Jonnyspeed, Lionel is never going to pay for the tooling, produce it and throw it on the wall to see if it sticks. If I had been in business for many years, I wouldn't either. I would put money into an investment that I had a good idea would pay off. Wouldn't you?
The NMRA has never been a factor for Lionel or MTH. That was all developed around HO and N scale products. These two companies just don't care about NMRA standards. Perhaps they should, but they won't.
Rusty Traque posted:The lack of DCC doesn't seem to hurt O Gauge, although I guess the code is now in some of Lionel's O gauge loco's.
Rusty
Of course not, Lionel is 0 gauge.
Tom
Tom Stoltz posted:Ukaflyer posted:Tom,
I thought I had grasped the concept of hi-rail and Flyer but it seems the edges are becoming blurred again. I have a Y3 in my display case with a 326 above it and a 21099 below. When I look at the profile of the tender wheels on the Y3 they look very close to the same tender wheel profiles on the 326 and 21099. So what is the Y3, hi-rail or Flyer?
I also have the NYC PA set and I seem to remember that the powered unit had wheel profiles that were quite low and then Lionel changed them to be larger afterwards, so is this hi-rail or Flyer?
To make this subject clearer can someone actually denote the upper and lower parameter measurements of hi-rail wheels and do the same for Flyer?
I try to keep it simple: look at Flyer, that’s Flyer; look at AM or SHS Hi-rail, that’s Hi-rail and in general the same for scale. If your flanges look close to one of these 3 categories, then that identifies it.
Here is a short video (second one down) that shows a comparison of all 3:
http://tomsturnouts.com/video/VideoTTT.html
Tom
In the past I seem to remember that hi-rail and flyer was referring to wheel profiles rather than brand/manufacturer. Are you now saying Tom that anything with the Flyer name is now regarded as Flyer irrespective of wheel profile? Then you say that by looking at the flanges they will denote which category an item fits.
Jonathan mentioned above he has a Lionel/Flyer Pacific that runs on code 100, but by your definition because it has the word Flyer in it, it has to be regarded as Flyer, I find that hard to grasp. It seems that various people have different views on how to define the same topic.
Looking at the NMRA link I see that the rail profile is 125, so on that basis if something can operate on 125 track, irrespective of it being alleged hi-rail, Flyer then they must all be compatible. Are we not then working to a standard which is denoted by track profile and not so hung up on wheel profile?
So coming back to my question on the Y3, that has to be regarded as Flyer and not hi-rail then.
I'm sure I am not in the minority of being confused on this topic
Ukaflyer posted:In the past I seem to remember that hi-rail and flyer was referring to wheel profiles rather than brand/manufacturer. Are you now saying Tom that anything with the Flyer name is now regarded as Flyer irrespective of wheel profile? Then you say that by looking at the flanges they will denote which category an item fits.
Jonathan mentioned above he has a Lionel/Flyer Pacific that runs on code 100, but by your definition because it has the word Flyer in it, it has to be regarded as Flyer, I find that hard to grasp. It seems that various people have different views on how to define the same topic.
Looking at the NMRA link I see that the rail profile is 125, so on that basis if something can operate on 125 track, irrespective of it being alleged hi-rail, Flyer then they must all be compatible. Are we not then working to a standard which is denoted by track profile and not so hung up on wheel profile?
So coming back to my question on the Y3, that has to be regarded as Flyer and not hi-rail then.
I'm sure I am not in the minority of being confused on this topic
First, did you watch the video?
I call it Flyer because that is the name everybody associates with early ‘tin plate’, ‘traditional’ or ‘vintage’ S gauge. And yes, it does come down to what rail the flange will run on which will include the flangeway on the turnout.
IMHO, I would say the wheel type also indicates the market the item is targeting. The Y3 with Flyer flanges… it is certainly not scale or Hi-rail, is it? If the Flyonel Pacific will run on code 100, it could be scale until you take into consideration the flange way on the turnout. If it will operate through a scale turnout, then it is scale. If it won’t, then it would be Hi-rail. Perhaps Jonathan can tell us that bit of info. I would be surprised if it could, but at this distance I can’t say.
