Jump to content

time for a brew

Moderated Status
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

120 profile views

time for a brew's Achievements



  1. Dapol have announced starting work on factory fitting the class 68 and have shown a glimpse of their new QC department on their forum.
  2. You are correct of course, Dapol have only recently jumped into the next-18 show, the question of if/when they are able to produce it and how it would work is open to the usual discussions that would best be opened in the Dapol thread. More relevant is the question of whom will receive the award should the nomination be successful, DJ models (who specified it), Bachman (who produce it), or the NMRA (who originated the standard)?
  3. Thank you Andy. Upon reflection if these were disallowed then nominations for this manufacturer would be somewhat thin upon the ground. I also observed that Bachmann are nominated for innovation in using the next-18 socket for DCC? Surely DJ models have always specified this and it has been used in Europe for some time. Even Dapol recently laid claim to it! Is this not an NMRA standard from many years ago, rather than true innovation? ModellU have also produced invitational 3D figures for many years now (I have been puzzled as to why they have not been included before actually) The voting system will of course even out the results, those, who like myself tend to the pedantic shall vote for our chosen nominations, and the majority result shall prevail. Which of course will be the true reward for the victors.
  4. Whilst this is an exciting and significant award scheme and can only promote the hobby as a whole, I am a bit puzzled by some of the nominations. As an example the OO Dapol Black Label was first released in 2016 and the Dapol O gauge Autocoach and Collet b-set coaches are old Lionheart models first sold some years ago. Neither of these count as 'New' models in my thoughts. If remakes are allowed then a lot of models are missing missing from all the categories. as an example (and to balance the above comments), Dapol have produced nothing but remakes in N and a lot of O gauge remakes during last year. But these have not been listed as choices. Other manufacturers have also benefited by, or lost out from the incongruities above. It would be interesting to know how these selections are decided upon. I must admit not a task I would envy.
  5. What a marvelous idea! There would be many advantages to any manufacturer from sourcing this kind of crowd support. Not least the ability to produce a model acceptable to the community. Surely a common standard must exist for the interchange of data - how does one print a 3D model from a standard CAD? I understand the process uses a step file which must be convertible from the private CAD program formats. (or is it completely redrawn, however a redraw would seem to defeat the purpose to my mind?) Some might say that it would be labour in vain,and indeed it would take a brave forward thinking company to accept this assistance, but it would demonstrates what could be achieved. It occurs to me that it would be a product in its own right, being a potentially valuable information source, saving much time in any companies production process. A golden opportunity for those who have the skills perhaps?
  6. I noted that "for me" they were serious errors, others of course feel differently or have not noticed/been lucky etc. The class 68 error is commented by myself and others here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/119978-dapols-new-class-68-locomotives/page-71&do=findComment&comment=2956184 and is an example demonstrating that a full review and observance of customer feedback was not performed. I believe Miss Prism is also experiencing similar challenges with the O gauge 14xx? Every person of course has differing viewpoints and standards. Dapol as the importer/commisioners are measured by the increments in which they seize opportunities for improve tangible product, rather than simply promising to improve. The affirmative action being taken by forum members to assist in correcting the drawings is a very positive occurrence. One can only hope that Dapol will take heed as the alternative is that they follow the well ploughed furrow.
  7. I feel that members contributions may need to be firmly placed and that it will be a one way information flow for little acknowledgement. but at least if the model is a success those members who have made it so will have the grateful thanks of the remainder of us and we have this thread to record those who will be the true 'designers' of the model. When I first read this forum, I thought Dapol appeared unfairly represented. However, since then, to my eyes, the flying banana the class 121 and their second attempt at the class 68 have both contained errors serious enough for me to place my purchase on hold. It seems a company seemingly run by accountancy and marketing graduates is attempting to repeatedly operate without any input from any person whom is modeler or enthusiast and that the errors and omissions are a consequence of this approach. When the creative design, specification and QC is performed overseas to a budget and a basic set of photographs even more so. It seems Dapol thought they were being clever mentioning their use of original drawings, but have only achieved a woeful display of actual practical modelling knowledge. I think at this point, since I have nothing practical to add I shall fall silent as I do not wish to become further disappointed and irascible, which is not in my nature. I just viewed this post, I agree. Well done to all who have the tenacity and a thorough understanding of the subject!
