Flyonel observations

My wife says we are the suckers because Lionel knows we will buy anything they make. Sometimes she is right about me being one

I find it interesting to have the variety of rolling stock we now have after my being an AF S gauger since childhood. I have returned two locos for repairs of the three I have. They were fixed to my satisfaction so I have no quarrel with Lionel. My hope is that we will have turnouts and crossings in the near future to expand/change the layout format for all interested in so doing. I'm thrilled to have new Lionel/AF products in any form.

I agree that it seems Lionel's been getting some bad information from somewhere.  That's why I think Lionel needs to start attending NASG conventions, S-Sprees and S-Fests.

It's been reported that the next run of cylindrical hoppers and the 57' reefers will have Flyer wheelsets, not scale, so that solves part of the problem.  Whether or not the off-road truck bolsters will be lowered is still a matter for speculation.

I've aready resigned myself to stocking up on AM trucks to scalify future cars.

One thing for certain, the announcement of the 57' mecanical reefer has resulted in the cancellation of a resin kit for the same car by Smoky Mountain Model Works.

As far as the ES44's go, they're listed in the catalog as "Limited Production" which I think is code for "We'll stop making them when we use up our existing parts inventory."

Rusty

This discussion of Lionel deciding what to build is interesting.

I had been a Flyer collector for some thirty years, from about 1968 to somewhere in the early 2000's. About then, I switched to O gauge for more club-type operating opportunities, but that's not the point of this story.

In 2007 I had the opportunity to work for Lionel for a brief period. Since I was still known to many as a Flyer guy, there was a suggestion that maybe I could give them some insight as to what the Flyer community wanted. Lionel was asking for my opinion, it wasn't to be foisted on them. They actually wanted to know.

Instead of just telling them what I thought, I decided to do some research. I visited the local Flyer club, talked to the members and the principals, contacted the dealers that I knew personally, and also contacted some that I did not know. I gathered all their opinions, wrote them down and analyzed them.

You know what the one common thread was? It surprised me.

The common thread was that there was no commonality at all. Everyone wanted something different - and some specifically did not want what the other did want. No person or group that I talked to wanted the same thing as the next person or group. Some suggestions were:

-remake big steam power -or not

-make new steam power -or not

-remake the old heavyweights -or not

-make more modern rolling stock -or not

-make modern power -or not

-make new track and switches

-make a line of S-gauge postwar celebration cars and locos -or not

The "or not" indicates that someone else said no, they should not do that, but should do the thing I am suggesting.

Interestingly, everyone felt that Lionel had not listened to their requests in the past. That was the only common thread. I have heard stories of S gauge market research and requests all found sitting in a wastebasket at corporate HQ.

So what does that mean? If there is no common want list, how can Lionel give us what we want? If there is no coordinated, succinct voice of the customer, what is a marketing rep to do? From whom do they get their requests for new product?

Maybe what we really want in S is to have everything, like we do in O or HO. A wider choice would certainly be nice, but can any one company offer that realistically?

When I visited the corporate offices and talked to the Flyer marketing/sales guys, I shared with them all the information I had gathered. They wanted to talk about the S gauge Fastrack they were planning to build, so I gave them my opinions on that as well.

Those are very, very interesting revelations, RoyBoy.  Thanks for that.

Originally by Roy Boy;

"This discussion of Lionel deciding what to build is interesting.

In 2007 I had the opportunity to work for Lionel for a brief period. Since I was still known to many as a Flyer guy, there was a suggestion that maybe I could give them some insight as to what the Flyer community wanted. Lionel was asking for my opinion, it wasn't to be foisted on them. They actually wanted to know."

In 2007 things were fine. It sounds like you gave good input.

Up to the U-33Cs and Y3s we get road specific detailing. Then we get non-flexible dies for the SD70s ans ES44s.

I understand they probably had to tool up fast for the heritage road-name frenzy.

But the cylindrical hoppers. Nice body casting. But scale flanges with Flyer couplers? It is good to know Lionel seeks our input. But whoever got their ear lately, if indeed they are responsible for the hopper debacle, should get the boot.

Without external input, I doubt Lionel would offer the car like that.

I'm sure this will be corrected in the future.

The lack of commonality doesn't surprise me.  Even on the 3-rail side of the forum there all the this and that of what Lionel, MTH or whoever should offer.  There's plenty of "what do you want..." threads that appear, particularly before the next catalog releases.  Many of those "wants" are for obscure or narrow interests, while others seem doable.

With S, there's still the tug-of-war between Flyer and Scale interests.  It seems that Lionel has been trying to balance the two to some extent with spotty success, but isn't there yet.  Meanwhile, the jury's still out with MTH.

