What do you want the future of this fantastic hobby to bring? A smaller scale? Fictional locomotives, maybe? What do you hope for.
Me personally, I would like to see some fictional locos. Obviously, I am not to strict on prototypical boundaries. I would like to see models of what could have been, like Lima’s planned 4-8-6 super locomotive. Or, the ACE 3000. And, I can’t wait for ProtoSound 3.
[8]TrainFreak409[8]
A Burlington 4-8-4 class 0-5 Northern steamer in HO, N
A Burlington 2-10-4 class M-4a Colorado steamer in HO, N
A Great Northern 4-8-4 class S-4 Northern steamer in HO, N
Made by Broadway Ltd. or Athearn Genesis.
I also hope all locomotives will be DCC ready, and have true AC powered motors (= no motor brushes to wear out). Higher quality models, no lemons or junkers allowed in cheaper cost models, and more prototypes in production in all eras.
More newcomers to the hobby wouldn’t hurt, either. (that will probably happen though.)
Would love to see the an HO scale ACE 3000. I think Ross Rowland (Chessie 614) was involved in that project back in the 1980s. [swg][tup]
I want to see more sound decoders and would like to see the big 3 DCC manufacturers producing high quality sound decoders (Digitrax, Lenz, TCS). [^][:p]
MRC currently produces “generic” sound decoders. QSI’s system is not available separately. Soundtraxx for now has a virtual “Monopoly” on prototype railroad sound decoders. Competition will drive prices down.
[:D][8D][:)]
More steam engines in S scale. I’d love it if Bowser did their line in S.
Enjoy
Paul
A better F40PH!
I’d like to see custom molding services, similar to custom decals, where you provide basic CAD or drafted and dimensioned drawings for parts (say, like window castings) and an entrepenuerial CAD-CAMM operator with some sort of laser-prototyping machine generates the forms then casts your parts. Truthfully, all the technology is already there, but the machinery is expensive to own. Once a service like this became available, the library of detail parts available would skyrocket; I, for one, need high-nose bell mounts for my N-scale Norfolk & Western diesels. Once I draft up the basic form and have it produced (likely at not insignificant cost), the pattern or mold would exist for anyone else to order units as well, and computers & the internet are very good at keeping a comprehensive database of such unique items.
The only trouble is how to structure it financially, since the prototyping machine would be costy, and the volume of parts needed by any single client would be small. Perhaps a royalty structure would provide incentive, as the initial setup cost would be borne by the designer of the detail part, but then all future sales of that part would line the pockets of the original designer. Then we’d start seeing deisel shells with winterization hatches or modified grille arrangements or other minor prototype variations, all specific to a railroad or era, filling all the gaps in current production runs, not to mention how many other things you can think of that you wish you didn’t have to scratchbuild. You could design your own custom building kit, even.
What else would I like to see? Norfolk & Western H-10 and H-2a hoppers in N-scale (with the right panel count and stake spacings) and N&W Class CG / CH / C2 cabeese in N-scale.
[bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow]
[bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow][bow]
Also I hope manufacturing technologies get advanced to the point where making a high end plastic steamer cost 1/3 of what it does now. Then we’d see way more road specific locomotives.
I doubt there would be much of a market for fictional locomotives ('cept Thomas). Nobody even seems to like a locomotive that doesn’t follow the prototype accurately. As “phantoms” (fictional) go, we can 'bash our own.
The ACE 3000 could be the real exception here, since it was a real proposed loco, and look at how many have already mentioned it. I was also going to even before I saw these responses. Same may go for other proposed prototypes that were planned but never made it to the rails.
I’ll always welcome more nice vehicles (Mini Metals, Give us some vintage Macks!) Dan
I would like to see fewer items in rolling stock kits. If mfrs offered kits without trucks, wheel sets and couplers it would reduce their cost and ours. They could offer an additional kit with their generic “warped/twisted trucks, plastic wheels, bent axles and hornhook couplers” to complete the kit. This would allow those of us that have specific wants/desires to add the trucks, wheel sets, and couplers of our choice without paying for them twice. The problem is we’ll never see mfrs get together to make a “standard” for truck mounting and coupler pockets.
Another thing I would like to see is, like computer card slots, I wish mfrs would make one connection standard with 2 slots. One slot for the decoder “card” and one slot for the sound “card”. Loco mfrs could mfr locos without cards and we could add the card(s) of our choice. This would eliminate wiring, re-wiring and soldering issues giving modelers less chance of letting the smoke out. If you don’t do sound then simply don’t add the sound card. If you do DC then slip in a DC card**. If you do DCC then slip in the mfr’s decoder card of choice. ** As cjm89 would like to see, mfrs could use brushless AC motors and the DC card could convert DC to AC.