  8. I am intrigued by the position taken by many posters that Dapol have received leaked information from either Bachmann, Hornby or Heljan. Perhaps this leak could also apply to any of the independents as well since this is scuch a long awaited and important model anyone not working on it could be considered negligent perhaps? Accepting the above as facts (and who would I be to disagree) I shall explain the reasons for my intrigue. Is it being inferred that Dapol are incapable of independent creative thought? (they did make the class 73 which was creative on many fronts). In support, I do agree that the published information has every suggestion of being knocked up within a day or two and rushed out with high expectations, not least the incongruities of the announced dates and the cut and paste nature of the Prairie (from our more knowledgeable members) prove this to be a case of corporate marking running the asylum.Are the membership collectively suggesting that Dapol require permission (from whom?) to produce a model? Additionally, should the supposed gazumping work and no-one else makes an announcement is this then proof positive that Dapol have been successful in marking their territory and another poor model is created? Or (perhaps an unbelievable situation) no-one else was going to announce it anyway. Since there is a long list of errors with the Dapol models (thank you Miss P.) I assume those companies advanced in producing a superior model would simply continue with a self-satisfied grin.
  9. I was considering one of the new models, but now this has been pointed out I simply cannot un-see it. I looked at each of the new ones in the shop yesterday and they are all the same, incorrect at one end. The logo is embossed into the models front so a decal won't correct it. It jumps out at me each time I look now, highlighted as it is on a yellow background, so I must think about this carefully. I could always run it with the same end facing forwards, but I considered one ended running because of the livery error and decided to leave it. It just offended the laws f aesthetics far too much and I believe this would now do the same. The shop says they have had few inquiries about this model so I have time to think.
  10. From an Austrian news publisher: The full (German) text: https://www.news.at/a/wien-modellbahn-zulieferer-zimo-8524447 1.48 Million Euros is quite a lot of tax! Translation: Vienna Tuesday, December 5, 2017 by apa Model train suppliers Zimo is insolvent Vienna - Model railway supplier Zimo is insolvent © Image: apa / Oliver Berg / dpa The total liabilities amount to 1.48 million euros. Affected are 33 employees and around 80 creditors. The Viennese model railway supplier Zimo Elektronik GmbH is insolvent. According to the credit protection association AKV Europa, a bankruptcy procedure was opened at the Vienna Commercial Court. The total liabilities amount to 1.48 million euros. Affected are 33 employees and around 80 creditors. The company develops or produces digital control systems for model railways. For example, production of control desks or sound decoders. According to AKV, the main customers are European producers of miniature railways. The exact insolvency causes would have to be checked in the procedure, it was said. A continuation of the enterprise is aimed at, besides a rehabilitation plan was announced. According to the debtor, a quota of 100 percent is being considered, reported the AKV.
  11. I think this might be off topic, but is relevent. please feel free to move it somewhere more appropriate if needed. Given how many companies in this hobby, including manufacturers as well as those offering self garuenteed crowd funding are home based this precedent seems cause for alarm. I'm not casting any aspertions on any company, any payment in advance is a risk, payment many months or years in advance for something that does not yet exist an expression of absolute faith and trust. If there is no enforcable legal recompense available after a CCJ etc. then I for one would prefer to see my money lodged with a licensed 3rd party, for example a solicitor. I know this will have a cost attached, but looking at the value of crowd funding outside of large organisations like kickstarter, where only one or two projects are permitted per company, we now have home registered companies consisting of one or two people offering multiple high value projects at once, if one project stalls then what is to prevent a domino effect within that company?
  12. Perhaps Dapol could have made it clearer, DCC controlled lighting is only implied and quite often it is noted that Dapol's logic does not always follow that of us mere mortals. Although I am somewhat a luddite where these things are concerned, lets hope that the additional (and perhaps unnecessary) complex wiring and electronics required for DCC in a coach does not create further QC problems. Dapol do seem to be employing excessive experimentation with new items, when perhaps more attention to other, more basic details might result in significantly less after-sales problems #simpleisbetterdapol ?
  13. Its good to see manufacturers working with others in this way and a well kept secret too. I suppose it has also helped fill the Model Rail Coffers a little as well
  14. I read (somewhere on here and also on Dapols digest) that the person responsible is "no longer employed" by Dapol from just over a year back. They appear to have someone called Neil working on product management now, no doubt he has helped with the improvements.
  15. Wow! Sold out already? This confirms that they must be ready or at least under construction, otherwise with their control of the factory, Dapol would have increased the build quantity to meet demand. They will be in the shops for January unless there is a Quality problem.
  • Create New...