My chat with Ryan:
Note that I am paraphrasing, so please take this into account.
- Ryan DOES read the OGR S scale board here. A good thing!
- Tooling costs vs. run size is always an issue (or rather THE issue).
- The SD40 is a real possibility – many RR names and configurations possible based upon the same tooling. The SD40 was used over a broad historical period down to the present day, thus its use is prototypically possible with many types and periods of rolling stock. Ryan very much likes the prototype.
- Not much hope was offered for the production of a matched set of passenger cars for the Frisco Northern. Considerably more orders would be required for the cars than are probably going to be realized for the engine. The production run required to be economically viable is likely to considerably exceed the preorders for the engine itself. A set of green Pullmans is a much more likely proposition in the future because of their universality.
- A GS-4 (and engines like it) is not in the cards. Numbers are going to be too small in the S scale market because one can place only one road name on the engine. A scale Hudson, say, is more likely in the future because one could place several railroad names on it even though one would not have strict prototypical accuracy … many RRs such as SF had 4-6-4s. The Y3 was made, in large part, because many RRs had them.
- An ‘improved’ Berk with Legacy is still a strong possibility. The critical tooling now exists.
- Once again, I raised the notion of deleting the coupler on the front PA of a set and restoring the closed pilot of the Gilbert 1950 configuration for improved ‘looks’. Ryan liked the suggestion.
Not part of my chat with Ryan, but impressions gained by other discussions with Lionel staff and observations:
- There still appears to be confusion on Lionel’s part about the low desirability of fantasy versions (all kinds) of rolling stock for the S gauge market. Branded versions of rolling stock, zombie cars, fantasy schemes on the cylindrical hoppers, etc., etc., etc. There is a strong tendency to continue to confuse the root desires of the S gauge and the O gauge markets. A related example … the waffle-side boxcars are not selling well (they are already being blown out by Charles Ro for $33 at York), which might have been avoided had the car been made a scale 50 or 60 ft. long.
- My strong impression is that Lionel continues to be in a quandary about newly tooled contemporary rolling stock ... the problem of tooling cost vs. sales volume again. My personal view that emerges from conversations with them is that the Lionel folks still can’t quite come to grips with the strong likelihood that they sabotaged their efforts and preorder count with the mechanical reefer with the truck/coupler snafu (and too many fantasy schemes) on the cylindrical hoppers. I reminded the folks that sales of the modern diesels are coupled (literally) to the availability of modern rolling stock to put behind them.
- Tooling costs vs. run size is always an issue. While undeniably true, it is thrown up first as continuing mantra almost to the point of being a bit condescending IMHO and as a default to do nothing. If you don’t understand your market (see above) however, expensive mistakes are made.
Have at it. 
Bob
). I am content to wait for a proper Berk with the full expectation that there will be a premium to be paid for it.