Confusion only comes in when people go out of their way to make it confusing. Like trying to include details or the scenery as part of the definition. Then trying to include all the hybrids into a category doesn’t help either. For example, I have a Flyer boxcar with a body mounted Kadee #5… that doesn’t make it scale.
Tom Stoltz
Roundhouse Bill posted:Jonnyspeed, Lionel is never going to pay for the tooling, produce it and throw it on the wall to see if it sticks. If I had been in business for many years, I wouldn't either. I would put money into an investment that I had a good idea would pay off. Wouldn't you?
The NMRA has never been a factor for Lionel or MTH. That was all developed around HO and N scale products. These two companies just don't care about NMRA standards. Perhaps they should, but they won't.
Bill, where did I suggest that they pay tooling first? You might want to re-read my comments.
Lionel uses a Build To Order model these days. There is no reason that they need to produce tooling for ANYTHING until they have enough orders. That's the point I'm making. How can Lionel say that they can't afford tooling on a Daylight when they have no idea how many they would sell? Why not put a picture of a Daylight in a catalog and see how many BTO orders they get? That would cost nothing more than the cost of ink. If they get enough then they build it, if not then they don't it's simple. They seem to already know what the tooling would cost so they should be able to determine what the break-point is as far an number of orders needed. That is simple logic. It is also what many companies are currently doing.
This part is my opinion: They don't care about S enough to bother. S isn't a big part of their strategic plan. They will just trickle out high margin products to pacify an aging Flyer community that will largely be gone in the next 15-20 years. It sounds harsh, but I see no reason to believe that S is going to be anything but a sideshow trick for this management team. As I said, my opinion and I do hope I'm wrong. I'll gladly eat crow, but I haven't had to yet.
I think this tread is starting to circle the drain. We've gone from plastic vs. metal steamers to the cost of tooling to control systems to scale/hirail daffynitions to BTO.
And what's been accomplished? Nothing. This has been about as effective as all the attendance threads after each York.
Realistically, all I want is some consistency from Lionel be it Traditional Flyer, Hirail, or crumbs for Scale. I really don't care. Every time the door rotates over there it's back to square one.
Note: I like my scale converted SD's and the deep flange scale propotioned Flyer I own. Looks good, runs fine.
And from MTH: All I want are my Illinois Central TOFC's and my Santa Fe F3's. That's it.
Anything newly announced this year from either company will probably be coming out after I retire and I'll be busy figuring out how to live on a fixed income.
And I'm sure Ryan's reaching for the Advil right about now.
Rusty
Rusty Traque posted:I think this tread is starting to circle the drain. We've gone from plastic vs. metal steamers to the cost of tooling to control systems to scale/hirail daffynitions to BTO.
And what's been accomplished? Nothing. This has been about as effective as all the attendance threads after each York.
And I'm sure Ryan's reaching for the Advil right about now.
Rusty
Rusty,
I think communicating is better than not bothering at all. Sure it appears like nothing happens, but in reality that is not true. I have learned that a fair number of people of this list who consider themselves to be well versed in the S community have no idea what else is out there other than this focus group. They might not even belong to the NASG. I have also learned that many come from the Lionel 0 gauge side of life and that certainly colors their view of all things Lionel. S is a wide and, as you know, varied group with many different interests. However there is more that we have in common than not. Hearing other people’s opinions is always helpful even if we don’t agree or are not interested. That is how we get to know one another and hopefully form some sort of cohesion.
I hope Ryan is continuing to follow this discussion so that he will understand there is much more to S than this one group. I would venture that this group is a rather small segment of the S world, but at the same time a fair sampling of the American Flyer crowd.
Tom Stoltz
"I think communicating is better than not bothering at all. Sure it appears like nothing happens, but in reality that is not true."
