Finding oneself face to face with what could only be described as “living history” of today’s International model railway scenario, could only but give me goose pimples. Alessandro Rossi, class of 1921, a real gentleman, with the manners and courtesy of the years gone by,  helped break the ice, and made this encounter all that more easy and comfortable.

A direct descendant of Alessandro Rossi, entrepreneur, philanthropist, and pioneer of the Italian industrialization in the mid 1800, who with the Rossi Wool mill (Lanificio Rossi) situated in  Schio (VI) was one of the biggest Italian industries of that time, later to be renamed “Lanerossi”.

Young Alessandro with 5 years of studies in engineering at the Milan Polytechnic, Commissioned Officer during the Second World War, at the end of the war, the young Alessandro decided to follow in the footsteps of the family, and go into business.

Alessandro Rossi on 1957

First of all, what brought you into the world of models trains?

It all started with my passion for trains. When I was a small child, I was given a Meccano (Hornby!) tin plated clockwork toy train, and my mother, built me with old matchboxes a railway station. From then onwards for Christmas all I asked for was toy trains….. even though not always what I wanted! Thinking back, as a child I had a jotter where I would ask all the people I knew, to draw a picture of a train…. Growing up my father bought me a subscription to the Meccano magazine in English and in French; this is where I started to learn my first technical terms.

How was Rivarossi founded, and who was Riva?

What was the model train market like at that time, and who was your target, children or adults?:

*******

In Italy at that time there was no one producing model trains, Lima and Conti started shortly after. The only makers of reference were Marklin and Trix. Our initial production was  addressed to children. The problem were the fathers, that were used to trains travelling like rockets, and I on the other hand was producing trains with speeds in ratio to scale more realistic.

A new market, a completely new production range, what were the reference points for your models?

I took the Trix system as a base, which at that time was still in AC. After a few trials I decided to use DC: as it was simpler, and allowed the movement or one or more locos in the same direction of movement. The main problem was the insulated wheels, as I want to use wheels produced on watchmaker’s lathes to ensure perfect rolling capabilities.

Only later did we manage to produce insulated wheels indispensable for 2-rail system, whilst the initial production was  on a basis of three rail track in DC. Inspiration for the motor unit came from the Trix range, and I adapted their motor to DC. The American Locomotive Atlantic 4-4-2 Hiawatha was the first with this type of motor.

Plastic was an enormous innovation, and you were the first to actually use it?

For what I am aware of, I was the first to use it in this sector. At the Milan Fair, at that time the biggest window onto Italian Industrial production,  I saw that a small amount of plastic powder in a mould, pressed it, and when opened an ashtray came out. Already a finished product. I then realised that the use of plastic (bakelite) would allow much more detailing than was possible with metal, sheeting, on in metal fusion, whichever.

*******

For what I am aware of, I was the first to use it in this sector. At the Milan Fair, at that time the biggest window onto Italian Industrial production,  I saw that a small amount of plastic powder placed in a mould , once pressed, and the mould  opened an ashtray came out. Already a finished product. I then realized that the use of plastic (bakelite) would allow much more detailing than was possible with metal, sheeting, on in metal fusion, whichever

The scale, many train modellers  screw up their noses, when confronted with the production range in 1/80, from what did this choice come from?

At that time train modelling did not exist, people did not talk about miniature trains, but toys. I started off with OO. Ho in Europe did not exist; reference was to the OO scale of the UK. Even Marklin and Trix based their models in OO (this British OO scale was in a 1/76 ratio, fundamentally missing was the intent of all constructors to use an exact scale, Editor's note). The use of HO in Europe was defined later on, with the birth of MOROP (Model Railways euROPe, the federation of European Railway Modellers, in 1954 Editor’s note) which  tried to introduce the concept of “model trains” and standard technological specifications for European producers. It was not a simple task, as each producer tried to have their own system prevail. I myself became a technical consultant for the MOROP and contributed in the definition of these standards, based a lot on the American standards, and I contributed in defining these norms.

The use of HO in Europe was defined later on, with the birth of MOROP (Model Railways euROPe, the federation of European Railway Modellers, in 1954 Editor’s note) which  tried to introduce the concept of “model trains” and standard technological specifications for European producers. It was not a simple task, as each producer tried to have their own system prevail. I myself became a technical consultant for the MOROP and contributed in the definition of these standards, based a lot on the American standards, and I contributed in defining these norms.

As for production for the American market, since there were already standards well defined, I started right from the beginning with their scale, the HO

You have always been very attentive towards the American market, right from the beginning.  With what criteria did you select the models to be reproduced?

The Dockside 0-4-0 was a proposal that originated from our American Importer. There was requests for a versatile machine, that was also ideal for smaller circuits. The first production of this Locomotive was rather ugly, as it was created from photo only, without original blueprints. The second version was not bad.

The technical data,  the measurements how did you obtain them?

For the American Locomotives, it was my American importer that obtained the original blueprints. As I have said, the first mould of the Dockside was obtained from photo or very little more, to respond to the market, but as soon as we came into possession the original blueprints, a new improved mould in Ho was immediately put into production, according to the US standards.

