What if Lionel were to build S Gauge steam engines with plastic shells.

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