The Yahoo group "Promoting S Scale Modeling" picked up Bob Bubeck's post on the discussions at York, so there is some cross communication. There is a lot of evidence that Lionel does listen. The SD70ACe's pivoting pilot overcame the objection to the U33C. That diesel and the subsequent ES44AC could operate on AC, DC, Legacy, or DCC--before O gauge locomotives could. (The Y-3 was not designed for DC, as Jon Z. confessed, and he was a bit surprised that it worked; so I wouldn't hold its somewhat erratic DC performance against Lionel.) Lionel rearranged truck design so that later SD70s and all the ES44s worked across American Models' switches.
Someone at Lionel was listening, but no one from Lionel informs the S community in return. Maybe if they didn't have so many high-water cylindrical hoppers in inventory, we might have seen new versions with prototypical trucks and real, non-glossy paint schemes as a reaction to the criticisms/suggestions. Instead, Lionel pulled back so quickly that they fell over and killed the mechanical reefer. If they consider the sell-out of the Berkshire as a success, maybe they'll try again.
The number of posts stirred up by the talk at York is encouraging, and the communication may not be one-sided. There have been a good number of suggestions from forum members here. Unfortunately, we won't know if anyone at Lionel has considered them until we see a concept drawing in a catalogue some time in the future.
I'll firstly admit that I didn't read the posts today and maybe I missed something. However, what would S gauge have been without AF? Now, I am one of those guys that wants it to be more than toy trains. If the purists think they will get want they want without the AF community, they are dreaming.
Sooooo plastic yes...
Tom Stoltz posted:
I hope Ryan is continuing to follow this discussion so that he will understand there is much more to S than this one group. I would venture that this group is a rather small segment of the S world, but at the same time a fair sampling of the American Flyer crowd.
Tom Stoltz
Tom,
I actually hope Ryan can start applying some consistency to the Flyer product line, but as indicated somewhere in one of these associated threads, he'll be in charge of locomotives, but not rolling stock.
Hopefully, he'll maintain an open line of communication with the Flyer rolling stock guru.
There's been 3-4 reboots of the Flyer line and as many management changes since 2001, when the Mikado's were first shown. It was the Mikado that got me back interested into Flyer after writing it off around 1995. I have a modest assortment of Gilbert and modern Flyer, so I'm not just a scale sourpuss.
Lionel has shown it can achieve great things with the Flyer line, but I think the corner office is the primary roadblock.
Rusty
The guy at Lionel that is in charge of AF other than high end engines is Steve Hilla. I have talked with him in the past and he participated with Ryan in answering my interview questions, but he was not at York.
Let me step into this puddle of poop, and state the future is flyerchief. It can run on AC, DC, DCC or DCS. Solves all the compatibility problems, isn't expensive and is easy to use. Less expensive for the manufacturer as well - might lead to a larger S gauge/scale selection, which might mean more customers purchasing, which would lead to more products offered etc, etc, etc.
And for those who say, you need a controller for each engine, Lionel has come out with a new controller to handle 3 at once. Since this is still in the early stages, that could expand exponentially.
Making stuff for one small segment of the market isn't going to happen, not in today's economy.
Francine
Francine posted:Let me step into this puddle of poop, and state the future is flyerchief. It can run on AC, DC, DCC or DCS. Solves all the compatibility problems, isn't expensive and is easy to use. Less expensive for the manufacturer as well - might lead to a larger S gauge/scale selection, which might mean more customers purchasing, which would lead to more products offered etc, etc, etc.
And for those who say, you need a controller for each engine, Lionel has come out with a new controller to handle 3 at once. Since this is still in the early stages, that could expand exponentially.
Making stuff for one small segment of the market isn't going to happen, not in today's economy.
Francine
There's been A LOT of criticism on the 3-rail side with the fact that the reverse isn't true, that the "Chief" systems can't be controlled with either a Legacy or TMCC controller.
Now, I don't have a FlyerChief loco to get the feel for, being that the BTO on the Berkshires didn't cover all the "O's." I would have liked to, but I was only interested in the NKP and not any of the other roadnames that still may be available somewhere. I've stopped worrying about it.
If Lionel wants to hang their hat on FlyerChief, that's fine with me, there may be something in the future I'd be interested in, there may not be. But, I don't think FlyerChief alone the total solution to a larger selection or availability of S.
Rusty