For Italian rolling stock, we had contacts with the FS (Italian State Railways), even though with some prototypes the information provided was wrong, and reference to colours which did not go any further that the drawing board.

One of the main strong points of Rivarossi were the motors, reliable even today, after 50 odd years, how were they born?

Motors were a delicate problem. We wanted “standard” motors in other words with identical RPM in relation to voltage, such that two similar locomotives would run at the same speed..
	The motor shafts were in special steel, machined on watchmaker’s lathes, and subsequently thermally hardened and rectified with a tolerance of 2 micron. They were  tested at 18000 revs against the 16000 that they were guaranteed at. I remember that I was the first to look at China  and Honk Kong (which was still under UK control), but with Chinese labour. As a test I had them make 1000 Locos, but when it came to the testing phase, only 200 were up to standards, the remainder having non-uniform motor revs.
The bodywork were well produced, and using our moulds which were of high standards, but the motors were not up to the standards I wanted. So production of only bodywork in Hong Kong and assemble here in Italy with our motors, was not economically viable. Therefore I did not go ahead with this idea. Production remained in Italy.

You dedicated much attention to catalogues, who did them?

The first ones I did them, and printed them in my factory. The first one I drew even the cover page. As production increased it became necessary to produce catalogues more detailed so I had them printed in Milan. The catalogues were prepared with only photos and drawings, without text, which was inserted at a later stage, divided by language. The translation in English and French I did myself. The problem is that technical terminology differs in the two languages; so for US rolling stock  I would use “American”, while for European rolling stock  “English” was used. The cover page for the catalogues were drawn by my friend Della Costa, but the cover page on the supplement with the “Littorina” I did.

The  “H0  Rivarossi -  magazine of model trains”?

That also I wrote and printed in my factory. As reference I based it on the “Meccano” magazine of my infant years. But sadly I had to drop it, as I did not have enough time, as we were rapidly developing and I could not follow it as I would have liked to..

You have always dedicated sections of your production to layouts, these also were done by you?

Business organization, all was produced by yourselves?

The production of the bodywork was entrusted to a third party, craftsmen of high standards. The assembly and painting we did on site. In 1970 we had a workforce of 300, plus approximately 600 external collaborators ( a figure rather more difficult to calculate) that were working for us outside the factory.

We were craftsmen, but all our work was implemented by means of industrial production systems.

(What is touching is the importance that  Engineer Rossi gives towards his collaborators, defining them so, and never as sole employees, often praised and remembered with fond affection. Editor’s Note).

And the moulds?

Making moulds was very costly! Those who made the models for the subsequent productions of the moulds were real artists, and I expected that the moulds be perfect, in high quality steel to last in time, and to guarantee products of constant high quality, without imperfections. The Big Boy has been produced in hundred of thousands, not a million, but not far off. The quality always perfect. But what they cost me….!

Rivarossi is also well known for the attention to details.

 Yes, for instance the curly bracket at the corners of the roof of the FNM old-timer coaches, it was made to be realistic “through-bore” and not low-relief, and for that time it was an exceptional achievement. As I made this specification, the first mould craftsman refused to accept it, but another said “he would try at it”; when it brought it back to us, exactly as we had requested it, he was rather proud of it.

Assembly of the models was by hand, and the mechanical part produced by watchmaker’s lathes. I requested my production manager for direct printing of labels on the models, instead of the decals we used previously. This method of rubber stamping was copied from another factory in Como, engaged in the production of watch-faces. The direct printing process had to be perfect through out the production run, and the lines straight on the last model produced as on the first one – it was not a joke.

Even with packaging you were a leader in this domain.

The first time I visited the US, I went around visiting shops, to se what was available. I noticed that they had nice boxes, printed in bright colours. Our boxes on the other hand were simple containers, gray and very low profile, like all other European ones. So I decided to think of better packaging, which gave the buyer a chance to see the contents, this is how we arrived to our famous red box.

Even with Stations, and related railway embellishments, you were on of the first. How did you decided what to produce?

Initially we had some items made of wood, by a craftsman in our area. We then passed onto producing Stations in plastic. I had seen them whilst travelling (Pergine, San Nazario, Dubino). I remember still, taking the measurements on site, with the help of my technicians, which knew their job well. In order to keep the FS rail men busy,  as they looked upon us with suspicion, we gave them a model train and a catalogue – this did the trick! We always had these items with us on these occasions

And  Arnaldo Pocher?

A rather indiscreet question… you also produced “free-lance” models such as the ADA/R and the Electric Badoni … how come?

The demands of the market (at that time less demanding than today Editor’s Note) We were an industry with personnel, bills to be paid, every new mould cost us a fortune, therefore it was necessary to optimize at the best what we had available.

At a certain point you left Rivarossi (in 1980 A Rossi abandons the running of the Company but remains as a consultant until the 90s Editor’s Note), summing all those years together what emerges?

In doing my job I enjoyed it, I travelled the world to show my trains, I had my problems, but I did what I liked most …. I had collaborators that worked with the right spirit, with eager willingness, and dedication.

Pictures of meeting
Massimo Cecchetti and Alessandro Rossi	Giorgio Giuliani and Alessandro Rossi