As I've mentioned before, American Models, the former S Helper Service and S Scale America have managed to tread this fine line with reasonable success.  Lionel corporate culture seems to be used to having it's own way and tends to flounder around in anything but O.

But's somehow they still manage to pull a surprise or two.  DCC compatibility was one, making the Y3 reworkable to scale wheels (perhaps unintentionally and admittedly at a fairly high cost to the purchaser, but still less in total than an equivalent brass import) and with S FasTrack being compatible (with minor modifcation) with S-Trax.

I think what we're going to see from this point on is the Flyer line becoming mini-O.  Designs and features (that fit) from the Lionel O Gauge line will continue to migrate to S.  It's not necessarily a bad thing, the research and design work is already done, all that's needed is adaptation to a smaller size.

Probably the same holds true for MTH.  Any "originality" will likely come from the few remaining independent S manufacturers.

Rusty

I kind of disagree.  Looking at the thread that was running a few months back I made a list of all the various requests.  I then was able to see certain items had more people asking for them then others.  All Lionel would have to do is list the top 2 in each category (Engines, Freight, Passenger, Operating Cars, Accessories and Other and send out a survey asking you to rank them from your favorite to least favorite.  This would help them to focus on where to spend their tooling funds. 

It may not make everyone happy but if you tool up the most requested items they will probably get their highest $$$ sales.

--Rocco--

I remain enthusiastic about Lionel's efforts to introduce impressive products into the S gauge market and to recover from initial mistakes. I hope that some of the "mistakes" may actually be early catalog representations that may not show what Lionel intends to offer. Perhaps discussions at York will clarify what is coming.

• U33C--a fairly accurate representation with road-specific headlights (not shown or mentioned in any catalog); second-run versions had slower operational speeds and fixes to the wheels for better electrical contact. A newer version that can run on DC/DCC as the new locomotives can would be excellent. Modifying the pilots to restrict their swinging as Lionel did for the SD70ACe and ES44AC would also be a great step forward.
• SD70ACe--a problem with middle wheel contact with the first run was corrected in the second run. The headlight is between the number boards, but this is prototypical for each road number they produced except the BNSF (which if numbered 9373 would have also been accurate). Although the catalog shows new locomotives with the headlight remaining above the windows, I would not be surprised to see the actual delivered product with lights appropriately in the nose.
• ES44AC--the first releases were prototypically correct and free from electrical problems. Just because the catalog, which merely recolors each product picture to match road colors with no other graphic change, shows new releases with above-window headlights may not mean that the new ones will actually show up that way. If Lionel were planning to move the lights to the nose, they should let potential buyers know. That could dramatically increase pre-orders, which would be good for everyone.
• cylindrical hoppers--the mistakes here are hard to excuse, but Lionel has already announced a move to put high-rail wheels on these cars in the future. If the truck were modified to allow easy switching of high-rail/scale wheelsets and to be lower for a more prototypical look, that should please almost everyone. Scale modelers would need to purchase only wheelsets for replacements, not the entire truck. The trucks Lionel puts on these hoppers now are durable, heavy, and very impressive. They are just too tall.   
• Challenger--I think the only improvement here would be a reintroduction with DC/DCC compatibility. It would then be as nice a product as the Y3 locomotive is. Altering both locomotives to accept scale wheels is not easy, but it can be done at a premium cost. Lionel ought to rethink the voiding of the warranty if the conversion is done.

Overall, Lionel has gotten more right than wrong; but the glaring mistakes are easy to fix. Lionel has shown some adeptness in correcting past mistakes. They would improve our perception of them if only they would communicate more openly with present and potential customers. We only have the catalog to judge them, and it is too often missing critical information (AC/TMCC/Legacy/DC/DCC compatibility, for example) and presenting only cookie-cutter pictures.     

(AC/TMCC/Legacy/DC/DCC compatibility, for example)

For what it's worth... I find the 'DC compatibility' of the Y3 unacceptable.  Because of all the extra electronics the electrcity has to go through to get to the motor, the Y3 performs very different than my other DC engines.  I would prefer a 'true' DC engine to start with.

Tom Stoltz

in Maine

Tom,

That's why they make wire cutters!!!

Jerry

That's why they make wire cutters!!!

You are so right about that, Jerry.  My Y3 was a Flyonel 'experiment' at getting the thing to run on DC.  I my opinion, it didn't work.  Unless someone form Flyonel can say withsome authority, I would say DC in a Legacy system is a non-starter.

Please keep the Legacy & fantasy for the 0 gaugers and leave S for the S gaugers.

Well, that's an opinion anyway... 2¢

Tom Stoltz

in Maine