It would also be nice if loco mfrs would make “plug-in” light sockets. If your specific road name and era used a mars light then plug one in. If it had a light with red lens then plug one in. This could also be used for steam era locos where headlight housings are different. It could lead to a whole new line of products or mfg company(ies).
Help the modeler… Standardization… I guess I’m dreamin’ again!
I think just as there has been an increasing amount of RTR rolling stock and built-up structures, you will start to see fully sceniced layout modules. Kind of like “Terrain for Trains”, but even more so. You want a two-track tunnel here? Fine – use this module and plop it down. You want track running alongside a rock faced cliff? Again, use the right module and it is yours. You could buy the modules “naked”, or complete with ground foam turf and dirt, trees, shrubs etc already attached. I can envision a way a person could complete a totally “custom” layout using 1’ x 1’ modules selected and arranged to suit his/her needs/desires.
I know many of you would hate something like this, but I would love it. My favorite part of MR is planning the layout and then operating it. Scenery construction is something I dread because I have little artistic skill and virtually NO carpentry skill. I would be more than happy to buy the “naked” modules, apply my own finishing touches, and be ready to go. On some of the more complex areas (rock cliffs, bodies of water, etc) I would even gladly use the fully finished modules.
That’s my vision of one of the future developments in MR. [:)]
I think a possibility is a programable locomotive. Something where you could tell it to go for a period of time, make some stops, wait for meets, etc. That would allow some of the lone wolves to run a layout like they had a larger group. It would also be good for some of the club displays. You see some of this in the computer controlled layout, but I think an onboard chipset would be next. Just add it to the decoder.
I wan’t to see much cheaper DCC, which should hopefully really happen soon.
Noah
I could see remotely operated couplers… I even have a theory on how they work.
Using a muscle wire (wire that either expands or shrinks when current is run through it) it could be attached to the knuckle of a regular old KD coupler. With DCC, you already have voltage on the tracks, at a good current capacity.
A tiny optical cell could be on the coupler, and when you point a light pointer at it (IR or laser - laser would be easier to “aim”) the coupler uncouples at that location.
as soon as you take the light away, the couplers return to normal mode.
It would be more difficult on hidden track, unless you wanted DCC decoders every car, and choose which coupler to uncouple… bleach.
Just an idea.
Rob
I would like to see more lower cost good locomotives. The current price of locos has just about priced a person like me on an fixed income out of the locomotive market.
I am afraid the if all prices keep rising at the current rate it will force some peaple out of the hobby and scare some peaple from getting involved. I am lucky that my loco roster has enough units to run my railroad or I would be out of luck , the last modern deisel I priced cost more than my mounthly car payment.
OK Jerry will climb down of his soap box now.
I do not see cheaper DCC unless more manufactures get into the market as the demand seems to be high at this time. (It’s called charging what the market will stand).[:)][soapbox][:)]
Yes to remote operated couplers.Our 35 Ton GE at work has them.Plus good smoke generators could be useful.I like the ACE 3000 also…Joe G
I agree with this, I think that smaller, higher quality smoke generators should be made for the smaller scales.
[8]TrainFreak409[8]
How about a rechargable battery powered locomotive. Something that could run a couple of hours on a charge. Recharging could be through a fuel port (for diesels) or the tender (for steamers). That would make the servicing area on the layout a bit more important. Recharging should take 5-10 minutes for a “realistic” refueling time. Operations could be by remote control. Eliminate all the wiring and really run your trains. Way back when I was little there were Sizzlers racing sets where you recharged the car for 10-15 seconds and it ran for 5 minutes or so. Ran off 4 “D” batteries.
I started in HO gauge in the early 50’s. The changes over the years has been phenomenal. Today we have an unbelieveable assortment of kits and RTR available for every aspect of the hobby, and the quality has increased dramatically. For the future? It available products continue to proliferate and increase in quality as they have through the past 50 years, I just want to hold on and take what comes.
Tom
If you want your wishes to come true, then you need to switch to 3 rail O, because a lot of what you seek is there NOW.
Thomas is nearly played out, remote couplers are almost standard on new locomotives, smoke is available on both diesels and steam, and you can use a computer to dispatch your trains.
The only problem for most of you dreamers is that you need small trains, for small spaces, and that’s a problem I can’t help you with, SORRY.
controling from in-cab camera with relistic controls that a chip picks up and puts out the right speed based on brake application, throttle, etc.